No rehearsal? No problem!

[TedH]

The only reason I'm in the band I'm in now is because we don't rehearse. And we make more money than I've ever made in my life, in any band. And I've been in lots of them.

The only requirements for being a super tight band that doesn't rehearse are:

1. Everyone gets the same sound files to learn from.
2. Everyone has a fair amount of band/stage experience.
3. Everyone is 100% responsible and does their homework.

Its really not that difficult, and can save LOTS of time and money. Original bands are a different story.

One slacker though is all it takes to kill it all.

Testify!

I've done a few of these and they are nerve-wracking for a weekend warrior like me who wants to play great and support the BL. It just requires a bit of time to absorb the material and a few charts, scratch track audio if the arrangement has changed or the ending is unique, etc., and a "get it done mentality" goes a long way. I actually really like these gigs now and want my next band to be come prepared, and any rehearsals are minimized.

 

[JimmyM]

Sure doesn't sound like rock and roll to me.

Rock and roll is, at base, African-American improvised music. I would respectfully suggest that the note for note duplication of a famous recording approach moves it into the realm of classical music - except without the complexity, virtuosity, and subtlety.

While it may earn more money to be able to make a note for note duplication of a famous recording, I'd rather do something else to earn the money and spend my music making time trying to create something. Even if what I create isn't all that great (and I assure you, it isn't!) at least it's mine. At the rates of pay for cover bands copying famous recordings note for note, I can't get very excited about that endeavor.

In my main world (jazz) all the tunes have been recorded so many times that there is no such thing as "the record" to copy note for note. With the exception of certain traditional performance practices (the "I am hip" into for ATTYA; the bass line for Red Clay; etc.) you play the tune, according to the changes. If the horns play a riff behind a soloist's third and fourth choruses, they work it out during the first and second choruses. if you're going to swap fours, the bandleader holds up four fingers and points to each soloist. If the bandleader calls an audible, he holds up the right number of fingers to indicate the key. And so on. The idea that a bass player would memorize and play note for note what Ray Brown did on a particular tune is completely unheard of. You might quote a particularly famous solo for a few seconds.

In that world, and the related world of society bands, you show up with your instrument and you play the music. If there are charts you read the charts. If you can't cut it, there are 100 fresh Berklee and NTSU graduates waiting, who can.

Rock and roll descended from jazz, with a significant infusion from country. The ethos of rock and roll was to create something of one's own, for at least the period from 1950 to 1980. The idea of copying records exactly note for note is something I did not hear when I was a young-un playing rock. Maybe I was out on the outskirts of rock and roll, I dunno.

I see somebody likes himself just a little too much...hmmmm?

You're free to think what you want, of course, but you're not the arbiter of what's acceptable and what's not.

 

[Ronzo]

Or maybe you’re just uncomfortable with the fact that I call out BS and complacency. So many naked emperors out there. If you can’t be passionate about playing music, if it’s just a job, why bother? I was taken aback by the delight on the part of the OP that there were “tracks” to play along with; maybe one of these days one of the tracks will be bass. Oh, wait, that has already happened. That he was seasoned so much that he could just drop in and do the gig, well, good for him, that’s what a lot of session people have done, and if he got paid well for it, so be it. Some people have a calling to engage in creativity. But that whole situation is a pre-fab thing, a human juke box, live Muzak, music played for people who don’t care where it’s coming from. Not my idea of a good time, to either perform it or be in an audience for it. Does that outlook, my personal standards, bother you?
What I found condescending in that other post was your dismissing of a music movement/scene that you apparently didn’t understand or participate in. There was more than just CBGB’s… Max’s, Mudd Club, Knitting Factory, Mercer Arts way back in the begining, Continental Divide, plus probably a dozen joints I never heard of, and even on the outskirts, Maxwell’s and My Father’s Place. As far as the outer boroughs, and the measure of a band like the Ramones, all of my friends and acquaintences from the area, admittedly Manhattan-centric, have told me that they considered all those places, and Jersey, to be as backward and stodgy as the midwest, maybe even worse. Why is Staten Island the butt of so many jokes? I always understood the term “bridge and tunnel crowd” to be a putdown.
Also condescending was the discounted regard of the validity of a band’s entire career and impact, based on the yardstick of how many mainstream hits they had later on, an meaningless evaluation on its own.

As I said in that previous post, I was actually playing in bands that played in a variety of venues at that time. A good friend of mine (and a superb bassist) opened with his original music band for Stevie Ray Vaughan and Double Trouble at My Father’s Place in Roslyn, NY The name of the band was Bushe. The date was April 22, 1984.

He was also the bassist in the first 5 or 6 bands I played with as a guitarist. (Hi, Jim D.)

When I was a partner in Shades of the Past, a NYC midiband I ran with two partners in the late 80s through the late 90s, we played a variety of gigs in various NY Metro Area venues. One of our add-on players was a fabulous Tele player named Walter Moormann. He played with Dave LaRiue on Dave’s “Live at the Khyber Pass” CD. When Walter had a horrible auto accident, we had a number of high-profile gigs booked with him. We got NYC session player Danny Marx to cover Walter’s chair. Danny was (and is) a total pro - he did EXACTLY what this thread discussed. We offered to send him charts, lead sheets, and audio files of the sequences. He said, “Just give me the set lists and keys. You guys do pretty much the original tune arrangements.” No rehearsal. He walked in to the first sub gig - the Christmas party for Queens General Hospital, at Russo’s on the Bay in Howard Beach, NY - with a Gibson 335, a PolyTone MiniBrute, and a dirt box. He absolutely killed it. He said afterwards, “Paid in cash at the end of the gig? No check? Hell, I’ll play with you guys anytime.” We needed him for a few gigs that year, including the Westchester Medical Center Christmas party held the following holiday season at Winged Foot Country Club in Mamaroneck, NY.

As I said in that earlier post, I participated in the scene. I was there.

And as I also said in that earlier post, I find your condescending tone irritating.

I still do.

 

[turf3]

I see somebody likes himself just a little too much...hmmmm?

View attachment 4400444

You're free to think what you want, of course, but you're not the arbiter of what's acceptable and what's not.

Well, okay then. Did I say I was? No, I said that this is how it appears to me. I am a lot more interested in hearing what someone can make of a tune than hearing a reproduction of the record (if there even IS a "the record"). You want to pay to hear people reproduce the record, well, you're in great company it appears, as there's obviously a lot of money in that.

Like I say, it seems that sometime in the early 1980s rock and roll performance down at the bar band level started getting ossified into an industry of making note for note reproductions of "the record". Since my rock and roll bar band work pretty much ended by '95 or so, I didn't spend any significant time in the environment of note for note reproduction, so it seems very foreign to me that there are such a large number of musicians (who are probably far more skilled than I am) who think of that as the normal, nay the preferable state of affairs. From the comments here, that's obviously the case today. So be it.

I'm not going to retreat from my position that the thing that makes African-American improvised music interesting is the existence of musicians' individual voices. I mean, probably something like 50% of all rock and roll is 12 bar blues or minor variants thereof. It's not the song form or the harmony that's interesting. The instrumentation is limited, the lyrics are narrow in scope. What's interesting? It's what the individual musician makes of that material.

 

[LBS-bass]

I'm not going to retreat from my position that the thing that makes African-American improvised music interesting is the existence of musicians' individual voices. I mean, probably something like 50% of all rock and roll is 12 bar blues or minor variants thereof. It's not the song form or the harmony that's interesting. The instrumentation is limited, the lyrics are narrow in scope. What's interesting? It's what the individual musician makes of that material.

I'd suggest there's room in the world for both, and even room in one well-rounded musician's world for both. I play in cover bands, and I also write music. I've dabbled my toes into various improvisational worlds, as well. No one thing defines what music is to me, or should be to someone else.

 

[Wasnex]

Well, okay then. Did I say I was? No, I said that this is how it appears to me. I am a lot more interested in hearing what someone can make of a tune than hearing a reproduction of the record (if there even IS a "the record"). You want to pay to hear people reproduce the record, well, you're in great company it appears, as there's obviously a lot of money in that.

Like I say, it seems that sometime in the early 1980s rock and roll performance down at the bar band level started getting ossified into an industry of making note for note reproductions of "the record". Since my rock and roll bar band work pretty much ended by '95 or so, I didn't spend any significant time in the environment of note for note reproduction, so it seems very foreign to me that there are such a large number of musicians (who are probably far more skilled than I am) who think of that as the normal, nay the preferable state of affairs. From the comments here, that's obviously the case today. So be it.

I'm not going to retreat from my position that the thing that makes African-American improvised music interesting is the existence of musicians' individual voices. I mean, probably something like 50% of all rock and roll is 12 bar blues or minor variants thereof. It's not the song form or the harmony that's interesting. The instrumentation is limited, the lyrics are narrow in scope. What's interesting? It's what the individual musician makes of that material.

I think you may misunderstand. Many musicians improvise cover tunes without rehearsing them. It's simply not necessary to play note for note if you know the chord progression and form.

In the cover bands I played in, we did some tunes essentially note for note and drastically changed others.

If you are going to rely on gigging to put a roof over your head, food on your table, and a car in your garage, you are going to have to actually work and get paid multiple times every week. To do this, you will most likely work with several different groups. There is simply not time for unpaid rehearsals, and if you are playing cover tunes you will have hundreds, if not thousands of songs memorized. If you are really good, you will be able to play each song in multiple keys, without rehearsal.

You may play fairly a song close to original recording in one band, and then go off on a wild tangent in another band.

Top level musicians get to the point where they recognize that many songs share the same chord progressions. So the chord progressions of the songs you know, become building blocks to learn new songs. So rather than learning a new song from scratch, you recognize it as the A section from one song you know, and the B section from another song you know. In essence, you already know the new song as soon as you recognize the building blocks. Since there are only so many possible chord combinations, eventually you learn to recognize most of the progression used in commercial music. Musicians who are really good at this, can actually learn songs on the band stand while they are playing it for the first time.

I never achieved this level, but I have worked with musicians who did. It's not uncommon.

 

[turf3]

I think you may misunderstand. Many musicians improvise cover tunes without rehearsing them. It's simply not necessary to play note for note if you know the chord progression and form. ...

No, I didn't misunderstand. What you described is exactly what the skilled musicians I've played with in rock and roll, jazz, society, country and bluegrass bands do. However, as I noted, I moved out of rock and roll bar bands two and a half decades ago, so the standard performance practice is likely to have evolved.

Even at my level of playing, I have learned many tunes on the bandstand. "How does it go?" "Well, it's a blues with a bridge/It's like Rhythm changes but the bridge is descending chords/Basically same as [xxx] except you hold the IV chord a lot longer..."

To me, what the OP described is basically the same thing as a symphony musician walking in and performing the Eroica without a rehearsal: definitely high skill, requiring a deep background knowledge of the repertoire. There's a lot to respect in being able to do that. From the standpoint of earning more money, I can see how that might be the way to spend one's time, learning note for note all the bass parts on a variety of popular recordings.

I don't agree, however, with those who say it's the only way to do covers, or that those who play songs differently than "the record" are lazy or unskilled. Yep, when I play a song differently than the record, it's because I am unskilled (I make no bones about it!), but don't assume that's the case always.

 

[Joe Nerve]

I think you may misunderstand. Many musicians improvise cover tunes without rehearsing them. It's simply not necessary to play note for note if you know the chord progression and form.

In the cover bands I played in, we did some tunes essentially note for note and drastically changed others.

I think this is an important thing to understand too. I may be guilty of making it sound more black and white than it actually is, also.

Many of the songs we do, we do our best to play them as close to N4N as possible. Others, there's not a chance we're even trying to do that. Songs like Shout, Brown Eyed Girl, Johnny B Good... they're simple enough for us to just enjoy them. I think the more ya do it, the easier it gets to know which ones are important to get as close to perfect as possible, and which ones nobody really cares about.

 

[Ronzo]

JMO, but if you’re not playing a cover N4N, you need at least to determine the iconic phrases, both instrumental and vocal, that identify the song to the casual listener. And make sure those are played and sung.

 

[LBS-bass]

I think this is an important thing to understand too. I may be guilty of making it sound more black and white than it actually is, also.

Many of the songs we do, we do our best to play them as close to N4N as possible. Others, there's not a chance we're even trying to do that. Songs like Shout, Brown Eyed Girl, Johnny B Good... they're simple enough for us to just enjoy them. I think the more ya do it, the easier it gets to know which ones are important to get as close to perfect as possible, and which ones nobody really cares about.

Same. I refine songs as I see fit, moving toward N4N sometimes. But I'm in one band with musicians who could play just about anything by ear, and we chase songs around all the time that none of us has ever played before, and it still sounds better that a lot of what other bands do, because everyone in this band has a phenomenal ear and what I like to call a phonographic memory.

Sometimes our songs will springboard from that and if they get added to our song list we'll all sit down with them as individuals and start to put the pieces together a little closer to the record. But another thing that doesn't get conveyed here that often is that you can't always cover all parts if you don't have all the instrumentation, so you need to get creative. This is where N4N can be a detriment to the song's overall feel and impact. You might need to do something else that was done by a different instrument in order to convey something that's important in the song.

 

[Wasnex]

JMO, but if you’re not playing a cover N4N, you need at least to determine the iconic phrases, both instrumental and vocal, that identify the song to the casual listener. And make sure those are played and sung.

IMHO it varies by song. Some songs need to be more true than others. I do agree that there is value in playing the iconic parts relatively true, but that's not necessarily the same as note for note.

With note for note there is often subtle variation in an iconic line across the form of the tune. In most instances the bass needs to worry more about capturing the right feel than putting all of those subtle variations in the right place. Of course there can be exceptions.

The leader in a group I played in wanted us to do Fourplay's "Bali Run". Perhaps ironically he was our lead vocalist and did not play an instrument. The song sounds easy enough, but it's really not.

The written out part was something like 11 pages. I did not have problems with the beginning part of repeated sections, but the different endings had variations in meter, the number of bars, etc. Of course the parts had to be played flawlessly because of the way they interlocked with the rest of the band. Miss a meter change and suddenly everyone is off by two beats. Play the wrong ending and you might be off by several bars. Needless to say, we had a few flusterclucks.

IMHO this is not really the type of tune you generally play from memory; there is simply to much subtle variation that must be played 100% perfect to really pull it off.

 

[Wasnex]

Same. I refine songs as I see fit, moving toward N4N sometimes. But I'm in one band with musicians who could play just about anything by ear, and we chase songs around all the time that none of us has ever played before, and it still sounds better that a lot of what other bands do, because everyone in this band has a phenomenal ear and what I like to call a phonographic memory.

Sometimes our songs will springboard from that and if they get added to our song list we'll all sit down with them as individuals and start to put the pieces together a little closer to the record. But another thing that doesn't get conveyed here that often is that you can't always cover all parts if you don't have all the instrumentation, so you need to get creative. This is where N4N can be a detriment to the song's overall feel and impact. You might need to do something else that was done by a different instrument in order to convey something that's important in the song.

Original recordings are often layered with multiple takes from the same players. So a 4 piece rhythm section will sound more like a 10 piece band.

I worked with a guitar player who always caved on the beginning of Brooks & Dunns "Only In America" because he played with a heavy technique and tried to cover multiple parts from the recording.

I wound up having our vocalist cover intro and it sounded great.

In this instance there was no need to play every single note on the recording, and no need to play like Stevie Ray Vaughn. Just play what is necessary to infer the artist's intent.


Brooks & Dunn - Only In America (Official Video) - YouTube

 

[Joe Nerve]

Sometimes our songs will springboard from that and if they get added to our song list we'll all sit down with them as individuals and start to put the pieces together a little closer to the record. But another thing that doesn't get conveyed here that often is that you can't always cover all parts if you don't have all the instrumentation, so you need to get creative. This is where N4N can be a detriment to the song's overall feel and impact. You might need to do something else that was done by a different instrument in order to convey something that's important in the song.

That's where tracks save the day .

A while back a couple put a request in for Joe Cocker's Little Help, 2 days before the wedding. We had a gig the night before too, so we were super pressed for time. I think this is a good example of getting close to N4N, and what a band can do when everyone is 100% committed. I realized right after doing this that what I played is nowhere near N4N in some parts, but it didn't matter. The important stuff was all there.

This is the only thing I ever recorded with my current band, cuz I really wanted to see how it was gonna turn out . The mix is from the top of my amp, not front of house so there's that, but here ya go...

No rehearsal, not even a runthrough. No tracks either.

 

[LBS-bass]

In this instance there was no need to play every single note on the recording, and no need to play like Stevie Ray Vaughn. Just play what is necessary to infer the artist's intent.

That's right. You can't cover everything. I've posted this song here recently, but this group is doing this song. In the middle there's a spot where everything stops and the horn section plays over four beats at about 1:15.



Well we have no horn section, right? So the guitarist and I do that. It's got to be in there. Actually, come to think about it, most of what's done in that bridge prior to that by the horns is being covered by the guitarist in our band. The actual guitar part is more ancillary at that point than the horns are.

 

[LBS-bass]

That's where tracks save the day .

A while back a couple put a request in for Joe Cocker's Little Help, 2 days before the wedding. We had a gig the night before too, so we were super pressed for time. I think this is a good example of getting close to N4N, and what a band can do when everyone is 100% committed. I realized right after doing this that what I played is nowhere near N4N in some parts, but it didn't matter. The important stuff was all there.

This is the only thing I ever recorded with my current band, cuz I really wanted to see how it was gonna turn out . The mix is from the top of my amp, not front of house so there's that, but here ya go...

No rehearsal, not even a runthrough. No tracks either.

You have all the important stuff. You have the feel, you have the signature lick on the chorus, etc. etc. That's what people would miss if it weren't there. I think you've posted this before as a good example of how this can be done. I love that your band is able to do this.

 

[hrodbert696]

My bands do rehearse, or at least did regularly to get up and running in the first place. But I would also say most of the guys I play with could probably pull off the set list the OP shared without needing to rehearse it. The exceptions would be Ain't No Mountain (not often I see Jamerson on a pickup gig list!), and to do I Want You Back correct and tight I'd want to have rehearsed it. That' the thing, the set list you pick for a pickup gig like this makes a big difference.

Mugshot Monday lately has been focusing our rehearsals, not so much on how to play the songs (though we just added a batch), but on tight transitions to move seamlessly through a set with no dead air. That can use rehearsing too - no looking around asking "are you ready? what's next?" etc.

 

[LBS-bass]

Mugshot Monday lately has been focusing our rehearsals, not so much on how to play the songs (though we just added a batch), but on tight transitions to move seamlessly through a set with no dead air. That can use rehearsing too - no looking around asking "are you ready? what's next?" etc.

I think rehearsal time is well used for things like this. Most of the bands I'm in rehearse. I do it because most of the players don't have the free time to learn material that I do. It's beneficial to all of us to come together in a way that points up the work we all still need to do as individuals.

But if I had my way, the rehearsals would be minimal.

I rehearsed with one band last night that has a show in October. The drummer is green; he's still learning the material and he needs us to work with him while he's learning. That's ok. We have three rehearsals scheduled between now and that show and I have every confidence that we'll all know what we need to know by the time we get there.

I have another band that's doing classic rock stuff. I learned their repertoire a few months ago. If I never rehearse with them again, I'd be happy and I'd be fine, but they want to do it so I'm there for them. This is the real problem, IMO. Not everyone is able or willing to take the time to refine what they know on their own time so they use rehearsal time for that. It is what it is. I'm not going to change people.

Another band I play with is still refining their song list. They haven't played out yet. They're really good players and I expect this band to sound great, but they still do weekly rehearsals. Remains to be seen what they will do once they are confident with the material and all the books are put away.

The blues band that used to rehearse weekly I have begged off from because I just don't need or want to do that every week with them. They can rehearse without me and when there's a show coming up that I'm involved in I'll come out a couple times to make sure they're happy.

Most of the rehearsal I do is to reassure and support other people.

 

[zontar]

Not playing it like the recordings is the cause of this not working. I get that people can play other things that fit and could very well work, but for it to go seamlessly it has to be a team effort. Everyone is dependent on everyone else and counting on others to play the songs as they know them. Its real easy to miss a cue when people are improvising, or think that someone is screwing up which could prompt another member to try to "save," the song. The whole band would have to be on extra high alert for the one person who chooses to play things differently, and train wrecks become far more likely. "Why the hell did you go into the chorus there?" "Because it sounded to me like that's what YOU were doing!" As @two fingers said, jumping in with no rehearsals probably isn't the best route if that's the way you plan to do it. I know that wouldn't work with my band.

I am not improvising--I am following the song structure, and if I am in such a position I would be listening to the leader & vocals (& the drums) and playing something that fits.
Sometimes even when I have time to practice, but to rehearse with the band I find they are playing the song with a different feel or tempo than I was expecting.

No matter how well each musician thinks they know the song, they still need to listen to make sure they are on the same page.

 

[zontar]

Then these types of gigs are not for you.

Possibly.
But I am not seeking them either.

 

[Medford Bassman]

The only reason I'm in the band I'm in now is because we don't rehearse. And we make more money than I've ever made in my life, in any band. And I've been in lots of them.

The only requirements for being a super tight band that doesn't rehearse are:

1. Everyone gets the same sound files to learn from.
2. Everyone has a fair amount of band/stage experience.
3. Everyone is 100% responsible and does their homework.

Its really not that difficult, and can save LOTS of time and money. Original bands are a different story.

One slacker though is all it takes to kill it all.

Amen brother!