Note For Note Vs. "Wiggle" Room

[Billoney]

Here's an argument in favor of learning covers note for note that I haven't seen on TB. It's COMPETITION. A player who learns note for note has an advantage over another who doesn't (everything else being equal).

 

[RoadRanger]

Actually I was turned down for what I thought was a tribute band because what they really wanted was someone to jam the tunes . I'm pretty sure they had been butchering the tunes for so long that they thought I was playing them wrong .

 

[Billoney]

Heinous!

 

[electracoyote]

Here's an argument in favor of learning covers note for note that I haven't seen on TB. It's COMPETITION. A player who learns note for note has an advantage over another who doesn't (everything else being equal).

I agree. It's the safe bet, and I've seen and had much more success going into an audition with an accurate or faithful bass line carefully copied from the recording. A too-clever interpretation of a well-known bass line usually makes a less favorable first impression--since you don't know these musicians your personal "flare" might wrinkle some noses. The rare exception would be a band that tells you up front that they want you to re-write the line and get creative, but in 40 years of playing in cover bands I can't recall ever hearing that. I have a high percent rate of beating the competition, and I'm sure a lot of that is because I initially learn a song straight and play it the way people are familiar with at the audition.

Now, after I'm in, and we get to know each other, things may change a little, but that depends on the mentality and goals of the project.

 

[hrodbert696]

Competition for what? Who are the judges?

Unless you mean someone is literally throwing a competition with a trophy for the player who most accurately reproduces a recording, this is only metaphorical, meaning it's thinking of either auditions and who will get the slot in a band, or of gigs and who will please the crowd more. But not all bands WANT note-for-note bassists, they may want someone with flexibility to adapt to what the band is doing, and crowds rarely notice unless there's some signature lick they expect to hear in a particular song and it isn't there, or if whatever the bassist is doing seriously throws off the groove or feel of the song.

I'm not opposed to anyone learning a part note for note. Transcription can be a valuable skill to understanding how a great bassist worked.

But I am opposed to insisting on it in cover band situations. It is often the case that a cover band plays a tune where they don't have all the parts that are present on "the recording." Power trios may cover a tune that was originally recorded in a five-piece. You need to think about the total musical performance; if each of the three members of the trio only play exactly what a counterpart in the five-piece played, then they individually may be playing note for note, but the BAND is not. The result may, if you're lucky, still be pleasing, if the missing parts aren't really essential; but often, the situation would force a cover trio to adapt their parts in ways that will fill the gaps and create an enjoyable performance.

 

[electracoyote]

often, the situation would force a cover trio to adapt their parts in ways that will fill the gaps and create an enjoyable performance.

I agree, the trio that totally re-works songs would be an exception to the note-for-note approach. If the original hit recording had a lot more instrumentation each member might be called upon to take up the slack and re-write their part.

Otherwise, I think the point of the OP was if the band has sufficient instrumentation and the overall musical goal is to come close to the most popular hit recorded version, the safe bet is to come into the audition with a faithful accurate bass line from that version. Then no one in the band can accuse you of getting too cute or clever, if they're so inclined toward that kind of judgment (which I see a lot in the bands I've auditioned for). If you get the nod and find out they have a tolerance for personalizing songs and parts, then you can make that adjustment later case-by-case.

 

[hrodbert696]

I had a very odd experience a few years ago involving a pianist and a singer. It was a thing I do every year where a horde of history teachers and professors gather in Kansas City to score AP test essays for the College Board. Since several of us are musicians, we had a few years where we would throw together some music for the last-night reception. It was generally standards so we could do it on minimal rehearsal. So there's a woman, great voice, wants to sing Summertime, and a pianist who knows it, so they sit down to play. It was the weirdest thing - he lays down the chord progression in steady common time. But she had a version of the song in her head, and plowed ahead singing it, complete with these big jazzy pauses and fills that completely broke the meter. It was a complete and utter train wreck. In a new project I'm in, a cover band, there was something similar, not with meter but with pitch. We decided to do Black Velvet, but the first time through thought may we could just play it in E rather than downtune to Eb. The singer, who's good but amateur and basically leans by singing along in her car, absolutely could not find her note. She jumps in trying to sing in the original key.

I guess the point being that, yes, it's a skill and a benefit to be able to play original parts accurately. But again, it isn't the be all and end all; being able to listen to your fellow musicians and adapt to what they're doing is also essential.

In cover band world, I think of hoary old standards like Sweet Home Alabama or Mary Jane's Last Dance. They're generally awful. I think part of the reason is that cover bands don't have six or seven members to spread all the various parts around. If they play JUST a recorded part, it's too simple and dull, just banging the same three roots over and over again. But if they improvise badly, they can overplay all over and train wreck it that way. Listening and adaptation are the key.

 

[Billoney]

Competition for what? Who are the judges?

Unless you mean someone is literally throwing a competition with a trophy for the player who most accurately reproduces a recording, this is only metaphorical, meaning it's thinking of either auditions and who will get the slot in a band, or of gigs and who will please the crowd more. But not all bands WANT note-for-note bassists, they may want someone with flexibility to adapt to what the band is doing, and crowds rarely notice unless there's some signature lick they expect to hear in a particular song and it isn't there, or if whatever the bassist is doing seriously throws off the groove or feel of the song.

I'm not opposed to anyone learning a part note for note. Transcription can be a valuable skill to understanding how a great bassist worked.

But I am opposed to insisting on it in cover band situations. It is often the case that a cover band plays a tune where they don't have all the parts that are present on "the recording." Power trios may cover a tune that was originally recorded in a five-piece. You need to think about the total musical performance; if each of the three members of the trio only play exactly what a counterpart in the five-piece played, then they individually may be playing note for note, but the BAND is not. The result may, if you're lucky, still be pleasing, if the missing parts aren't really essential; but often, the situation would force a cover trio to adapt their parts in ways that will fill the gaps and create an enjoyable performance.

By "competition" I mean other musicians who are auditioning for the same position. The band does the judging.

 

[MalcolmAmos]

Never been a note for note guy, not going to get into that being right or wrong. Where I play we joke about the lead vocalists falling off the stage, but, should that happen we will all follow and catch her before she hits the floor.

Heck of a lot more fun. And if they keep asking you back, well.......

 

[Bodeanly]

I learn everything note for note, then throw in my own stuff once I'm super confident with the song and once it's too late for the band to fire me.

 

[JRA]

(i play jazz.)

i'm thinking that on the cover band circuit the note-for-note cat gets the nod most of the time. but most folks probably want a player who can also think outside of the box.

 

[ObsessiveArcher]

I'm in a cover band and I always strive to get note for note, at first. Then, I figure out what works best in the context of our band. We are a 3-piece + vocals so the guitarist and I will figure out how to fill out the parts that might be missing in the arrangement. We believe in being true to the original, but also encourage everyone to experiment during rehearsal/practice. If it sounds good, then it's good!

What drives me bonkers is when our drummer is constantly changing the tempo, during the song, multiple times. I prefer to play a song close to the original tempo. If not, that's fine - but make it consistent through the whole song please! Change it up with Dynamics, i.e. with different volumes, alternate fills, etc. not with unscheduled or unwelcome tempo changes. Don't get me wrong. Slowing down for a killer Outro is, well, killer! But starting the song +/- 15% BPM compared the last time we played it and then slowing down to 90% tempo in the middle of a verse, then speeding up 110% during the chorus, then down to 85% on the next verse...

 

[73jbass]

Unless you are in a tribute band, the audience won't know or care if you play it note for note.

 

[Medicine Man]

I learn the note for note for the rehearsal, and then throw in small but tasteful fills or variations as time goes by. Many covers need a bit of spice to keep crowds interested, imho. If I play too straight up, regular audience members let me know I'm slacking on break.

 

[DavC]

when i was in jr high , i learned songs note for note ... it has its place , especially for learning licks you like ...

but i soon started jazz piano studies ... trying to get away from those 12 yrs of Classical training was quite a learning experience .. ! copying or reading parts very well is great ... but i prefer ' style ' .. !

now i'll learn cool passages note for note , just because i like them and what that ' lick ' in my memory banks .. !!

all those things in our memory banks can grow and mutate into new stuff , which becomes our own style .. !

 

[RobTheRiot]

In the case of going for an audition, I think it's always best to find out before hand what the band is looking to do.
Wether or not that's possible, I don't see a downside to learning a song note for note...
- either you end up playing that way, or if you jam it up you have the knowledge to work in parts of the original as you wish.

- Learning the original correctly keeps you fresh & in practice learning new material - practice never hurts!

- Also, if you learn the song properly for this audition, you KNOW IT. You'll be prepared if it comes up for another audition, jam, whatever. Easier to learn it properly once, than risk having to go back, relearn it, and break bad habits formed from "half learning" it the first time.

I just don't see anything but positives coming from learning it note for note.
Not saying anything about how people choose to do covers, there's a place for all interpretations... I just think, like in many areas in life, knowledge is power... why intentionally approach a situation not knowing all you can?

 

[RobTheRiot]

What drives me bonkers is when our drummer is constantly changing the tempo, during the song, multiple times. I prefer to play a song close to the original tempo. If not, that's fine - but make it consistent through the whole song please! Change it up with Dynamics, i.e. with different volumes, alternate fills, etc. not with unscheduled or unwelcome tempo changes. Don't get me wrong. Slowing down for a killer Outro is, well, killer! But starting the song +/- 15% BPM compared the last time we played it and then slowing down to 90% tempo in the middle of a verse, then speeding up 110% during the chorus, then down to 85% on the next verse...

That would drive me nuts too!!

Sounds like it might be time to recommend incorporating a metronome into your rehearsals...
there's also some real-time BPM analyzer apps I know some drummers are using now. Can provide instant feedback on tempo and show if they are swaying from the original tempo of the song. (A cool idea as long as they don't get too caught up staring at the screen..).

Good luck getting that worked out...
I think a non-steady beat is one of the fastest ways to clear a dance floor, even tho 99% of the people won't know why they don't feel like dancing.

(Apologies for digressing from OP's topic...)

 

[lfmn16]

Competition for what? Who are the judges?

Unless you mean someone is literally throwing a competition with a trophy for the player who most accurately reproduces a recording, this is only metaphorical, meaning it's thinking of either auditions and who will get the slot in a band, or of gigs and who will please the crowd more. But not all bands WANT note-for-note bassists, they may want someone with flexibility to adapt to what the band is doing, and crowds rarely notice unless there's some signature lick they expect to hear in a particular song and it isn't there, or if whatever the bassist is doing seriously throws off the groove or feel of the song.

I'm not opposed to anyone learning a part note for note. Transcription can be a valuable skill to understanding how a great bassist worked.

But I am opposed to insisting on it in cover band situations. It is often the case that a cover band plays a tune where they don't have all the parts that are present on "the recording." Power trios may cover a tune that was originally recorded in a five-piece. You need to think about the total musical performance; if each of the three members of the trio only play exactly what a counterpart in the five-piece played, then they individually may be playing note for note, but the BAND is not. The result may, if you're lucky, still be pleasing, if the missing parts aren't really essential; but often, the situation would force a cover trio to adapt their parts in ways that will fill the gaps and create an enjoyable performance.

The truth is, there really is no such thing as note for note. I can't really think of a band that releases a tune with NO overdubs at all. There are usually extra guitar parts, keyboards, background vocals, percussion, etc., etc. Even a 5 or 6 piece band couldn't usually play something exactly like the original. A bass line that sounds good in the original context doesn't always cut it with different instrumentation. I've found that instead of adding a lot of extra notes, for the music I play (rock, guitar/bass/drums), simplifying the parts and focusing on driving the tune is more productive than adding more fluff.

Just my own take is that you need to get all of the chords correct, the feel, the signature riffs and most of the fills. If I get 80% - 90% exact, I'm happy. I've had multiple times where I've been told I nailed the recorded part in auditions when I know that I wasn't 100% there.

As for competition, playing exactly like the original isn't the most important factor in getting a gig. Yes you do have to be technically proficient, and yes you do have to 'know' the tunes, but showing up on time, prepared, without an attitude and exuding 'team player' vibe will get you way more gigs than playing 99% exactly like the original. Just my experience.

 

[BassAndReeds]

Play musically as yourself.

For some people, that means playing note for note. Some it means jam on the chord structure.

For me, it depends on the song. For some tunes, I open it up. Some I play note for note. That's where the musicality comes in, which is personal taste.

But auditions aren't just about the notes. It's about personality, lifestyle, perceived ability to interact with the members. So if you get turned down for a gig, you may have played everything just right, but other factors led to you not getting the gig. Don't worry about that, just keep auditioning. If you're a good player, you'll find a group of like minded musicians eventually.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Here's an argument in favor of learning covers note for note that I haven't seen on TB. It's COMPETITION. A player who learns note for note has an advantage over another who doesn't (everything else being equal).

IME there's learning note for note and there's playing note for note. I don't see them as the same thing. I think the ability to not be restricted to note for note is far more valuable.