• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Keyboards in Cover Bands - How do you do things?

Now for the rest of the question - the other band I'm in that works a lot does not have a keyboard player. Our second guitarist usually takes on the keyboard parts and arranges them for guitar. We have been playing around with the idea of inviting the piano player from the two-keyboard band out - I've been in two different bands with him - but haven't done it yet.
 
Doesn't this depend on what "covers" the band is playing? Years ago I played in a very successful (locally) "cover" band that leaned heavily towards Motown, soul, R&B, etc and not necessarily Hot 100. IMO we could not have done a decent job of it without the Hammond (there was no electronic equivalent back then).
 
Doesn't this depend on what "covers" the band is playing? Years ago I played in a very successful (locally) "cover" band that leaned heavily towards Motown, soul, R&B, etc and not necessarily Hot 100. IMO we could not have done a decent job of it without the Hammond (there was no electronic equivalent back then).
Yep.
 
If I am missing something please correct me, but I think that proficiency can happen for keyboardists can happen with formal training.

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what the objection or disagreement is...

I wasn't saying that formal training is or isn't required by all/any circumstances.

It's demonstrably the case that it's possible to reach high-level proficieny with guitar, bass, drums or keyboards through formal training or self-teaching. I believe that as far as tendencies go, bass and guitar tend to have a much larger proportion of successes with self-teaching. This is something I believe by observation, not something I've seen actual statistics on. I think that there are a number of reasons, including the instruments' size, cost, loudness/obtrusiveness, minimum useful skill required, popularity with new players, relative complexity of basic techniques, and other factors I may not even be considering.

But I think that whatever the combination of causes is, keyboard ends up being less readily casually "picked up" by budding players and the end result is that there are far fewer hobbyist band level keyboard players than other instruments.

You can find good guitarists, bassists, drummers and keyboard players who got there on just "interest, drive and some natural inclination"...I believe keyboard players of this type will be the least common and the least likely to say they never had a formal lesson or learned to read music at all.
 
Last edited:
It also depends on the keyboardist. I recently sat in with a band. They keyboardist had talent, but overplayed on everything (he had played more in the past as a solo, or as an accompanist).

I tried to explain that a lot of times, he had to be content playing fills, and unless there was a specific keyboard part, probably would not be using much left hand.

I'm self taught on keys, but understand that unless you are soloing, you are probably playing simple horn/string lines, or block chords. He was 10+ times the player I am, but just didn't understand his role.

Listen to classic Motown. Even in the early years, they normally had three guitars, piano, organ, 2 or 3 percussion, and often horns. But it NEVER sounded too busy. The musicians knew their place.
 
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what the objection or disagreement is...

I wasn't saying that formal training is or isn't required by all/any circumstances.

It's demonstrably the case that it's possible to reach high-level proficieny with guitar, bass, drums or keyboards though formal training or self-teaching. I believe that as far as tendencies go, bass and guitar tend to have a much larger proportion of successes with self-teaching. This is something I believe by observation, not something I've seen actual statistics on. I think that there are a number of reasons, including the instruments' size, cost, loudness/obtrusiveness, minimum useful skill required, popularity with new players, relative complexity of basic techniques, and other factors I may not even be considering.

But I think that whatever the combination of causes is, keyboard ends up being less readily casually "picked up" by budding players and the end result is that there are far fewer hobbyist band level keyboard players than other instruments.

You can find good guitarists, bassists, drummers and keyboard players who got there on just "interest, drive and some natural inclination"...I believe keyboard players of this type will be the least common and the least likely to say they never had a formal lesson or learned to read music at all.

This is why I ask. I could have missed something.

Your post is spot on IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drpepper
I've been in bands with different approaches
- in one band, we didn't have any keys. That does mean we won't be able to play a certain set of tunes (Simple Minds "Don't you forget about me" is out) but most songs we could make work with just guitar.. Keep in mind the average audience is looking for a good time, not for absolute perfect replicas.
- in my current band our dedicated keyboard player is perfectly willing to hang back - and even not play at all - if the song doesn't need keys. I think this is the better scenario: we can play many more tunes yet I never felt the urge to hack off his left hand. Andy; we love you, man!

Regards
Mark
 
Just thought various people's thoughts and approaches to the topic might be interesting to discuss some.
One route is to simply not have or seek to have keyboards and then do some combination of arranging songs to try to cover for lack of keyboards and/or limiting song selections based on instrumentation. If the subject comes up from time to time, arguments against adding keys often involve fewer moving parts meaning less effort for keeping a nice, tight and clean result and fewer mouths to feed means more in each pocket...both valid enough. I've happily played without keyboards.
Another mouth to feed, another personality to deal with. If things are working without a KB, leave it that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drpepper
I personally like having a KB player in the band. Only one group I've gigged with didn't have one and we managed, but there were some limitations as to what we could do.

Ideally, it's a person who can play keys and guitar well, so you have options. 2 of my experiences have been with that option. Another had a dedicated KB.

Solid KB people are in demand and get to punch their own ticket, so many do without
 
  • Like
Reactions: drpepper
Just thought various people's thoughts and approaches to the topic might be interesting to discuss some.

I've noticed that cover bands can take different approaches to keyboards. I think that generally, for the weekender level, keys can be one the more difficult spots to fill but also end up being a spot that the right group can do very well without.

One route is to simply not have or seek to have keyboards and then do some combination of arranging songs to try to cover for lack of keyboards and/or limiting song selections based on instrumentation. If the subject comes up from time to time, arguments against adding keys often involve fewer moving parts meaning less effort for keeping a nice, tight and clean result and fewer mouths to feed means more in each pocket...both valid enough. I've happily played without keyboards.

Another is to have a keyboard player who can also play guitar and possibly other instruments (sax, violin...). I'm currently in a band with type of arrangement. For this band specifically, problems can come from the fact that he's not really a keyboard player who can also play guitar, he's more a guitar player who took piano lessons growing up and has enough connection to the the instrument to help out some. So, it takes care of the arguments above, but depending on the person, can mean some compromises and having the capability but at a lower level than other parts of the group.

And then there's having a dedicated keyboard player, which is the situation in another band. Assuming the skill is there, it's great in doing away with song limitations and arranging for switches. My problem here is that, in my experience, with a lot of rock tunes, this has led to there being keyboards in songs that don't have them in their original versions. A while back, I played with a guy who was real good about this...he had a good attitude about serving the song, so he'd hang back, drop out, do hand percussion when it was called for, and he had a decent overdriven guitar patch where he could throw out some chords to fill-in without being overbearing. That was nice. At the level many people are operating, a big part of playing music is for enjoyment, and sitting out a lot wouldn't be so much fun. But I have to say the result of hearing keyboards in covers where they don't belong bugs the crap out of me (doesn't seem to bother anyone else I play with to anywhere near the same degree). Currently, where that's the case, I'm not in a position to do anything about it except sulk.

So, I've experienced and seen the positives in each type of situation as well as the difficulties and frustrations that can come from each.
Unless it is a tribute band situation, I personally wouldn't care; in fact, I'd love it!

I think trying new things and making arrangements is such an awesome part of playing music. Because nothing to me is more boring than playing the songs exactly like the record (unless you are the actual original band of course, or a tribute band where that is the whole point.)

A trumpet part in Black Dog by Zeppelin? I'd love to hear that! An accordion solo in Free Bird? All for it! Just relax and have fun, that's what music is all about man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBS-bass
But I think that whatever the combination of causes is, keyboard ends up being less readily casually "picked up" by budding players and the end result is that there are far fewer hobbyist band level keyboard players than other instruments.
I tie this in with the loss of music education in public schools, combined with the lack of keyboards in popular music that begin with the grunge era.

It seems to me that there were more keyboard players - self taught or otherwise - back in the 80's when I was originally out there. They were easier to find. It was also easier to find someone who didn't mind using their skills to play assorted parts, pads, and patches. Not everyone wanted or needed to be a serious pianist.

Nowadays they are much harder to find and the ones I do find tend to be formally trained. They are usually the most capable players in the band in terms of theory knowledge and reading. And players like that are usually not content to play parts, pads and patches all night. They want to comp over changes with chord charts. In the right kind of band, that's what you want, but it's not always what you need.
 
It's great to have a keyboardist in the band to help fill things out and get those songs that are keyboard-led and with alpha keyboard solos into the catalog. But, as with playing "lead bass" a.k.a "third guitar", overplaying can muddy stuff up quick... they really need to not play for the sake of playing and know when to lay out. Plus, their patches have to sound good. So, as long as they know what they're doing and they're tasteful going about it, great. Especially if they can play sax and sing backups.

Problem is, finding (and keeping) someone that can do all that is near impossible in my neck of the woods. So, backing tracks are great as long as they're well done, the band is tight with them, and we're not talking about trying to use them to do keyboard-led songs or songs with those alpha solos. Otherwise, between a lead singer capable of playing some keyboard bits and me on bass pedals, we're jake.
 
The thing I find overwhelming about keyboard playing is that it's not just one job and one instrument. When you play bass, 90% of the time you're sticking to the one role--playing a bass line. On keyboard you'll be expected to cover fills, and pads, and leads, and rhythmic comping. You might be covering parts that were originally played with a piano, an organ, a clav (all traditional keyboard instruments but with different techniques!), a horn section, a string section, or any of a wide variety of synths (subtractive, FM, sample-based,...).

So it helps to have some basic piano technique, to know some blues licks, to know how hammond controls work, to know something about typical horn section voicings, to recognize square waves and filter sweeps and PWM and oscillator hard sync, etc., etc.

I think that tends to favor people that have a broad background--maybe they played in church on Sunday, and the school jazz band during the week. Maybe that's why there's a reputation for formal training. I's not that that's really necessary--there are counterexamples--it's just that if you have that wide variety of experiences, then piano lessons or music classes are often going to be on that list somewhere. And that affects how we talk about songs, so people notice.
 
Maybe as bassists we're just somewhat jealous that some Hammond B3 players can put our brethren out of work with their left foot pedal work (e.g. Pat Bianchi et al.) :)
I'd feel more threatened if there were more of them :)

Not even the well-trained players I know who have good organ chops care about playing pedals much. It's one more thing they'd have to carry; unless you have an actual B3 or similar, most setups don't include pedals.

Mine does, but I never play them and it all stays in my rehearsal studio.
 
My band has keyboard and relies quite heavy on it. We play mostly pop and rock hits from '60s to contemporary, and usually select the song that have original keyboard (or string, or horn) parts. So our keyboard player just plays the most prominent parts. For 5 years we exist I can remember only a handful of songs we played that didn't have any kind of these parts originally.
Still Loving You - keyboard played the arpeggiated guitar part with an appropriate patch
Too Drunk to F*** - distorted organ dubbed a rhythm guitar part
Highway to Hell - same as above
Pretty Fly - polysynth syncopated stabs. We had live sax and trumpet on that song, too. Sounded great.
There was a couple of Ukrainian ballads that originally didn't have keyboard parts. In this case a light soundscape played with Rhodes patch did the job well.

On the other hand, a guitarist from my old band (late '80s) now plays with his daughter (rhythm guitar, lead singing), a bass player and drummer. He plays lead guitar and does some back singing. The thing is that a lot of songs they do are keyboard heavy '80s hits, e.g. Duran Duran, A-ha, Depeche Mode, Alphaville, etc. I've been to their show twice and crowd doesn't seem to mind the lack of keyboard player. BTW they don't use backtracks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: drpepper
I've read all the posts with interest, since I am a keyboard player (exclusively in some bands currently) and keys/bass player when I do Zeppelin.

I am glad that most of you have experienced life in a band with a good keys player that KNOWS HIS PLACE AND STAYS THERE. This is the kind of keyboard player I always try to be. I think it is because my first gig experience came in Junior High and High School playing in the rhythm section of a jazz band. In a big band, everybody has to play his/her part and stay there. There is nothing better to center someone on how to play with others than playing in a big band.

I would agree that the worst of all worlds is to play with anyone (Guitar players particularly, it's not just keys players) that doesn't know how to play well with others and serve the music rather than their own egos. it sucks, and I understand the frustration if that's your situation.

So my only "ego" thing is as some have said: if the original song has a prominent keys part, it should be played by the keys player. IMO, backing tracks and/or sampled parts triggered by other players. To me, as a keys player, these are an ABOMINATION.

Keys players in a band setting should primarily play piano, EP, organ, clav parts, an occasional pad or synth lead. Horns, unless you have a really good 'board like a Nord, Kurzweil, or Korg (I play a Korg Kronos) and particularly sax are much harder to replicate with keys. Can be done, and I've done it a lot, but it's always seemingly a compromise.

So to me, if you can't replicate the sound you need well enough....don't play that freakin' song.

Now, what to do when you are the keys player in a band that doesn't play a ton of keys songs?
Yes, you find a way to help out (other than that "get coffee" nonesense) with guitar or percussion, or whatever the rest of the song needs. If you don't need to do that...you sit out, or just sing backup...or whatever. I agree that a keys player should not add major sounds that were never there in the first place. that's where the keys player becomes an ABOMINATION.

In my Queen band, for example, keys are an integral part of the sound for many songs. So I'm pretty busy and feel like I really contribute to the success of the band, even though it was only 4 guys in the band, as a fifth wheel dedicated keys player, we get by. Our lead singer used to pretend to play while he sings, but he's so much better just interacting with the crowd away from the piano, that we have decided to be a 5 piece. There are about 5 songs in the set that have no keyboards whatsoever in them. And I don't play anything during those. I use them as a water break opportunity. And every once in a while a potty break. (Stone Cold Crazy is a good one for that).

If any of you ever have a beef with a Keys player, do not hesitate to talk to them about it privately, outside of a gig or practice. If he/she is a true pro, he/she should take it in stride and make the adjustments requested. Real pro keys players know they are not LH bass players (unless that's what's actually needed). we don't need reminding that there is already a bass player...we know that.
 
I think that depends on what kind of band you want to be. If you just want to play bar rock, it doesn’t really matter.

8 years ago, when I joined the Latin R&B band I play in now, they had a horn section, but no keyboard player. They guys had been comping all the keyboard parts with other instruments for more that 20 years. They sounded OK, but all the music they played was intended to be driven by the keyboard player. It really always sounded like there was a big hole in the middle of the band, and everyone worked way harder than they needed to. The first question I asked coming into the band was, “Where’s the keyboard player?” I didn’t get any satisfactory answers, and whenever they asked me to cover keyboard parts on bass, I’d tell them, “Get a keyboard player - I’m busy playing the bass parts.”

It may sound like I was being an obstinate jerk, but as the years went by and we needed subs, we had to turn to better players to fill in. Every one of them asked, “Where’s your keyboard player?” Finally, one day we hired a friend of ours who is a drummer in a name-brand band to play drums and sing lead when he wasn’t on tour. We gave him the set list and he said, “I can’t sing and play drums on these songs without a keyboard player.” The BL relented, hired a keyboard player, and we’ve had one ever since.

Fast forward to today and we have a keyboard player and a really good real-deal R&B singer. And she wants us to back her up with better vocal harmonies. Having a keyboard player has been invaluable to making this happen. These days, we’re playing more ambitious arrangements than ever and more difficult songs - and a lot of that is because we have a keyboard player. As a band, we’ve been able to expand our horizons and our repertoire. The band sounds better than ever!

My point is, if you’re looking to drink a few beers and swap solos over Long Train Running, then maybe a keyboard player is a hindrance. But if you want to do bigger songs with a bigger band, and push yourselves musically as a group, then it really really helps to have a keyboard player in the band.