Playing note for note.

[etoncrow]

..For the record my dog looks like Ringo Starr, but I named him Geddy Lee...

You know the rules, no pic, no dog!

 

[OnederTone]

Actually, it sounds like this was EXACTLY what the OP was doing: trying to improvise when the rest of the band was sticking more strictly to the original version.

Invalid Link Removed

OP did have that situation, and the thread was started out of his frustration from that experience. I kind of thought it veered off into there are type A cover bands and type B cover bands...

Heck, I figure by TB standards I'm pretty much still dead on topic.

 

[OnederTone]

You know the rules, no pic, no dog!

Invalid Link Removed

Ringo is probably smarter than the dog.

 

[DWBass]

Of course it's a group decision. The group decides not to play note for note and everybody is always listening and reacting and adapting to what everyone else is doing. If one person does something cool, the others are able to create the right space for it. If someone is screwing up, the others can help cover for it. It's musicians organically creating magical moments.

Let's say you land a gig opening for a great band with an awesome guitar player. The guitar player says "Hey, how about I sit in on a song or two as a guest during your set?". How do you note for noters do this? Can you?

I am not a set in stone note for noter nor did I say I was. As to the situation you described, I do it all the time. But I also play a wide range of music from jazz, latin, r&b, funk, pop, caribbean, blues and also some ethnic styles. So can I? Yes I can! But that's me.

 

[Turock]

For the crowd complaining that live, bands don't even play their songs the same as recorded...they do almost always play the song the same way live from night to night.

Take bands like Zeppelin, Cream, and the Allman Brothers for example, it would be impossible for them to play their songs the "same way live from night to night", nor would they want to. I'm quite certain that they have never played a song the same way even one time.

 

[DWBass]

I'm just saying the "Covers should be played as recorded" camp can be silly. Stretch out and have fun with it... it's not a recital.

Dude, I agree with you! Again, I'm not a note for note guy but I prefer the band members learn the dang song before getting freaky with it! The OP's point was he wasn't down with learning or playing songs note for note. The band, apparently, wasn't happy with him doing that. And he wasn't happy about being restricted.

 

[Munjibunga]

I play covers very close to the original and, remarkably, the reason is that I'm not so creative that I think I can make significant improvements over what a professional bass player with a professional producer laid down on the original track. Oh, there are some songs that need a little extra action, but I wouldn't do it to a classic. Sometimes even the audience knows the bass line in the song, and they want to hear it. I've had people tell me on the break they really dug the bass line because it was spot-on. I'm more interested in entertaining the audience than I am in impressing myself with my bitchen, self-made bass lines.

 

[fourfinger]

the biggest problem I've found with people I've played with that won't do covers note-for-note is because they're completely unable to.

That's my experience too, but either approach can be overdone and both approaches are 100% valid.

The important thing is, if you're not a "parrot" at heart, don't join a "parrot" band. There are some great bands that would NEVER play a tune note-for-note.

Likewise, if you ARE a "parrot" at heart, then don't join a band that likes to "fly free" and does a lot of improv or a lot of original arrangements (i.e. a "seagull" band).

Not every cover needs to be 100% note-for-note, but the best cover bands seem to do a lot of their tunes that way.

 

[OnederTone]

Dude, I agree with you! Again, I'm not a note for note guy but I prefer the band members learn the dang song before getting freaky with it! The OP's point was he wasn't down with learning or playing songs note for note. The band, apparently, wasn't happy with him doing that. And he wasn't happy about being restricted.

Brother we aren't arguing... I'm just trying to not work at the moment, and we're agreeing from different directions. How about I buy you a virtual beer and we sit in the corner and make fun of everyone else?

 

[ChrisB2]

I'd say that the arguments being put forth that So-and-So famous band plays their So-and-So famous song differently every night, and that So-and-So famous artist covered So-and-So song in a different way and it was great, are non-points in this discussion.

We're talking about small-time local cover bands here, and they're better off getting as close as possible to the radio version of a song. That's what the dancing cougars want, that's what they get. Of course! a famous artist can remake their own songs, or someone else's songs, and be successful.... because they're FAMOUS ARTISTS! It does not logically follow that Joe Blow Bar Band will enjoy that same acceptance with their excursions into creativity.

I love playing interesting songs with great bass lines, as close as possible. It's great fun for me, especially as others enjoy what I'm doing. Don't like the bass line to Hotel California? That's a cool line in my book. And I don't think the song can be improved by changing the line no matter what you change it to. It's a hit song for a reason, and the bass line is an integral part of that.

Play the first 2 or 3 bars of One Of These Nights and almost every American will know the song. Maybe only half can actually name it, but almost every person will recognize the bass line and say "cool song"! Change it to your version, and it means nothing.

I think it's rather self-serving to imagine that one can improve a song that was a big hit, if that someone has never written a hit of their own. Or to think that a listener would prefer their Improved version over the Hit version. Not only do you lose what made the song good, you lose the familiarity, and in the cover band world I'd say that over time that will cost you gigs.

(Disclaimer: I do not play every song note for note. I don't even think it's always possible to do 100%. But I do strive to get as close as practical.)

 

[James Judson]

That's been my experience as well. Even the note-for-note bands can be off from the original, especially if they have a revolving door of musicians. Some bands that are note-for-note are actually just true to the arrangement of the song moreso than playing all the notes of the song.

To me, it's more important that I lock in with the drummer to lay down the feel of the songs, and imply the chord movement in a song. I also rather not spend time arguing during rehearsal or a gig as to whether something is note-for-note. The goal is to make good music, and sometimes it's requires note for note, and sometimes it doesn't.

Lots of people won't notice if you played a bassline different from the original, but they will notice if you're not grooving with the drummer. Like bassists, drummers have their own nuances. Even though a drummer or bassist can play the same notes, it will sound a little different for each player in terms of tone, feel, etc. I find that each drummer does a shuffle differently. So what's important to me is that I play the shuffle along with the guy behind the kit on the stage, not the guy on the record.

Sure there are basslines like Billie Jean that should be done note-for-note or pretty darn close. But if the the drummer isn't laying down the right beat, you will be off. So what do you do? You could try to push the drummer into the right beat, but that could lead to a trainwreck or a few measures where you guys are fighting each other. And there's a possibility that their interpretation is off, and they'll never get it right. People can't dig the tune if the bass and drums aren't locked, so usually I'll concede and lock with the drummer and do my best to make it my own.

This is exactly how I think it should be done.

I'll just add a couple things. If you are playing something popular like "Folsom Prison Blues" I say play note for note cuz, there is probably a Johnny Cash fan in the audience that will hate your band if you try to rock it up.

Every band has a style such that they sound like themselves no matter what they play. To them I'd say play note for note so you learn new styles and you don't bore your audience with the "same boring" song all night.

I have been accused of playing note for note when in fact I was playing the correct "style" for the song.

I would have quit that band myself. Not cuz they wanted note for note. But because they were trying to play my instrument for me. You hire me to play bass, let "ME" play bass and if I'm not good enough find someone better. Suggestions are always welcome though.

And I'll end with, "everyone here is right". There is no wrong way to play music. But what works best is when ya'll play it together.

 

[ksandvik]

Take bands like Zeppelin, Cream, and the Allman Brothers for example, it would be impossible for them to play their songs the "same way live from night to night", nor would they want to. I'm quite certain that they have never played a song the same way even one time.

Cream was famous for never playing I'm So Glad the same way. I checked it myself by listening to three different live versions - yep that's true. Which is the charm with Cream.

If you also listen to the Cream re-united DVD from recent years, a lot of the tracks are played much slower than when they were originally performed.

 

[lfmn16]

Cream was famous for never playing I'm So Glad the same way. I checked it myself by listening to three different live versions - yep that's true. Which is the charm with Cream.

What three versions? I find it very hard to believe that Jack Bruce played the bass line exactly the same three times in a row, but I'm willing to take a listen and admit if I'm wrong.

 

[lfmn16]

For the crowd complaining that live, bands don't even play their songs the same as recorded...they do almost always play the song the same way live from night to night.
A good compromise is learning live versions of songs.

I don't know what bands you listen to, but I can't think of any band except AC/DC that plays their material the same every night. Ever hear of the Rolling Stones?

Knowing something note for note gives you far more flexibility.

How does playing something note for note give you flexibility? That doesn't even make sense.

I can't get over all of the note for note nazi's that are so judgmental about people that don't want to play everything exactly like the record. It's really up to each band and really nobody else's business. Vote with your feet - if you don't like the way someone is playing something, don't go see them.

 

[zephyr_words]

How does playing something note for note give you flexibility? That doesn't even make sense.

I said KNOWING a song note for note gives more flexibility. I don't get what's so hard to comprehend there.

Also, I'm not sure if you're referring to me as a note for note nazi. If so, I will just assume you interpreted everything else I wrote just as poorly as the above quote you took.

 

[bluewine]

I don't know what bands you listen to, but I can't think of any band except AC/DC that plays their material the same every night. Ever hear of the Rolling Stones

Understand that many TBers are to young to understand or appreciate "once in a generation " superior bands like The Stones. They really don't understand their legacy or why they are the best Rockin Roll band on the planet.

It's not their fault, you can't choose the year your born in.

blue

 

[bassbully]

BLASPHEMER!!!!

It works as well as others we twist up like this... folks love em'.

 

[hernameisrio]

bluewine, there are A LOT of post-baby-boom people on here who appreciate bands like the Stones, come on. The whole "kids these days" argument might've worked 20 years ago, but I think you'd be surprised by the tastes of people younger than 50.

Re: note for note. While I don't think one necessarily "has" to stick to the exact notes as they were written/recorded, I also personally think it's a bit much when a band does a cover and they do it differently, but not differently ENOUGH. I've heard a lot of really awkward covers that fall somewhere in the middle and therefore just don't work. I saw this band down in Savannah that covered Stevie Wonder's "Superstition" and stuck to enough of the notes that it was recognizable and appreciated, but didn't stray so far from it that it became almost a parody. As a cover band, I think it's important to strike a balance with some songs. And then of course with other songs, there are certain parts to them that are completely fundamental, so why not do it right and play them that way? But to be note-for-note all the time is unrealistic and, in my opinion, unnecessary. Tell that to the chart-reading, nitpicking bandleader of the cover band I'm about to quit. Ha! Aight...anyway.

 

[guy n. cognito]

bluewine, there are A LOT of post-baby-boom people on here who appreciate bands like the Stones, come on. The whole "kids these days" argument might've worked 20 years ago, but I think you'd be surprised by the tastes of people younger than 50.

Don't worry about our friend Blue. He's convinced that age alone makes one an expert on music, and nothing good has been made in 30 years.

 

[Joe Nerve]

I believe there is black, white, and grey to this issue.

The black and white. 99% of the time if you're auditioning for a band, whether it be covers or original, you're most likely to land the gig if you nail the material note for note and can play it flawlessly. That's been my experience as I seem to more often than not be the only guy who DOES nail the material, and the bands that offer me the gigs tell me so. Happily. And I've heard TONS of negativity regarding bassists who've come down to auditions, not knowing the material. It's usually accompanied by, "what the hell are these guys thinking?"

Also black and white - you nail Won't Get Fooled again note for note, you gain lots of points against the guy or gal that's improvising all over it. Same for lots and lots of other songs. I'd give more examples, but it's 6AM. Also, if it's a tribute band then don't even think about playing your own thing.

The grey - if you're an original band throwing some covers in, then by all means do it your own way. If you're doing Zeppelin, any jam band, funk stuff, etc. then the idea of playing note for note gets kind of ridiculous. But unless the entire band is truly making the songs their own, then the improvising IMO needs be left to a minimum, and the jams are only parts I myself will go off on.

Only time I won't work on nailing established material note for note is when time doesn't allow, and I have to use cheat sheets or whatever.

I absolutely don't believe it cramps anyone's creativity, or limits it. I think that's just a copout for not wanting to, or not being able to learn note for note. I can go off playing covers in my house being insanely creative and playing all over the place, I can write my own material, there are lots of times and places I can express and expand my creativity. Butchering somebody else's work I don't think is the proper place. And I disagree with the, "if I want to hear it note for note" I"ll listen to the radio camp. For the most part, note for note is what people want to hear when they're listening to covers. Only a rare musician here and there will complain regarding hearing things note for note. I can't see many in the audience ever saying, "This band sucks. They sound exactly like the recordings. I'm leaving!" Nope, it doesn't happen. Quite the opposite in fact.