Local Live Music Is Dead

[DBCrocky]

I've seen this trend, even in college towns a lot of the kids are more interested in dressing up and going clubbing than in seeing a good band play.

However, the bright spot is in festivals. There are more and more festivals that have many bands over a weekend, allowing bands to combine their draws to everyone's benefit. There are also BBQ fests, Arts fests, etc. where bands can play to a built in audience.

The cover bands can usually play bars that also have a built in crowd of regulars.

But original bands in traditional music bars that don't have a regular crowd: this is starting to get very difficult, even in bars next to colleges.

However, I wouldn't surmise that the time of live music has passed. It's just on a down cycle right now because other entertainment (DJ's/Karaoke) are in vogue.

 

[busmandan]

I'm playing out in cover land and doing alright - typically $150 per man per night and we're getting all the gigs we want. We're in regular rotation at four venues and looking to add a couple more. We'll pick up some decent summer gigs in a few months as well so I can't complain.

 

[allTimeFavorite]

Since I am in a band that does few live gigs, I am looking at this mostly from a fan's perspective. First of all, I LOVE LIVE MUSIC, be it jazz, punk, or rock. However, like travep, I am getting older. It has become much more difficult to go to a week night show, that is scheduled to start at 9:30 (but actually starts closer to 11:00) and get up on time the next morning. I have always wondered why week night shows don't start earlier.

 

[bombpop14]

I just feel sorry for the young guys coming up...

The whole dream that fueled my rock and roll fantasy growing up is gone. You used to be able to build a following in local clubs, get record companies to come check you out, try your hand at touring out of state, and hopefully put out a "record". It's a different world now.

I'm sure at some point the pendulum will swing back in some form or another, but in the meantime, after many years of touring and making a living as a entertainer, I'm once again a "hobbyist".

 

[keiththebassist]

The local music scene just north of San Francisco is more or less in a downturn as well. Of course, it doesn't help that our only rock/metal radio station which helped showcase and promote local unsigned acts has now turned into a top 40 hits radio station. It's frustrating and depressing, if you want to hear rock on the radio, don't come to Sonoma County, we don't have any. This has been happening in one form or another for a long time though, It's been happening I believe since the 70's when disco took popular, all the stages were ripped out and the shiny ball went up... Hopefully it's just a pendulum swing that will come back to us in favor, or perhaps it's just a thinning of the herd in search of those who still hold live music close to their hearts.

 

[aborgman]

The quality of live music is unpredictable and relatively uncontrollable by the venue management and therefore a risk compared to recorded music.

I disagree with this assertion.

Live music, while not as predictable as recorded music, is predictable and controllable.

It just requires the person doing the hiring to actually vet the bands they hire.

 

[bucephylus]

Good thread topic; but, my 1st comment is that there are so many posts seeming to whine about not getting some kind of opportunity to make it big based on your local circuit. Don't look now, but times have changed. I grew up in Detroit. We had Ted Nugent, Mitch Ryder, Brownsville station etc etc as High School dance bands. Back then, there were High School dances. They were popular. DJ's were not wanted.

Don't look now, but we just went through (and are still going through) the worst economic disaster of our lifetime. Detroit's primary product has shifted to agriculture; they are growing corn in leveled tenement neighborhoods!

My main comment is you had better be in this because you love the art. If you want money, go work for the banks. For a musician in their local circuit, it means you have to work with the club owners with the market conditions they have to work with, take the pay they are able to justify, and focus on playing well.

BTW, regarding the Phoenix area where I am currently gigging and contrary to previous post: Phoenix is NOT local venue live music Mecca. There are more talented bands than venues; so, you have to be really good. Playing in multiple bands usually creates antagonistic booking situations. The clubs, with a few exceptions, do not have regular clientele, and want the band to bring the crowd. DUI limits are close to where they take your license away for anything more than one beer. Mill Ave (ASU) is busy, but the main crowds come out around midnight to meet the opposite gender and could care less one way or another about music. Chars is great. The Rhythm Room is a nice room but has problematic management. Overall it is possible to play in Phoenix; but, I would not call it great. I absolutely will not pay to play or move any gear at all for free, and I have enough gigs to be happy. But it is NOT the 60's/70's.

Anyhow, play because you love it. Stay focused on the art form. Go with the flow, and don't have a lot of expectations.

 

[Sixpack324]

I'm playing out in cover land and doing alright - typically $150 per man per night and we're getting all the gigs we want. We're in regular rotation at four venues and looking to add a couple more. We'll pick up some decent summer gigs in a few months as well so I can't complain.

IMHO, Cover Bands don't really belong in this conversation. What I mean is, cover bands usually play to a set audience of regulars at a particular venue. 80% of the audience at a cover band's gig would be there if the band was there or not.

Around here (NY/NJ Metro area), there used to be a few local cover bands that could play a 500-750 person venue that wasn't a "bar" (Tradewinds, Birch Hill, Count Basey Theater, etc.) and fill it. Not any more, though. Very rarely do you hear of this happening, although there are a few exceptions, mind you VERY few.

Original Bands on the local "Rock" scene, however, are done! Live music for these bands (my band included) is a dead horse. Venues are tough to fill. BUT, as well as some of the other reasons posted here, I believe that a large part of the reason live music is dying is the stage show. Or, more accurately, the lack of the stage show.

Back in the day, bands didn't just get on stage and play good music, they put on a show. I see a lot of bands, most of whom are writing & playing good music, get on stage wearing the same clothes they wore to the grocery store that afternoon only to proceed with playing their music while staring at their shoes.

I'm not saying bands need to dress up like KISS or Rick James, but stage presence and showmanship have been gone for a looonnng time. When you take away the stage show, you now have a live jukebox. Who wants to pay $10/person to listen to a live jukebox?

Think about it....Iron Maiden always incorporated the latest version of Eddie into their shows and Dickinson running around with the Union Jack and a Redcoat's red coat on during The Trooper only added to the spectacle.

As much as I don't like them, Judas Priest always put on a GREAT stage show, again adding to the spectacle.

W.A.S.P. (and I'm not a fan) incorporated stacks of televisions at the corners of the stage playing hardcore porn into their show. Again, adding to the spectacle.

These "spectacles" combined with a good live music performance made for a great "show". Keyword there is "show". I hear a lot of musicians calling their gigs "shows", but I have to ask "Where's the show in 5 guys in t-shirts and jeans standing there playing music"? That's not a show.....That's just a live version of the album.....And why would I want to pay to hear the album that I already own?

I believe this trend of the lack of a "show" combined with economic trends and the "instant gratification" the internet affords has culminated in the death of the live Rock scene.

 

[Altitude]

Good thread topic; but, my 1st comment is that there are so many posts seeming to whine about not getting some kind of opportunity to make it big based on your local circuit. Don't look now, but times have changed. I grew up in Detroit. We had Ted Nugent, Mitch Ryder, Brownsville station etc etc as High School dance bands. Back then, there were High School dances. They were popular. DJ's were not wanted.

I'm not sure which direction you're pointing here, but your illustration is a good one in any case.

Think of a midsized city. Let's use Cincinnati. On a weekend in the fall, consider:

• How many high school dances happen
• How many fraternity parties happen
• How many weddings happen
• How many corporate events happen

I'll argue that 25 or 35 years ago, most of these events would have featured live music from a paid local band. Today, a tiny fraction of them do, most using recorded music instead. This is on top of the generally anemic attendance to live local music in bars and music venues I started this thread to describe.

So, there are lots of young Ted Nugents out there today who nobody is hearing because nobody is watching live music.

 

[fishdreams]

Live music isn't generating incremental revenue for most venues.

I agree - but there's an interesting thing here at work, (which I assume is typical for 'music towns' such as NY, Nashville, Austin and the like)
1) IME almost all the live music in bars, small venues, large venues is original music or arrangements (for the typical cover band fare, I need to go to Long Island or New Jersey)
2) at the same time, almost every venue offers live music

Now why is that? Obviously, putting in a cover band instead, or having no music at all seems to keep people away, otherwise we'd have that years ago. On the other hand, guaranteeing the musicians anything in advance almost never happens; it's tip jars and such. So this is a competition model between venues where musicians are needed, and at the same time never paid.

Now fast forward to Europe, Germany. A decent size bar in a mid size town with a performance space- but a bar at the end of the day, nonetheless - means that something like $20 is charged at the door for live music by a bunch of unknowns such as you and me-and and the place will fill up easily. People drink some, but say 75-300 people show up for live music in the first place and they pay attention to it, too.

Now that is something, I am sorry to say, I have not really encountered in the NY since I have been living here, unless it is a 'big' name, a drunk party or special event of some sort.

In Germany (Europe) music in itself seems to mean something; being a musician implies a status that really goes beyond just providing entertainment, and people are more sensitive to the idea that it's normal to pay for a musical experience. In the States people seem to take music as something you don't pay for, unless it has a 'use' or a 'function' as entertainment (pop, rock, dance) or status enhancer (classical).

I would love to see a general strike of musicians in NYC-no live music anywhere for, say , 3 weeks- and see what happens. What do the people really want?

 

[bassbully]

I disagree with this assertion.

Live music, while not as predictable as recorded music, is predictable and controllable.

It just requires the person doing the hiring to actually vet the bands they hire.

I don't know about that. Far less liability when booking Dj's vs a live band. A few Dj's on the books is allot easier to manage than a rotation of bands every month.

I do know one thing, add up the amount of people in the few dance/DJ clubs in my area on a Saturday night and then add up the amount of people in the live music venues which there are way more of then Dance clubs. The Dance clubs will have 10X the amount of people thru the doors that Saturday for sure.

 

[Muttleybass]

I totally agree with what your saying. It was the point I was trying to make over in the other post.

However, I'm not sure I agree that it's totally dead. I think the upper end live music venues are still doing well, just not to the degree they were in the 80's and early 90's. Back in those days, even smaller venues paid decent money and had live music. Now small pubs are getting out of it and it's tougher than ever to get booked into the better places.

 

[ksandvik]

I don't agree that local live music is dead, but interesting local music certainly is close to extinction. I doubt many would like to go out and listen to cover bands, exactly.

 

[aborgman]

IMHO, Cover Bands don't really belong in this conversation. What I mean is, cover bands usually play to a set audience of regulars at a particular venue. 80% of the audience at a cover band's gig would be there if the band was there or not.

Oh how I wish that were generally true.

Around here, we've gotten to the point where a lot of venues expect cover bands to bring 50 people.

 

[aborgman]

I don't know about that. Far less liability when booking Dj's vs a live band. A few Dj's on the books is allot easier to manage than a rotation of bands every month.

We're not talking ease of management. We're talking about hiring crappy bands.

If a venue hires crappy bands - it's the fault of the person doing the hiring not vetting the band.

The idea that a live band is an "unknown" and a DJ is a "known" is only true if the venue is unwilling to do the necessary work of vetting the live band.

Basically ignorance of the quality of band you are hiring is the very definition of WILLFUL ignorance.

 

[ksandvik]

Oh how I wish that were generally true.

Around here, we've gotten to the point where a lot of venues expect cover bands to bring 50 people.

Mostly relatives and friends that are forced to attend....

 

[tZer]

My wife and I went to Memphis and stayed in a hotel just off of Beale street.

During the day there were bands all over the place playing 'original' blues and similar folky/ethnic grooves well into the evening. From noon until 9pm you could catch all kinds of really great cats playing really great music of all sorts - standards, covers, 'originals' (because really they were just riffing on standard progressions and passing around solos - not necessarily giving you 'their latest song that they wrote') - and we saw all kinds of great, local, live music.

But we're old and didn't want to stay out when the clubs went crazy so we went back to the hotel and watched the fun from our window. Guess what happens after 10... TYPICAL TOP 40 COVERS everywhere at volumes that would drown out a 747 - packed with drunk, partying people.

Conclusion: You can most definitely see some really great, local, even 'original' stuff - but you have to go early and to the right places to see it. All the clubs that want to capitalize on the 'get drunk and dance' crowds are going to be serving up the stuff that makes them do just that - and from what I saw and heard, there was no shortage of bands or people wanting to see them.

Around St. Louis there are some pretty good venues that consistently put on local, live music - and have for as long as I can remember. We also have a few local radio stations that support local, live music vigorously - and that helps. A friend I jam with also plays in a group that sees hundreds of people packing their venues whenever they play and that band has been around for almost 20 years.

While I can't speak for the rest of the country, where I am I can go see good, live, local music - original, cover, other - almost any night of the week and there are many bands around here that are actually doing OK, relatively speaking.

Local, live music dead and gone... I wouldn't count it out yet. Maybe the major markets have just burned themselves out and it's down to the secondary and tertiary markets to keep it bubbling - but it's bubbling as far as I can tell.

 

[bucephylus]

I'll argue that 25 or 35 years ago, most of these events would have featured live music from a paid local band. Today, a tiny fraction of them do, most using recorded music instead. This is on top of the generally anemic attendance to live local music in bars and music venues I started this thread to describe.

So, there are lots of young Ted Nugents out there today who nobody is hearing because nobody is watching live music.

In many respects, that is so. We have to work within the gigs that do still exist. No question live music has nowhere near the same social interest level that it did 40 years ago.

 

[bucephylus]

We're not talking ease of management. We're talking about hiring crappy bands.

If a venue hires crappy bands - it's the fault of the person doing the hiring not vetting the band.

The idea that a live band is an "unknown" and a DJ is a "known" is only true if the venue is unwilling to do the necessary work of vetting the live band.

Basically ignorance of the quality of band you are hiring is the very definition of WILLFUL ignorance.

You don't seem very familiar with the average club owner out there. Your posts amount to finger pointing, which may be correct; but explaining the situation does not improve it. The AVERAGE club owner relies on the bands to come to them. You may be right as rain that they should put more effort in, but that simply does not line up with reality, IME.

 

[lomo]

I agree, particularly because the increased availablity of music has cheapened it. Some still truly appreciate the live experience, but for most, unless it's a large concert "experience", there's little appreciation. 100 years ago if you wanted music in your home you had to make it on your piano or other instrument. Now there are unlimited tunes in your car, phone or whatever. Music is piped into most stores and many restaurants and backs most film and TV. IMO the average person (ie not a music fanatic) is OD'ed on tunes and no longer sees live music as "bonus" entertainment.