Performance expectation times and standards...

[Jeb]

Lets say you are scheduled to provide the entertainment at an establishment and the newspaper advertises your wares for a 9-1 or 8-midnight or whatever. How do you arrange your sets?

Typically, the project that I'm involved in will start on the hour and play for 45 minutes and take a 15 minute break for 3 sets. During the breaks, we will play a variety CD through the PA. On the last set we will start on the hour and play for the full hour to end at the contracted stop time (midnight or 1am). So thats three 45 minute sets and one 1 hour set.

Would that be considered a universally accepted standard? It has worked for us thus far without issue, but I'm curious as to how the rest of you might approach it.

Thanks.

 

[IvanMike]

Most bands I've been in do 3 sets at about an hour and 15 minutes each - sometimes longer than that. Often we'll do two long sets and then the last one will be about an hour long
45 minutes is a bit short

 

[kansas666]

The standard by which I have always played is if you are booked for 4 hours - you play 3 hours of music. Whether that is accomplished by playing 3-1 hour sets with 2-30 minute breaks or 4-45 minute sets with 3-20 minute breaks or some combination of the above.

 

[nicoli]

It all depends on where you're playing, you should ask the manager or whoever you're dealing with there. Some places I've played we were asked to play half hour on and half hour off. At another gig I've played three 15 minute sets followed by a couple hour long sets.

The typical gig for us I suppose would be 45 minutes on and 15 minutes off, and probably play an hour long final set.

 

[jive1]

My band goes in with the goal of playing 3 one hour sets, but depending on the wanking going on a set can last more than an hour. So we do two sets ranging from 50 to 75 minutes, and take a 15 minute break in between. After our second 15 minute break, we play until closing.

 

[Mike N]

So we do two sets ranging from 50 to 75 minutes, and take a 15 minute break in between. After our second 15 minute break, we play until closing.

+1

 

[Munjibunga]

I like to do the first set for a full hour, then 15-minute breaks so the last set is 45 minutes. People are showing up and starting to dance in the first set, so the extra 15 minutes sits well with them. At the end of the night, the ones that are left are drunk and dry-hunching to pretty much everything, even "Rocking Down the Highway," so time is not of the essence at that point.

 

[Bilbo Bassins]

It varies, but the one I like the most is 4-sets, 3-15 minute breaks: 45, 45, 60, 45. Put the tightest, best, flashiest, stuff in that 3rd set, last 15 minutes. Builds to a nice climax. Last 45 is then the denouement (dA' noo mau), a la final resolution of the show. A 60 minute first set just seems too long, and 60 minutes on the last set is worthless if the gig's a drunkfest. If not a drunkfest or an afternoon show, then 45, 45, 45, 60 will also work.

 

[secretdonkey]

...the ones that are left are drunk and dry-hunching to pretty much everything...

This is the second or third time I've heard this expression as "hunching" rather than "humping." I wonder if both versions have always existed, or if (as I suspected the first time I heard it) hunching is a corruption of the original idiom, humping? By their definitions, both words are acceptable, but I will never, ever get used to hearing hunch in place of hump.

Not that anyone care. Or should. I just noticed I was falling behind on my post count and needed to post some fluff. Or something.

 

[secretdonkey]

Some clubs will be very specific in how they want you to structure your sets, other won't. Be prepared for either scenario, I say!

I've been in too many bands, who although conducting themselves professionally otherwise, would stretch 15 minute breaks to 25 minutes or more. Surprisingly, clubs almost always put up with it, too, even when people were streaming out the door. Hmmm...

 

[Thor]

That was fluffy.

I think 45 is a bit short as a first set.

My thinking is more along Jive's, if the guitar player is not
totally brain dead that night, he should be able to wank a
bit once he gets going.


I am way more behind than you on posts, goosemule!

 

[Munjibunga]

This is the second or third time I've heard this expression as "hunching" rather than "humping." I wonder if both versions have always existed, or if (as I suspected the first time I heard it) hunching is a corruption of the original idiom, humping? By their definitions, both words are acceptable, but I will never, ever get used to hearing hunch in place of hump.

Not that anyone care. Or should. I just noticed I was falling behind on my post count and needed to post some fluff. Or something.

I got it off a Fugs album, on which one of the songs has a line that includes "... dry-hunching to Johnny Ace records." That was in the late '60s, so it's been around for a long time. Dry-humping is what a dachshund in heat does to your leg.

 

[nonsqtr]

Some clubs will be very specific in how they want you to structure your sets, other won't. Be prepared for either scenario, I say!

+1

Recently we played at a place where they're real sticklers for the 45 minute thing. They want to sell drinks in the 15 minutes between sets, the cocktail server walks around to all the tables and etc. Most places aren't so anal about this, and are more flexible with the schedule. He who pays the bills makes the rules, except if otherwise stated in the contract, so we try our best to please the club owner. If they want 45 minute sets, that's what they get. If they don't specify, we sometimes take liberties, many times we've played two 90 minute sets with a half hour break, and so on, with the last set picking up the slack. Sometimes they ask us to keep playing 'cause the place is packed and they want to extend the crowd, and other times they ask us to stop early 'cause the place is empty and they want to go home. Usually we try to fit into the 45-15 format, that's what we target, and the deviations occur off that baseline.

 

[Big Al]

This is the second or third time I've heard this expression as "hunching" rather than "humping." I wonder if both versions have always existed, or if (as I suspected the first time I heard it) hunching is a corruption of the original idiom, humping? By their definitions, both words are acceptable, but I will never, ever get used to hearing hunch in place of hump.

Not that anyone care. Or should. I just noticed I was falling behind on my post count and needed to post some fluff. Or something.

I'm a perfect example of perfection or brains not being mandatory to be a musician, but I can speak English. It's "humping". Just because a musician sings it on a record doesn't mean it's right. If that were the case, listening to "Angel of Death" by Thin Lizzy would lead you to think that the word for what a prophet or seer does is "prophesized" when actually the word is "prophesied". Then again, if we were all swots (nerds?) the music business would get very stale, very quickly, so vive la difference!