Playing note for note.

[etoncrow]

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

Blue, I have been playing in bands since 1962; top 40 bands, original bands, symphonies, ice carnivals, marching bands, jazz quartets, brass bands, folk trios, bluegrass, etc. I have also read a good many of your threads and contributions for the amusement value. Do not play the "age" card; you are condescending enough as it is and you are swiftly losing whatever credibility you walked in here with by stepping on your tongue at every step.

edit: and actually some of us can choose the year we are born in

 

[lfmn16]

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.

Read your own post, you say "Knowing something note for note gives you far more flexibility." "And that I've now memorized 250+ songs note for note in the past 14 months." "If you're going to be in a cover band where you learn 50+ songs it's much more productive and time efficient if every single member learns each song, on their own time, near note for note." "bands that really abandon even being close to note for note are a bunch of lazy musicians."

enough said.

 

[lfmn16]

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.

It's the difference between having 30 years of experience or having the same one year of experience 30 times.

 

[DWBass]

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.

+1 [/thread]

 

[spade2you]

It's the difference between having 30 years of experience or having the same one year of experience 30 times.

LOL, so true sometimes. I used to hear "son, I've been playing for 30+ years," only to slop through some songs. Well, I guess he didn't say that he's been playing them right for 30 years.

 

[JimmyThunder]

When people ask me how long I've been playing, I often reply "Been playing 22 years...but I stopped getting better after year 5 or so."

 

[lfmn16]

LOL, so true sometimes. I used to hear "son, I've been playing for 30+ years," only to slop through some songs. Well, I guess he didn't say that he's been playing them right for 30 years.

Been playing them wrong so long the record doesn't sound right anymore!

I used to play for this guy who would just call a song, a key and a genre (if you were lucky) and you had to make it all up as you went along. I heard the original recordings to some of the songs years later and barely recognized them. Not much fun, but the gigs payed so I played them.

 

[spade2you]

When people ask me how long I've been playing, I often reply "Been playing 22 years...but I stopped getting better after year 5 or so."

At least you're honest. Delusions of grandeur seems to be ingrained in some musicians, usually the first ones who tell us their opinion of the pocket. With a lot of musicians these days being self-taught, many seeming to take great pride in this, it's not too hard to hit a wall.

I'm hard wired to want to progress with anything I do. LOL, my desire for note-for-note is exactly why don't jive with most cover bands. The really good ones tend to play more than my work schedule would allow, but I'm sure things vary by region.

 

[Ric5]

To clarify ... I started this thread based on a bad band experience. There is a local band with 2 guitars and a drummer that I joined recently. The first big red flag was they didn't seem to know what notes were what on their fretboard. Then they want to learn ALL of their songs note for note from tabs. First of all: most tabs are wrong, so they had to agree which "wrong" tab they all learned from. Second I can sometimes come up with a better bass line than the original recording. Third when people hear us play all they really care is does the song have the same feel and are the signature licks all correct.


But some musicians think a song is a series of notes strung together in a specific order and that learning that song is a process of memorizing that order and repeating it each time. For me a is a totally non-musical approach that sucks the life and feeling out of a song. I try to get an overview of the song and then each time I play it I get a little closer to the original feel. Sometimes sheet music and tabs are needed to help get the parts correct. Sometimes the sheet music and tabs send me down a road of playing wrong notes, so a good ear is needed to temper this whole process. Then you have to get the feel of how the band members are playing the song and learn to fit in.

 

[DBCrocky]

So do you guys think guitar solos need to be note for note as well? Do you think it's important to play each minor bass fill note for note to from a studio recording?

I agree as others have said that some bass lines need to be learned note-for-note because they are signature licks for the songs. I also agree that it's usually not a great thing to simplify a song's structure because you're too lazy to learn it properly.

But if you look back at the OP's post, he says the band could not improvise at all, and that they expected exact note for note from a particular recording.

But when I say there are certain things you can't do by playing note-for-note, what some of you say is that at those times you abandon note for note.

So perhaps we are in the same place, leaning note for note when appropriate and improvising when appropriate. Except you are complaining about lazy musicians who can't or won't learn note for note when it's appropriate, and I am complaining about musicians who can't or won't improvise when appropriate? It's just that I play music where improvising is appropriate much more, and some of you play music where note-for-note is appropriate much more.

On the other hand, I find quite ironic that Won't Get Fooled Again is touted as a bass line that people want copied note for note. John Entwistle was one of the first bassists to really break out of the mold and demonstrate the power of improvised bass lines in a rock format, and was probably my biggest influence as a bassist. I wore out cassettes of Live at Leeds when I was young. I be surprised if John ever played that bass line note for note from the Who's Next recording except for the day he recorded it.

I don't doubt that Joe probably does impress people by playing that song note for note. I makes me realize that the radio hit mentality is still the prevailing mainstream paradigm, and I have been outside the mainstream for so long I've forgotten it. Maybe most people do want note-for-note renditions of radio hits. If so, there are obviously plenty of folks that want to provide it for them.

I am happy to be in the minority.

 

[onosson]

Just a couple experiences of mine over the past decade:

1. I play in an on-again-off-again CCR tribute act, it's been a steady gigging band in the past, and is now basically on hiatus. We've been through about 7 singers now, that's part of the problem. But we do well, score some really nice paying gigs (I mostly fly in to the shows these days), and have fun. We do NOT try to do note for note, not even close. We learn the parts, the lyrics and melodies, and the general tempo and feel. But we mix it up to make it work live, add 3-part harmonies where they aren't in the original, extend choruses, add intros and solo sections, etc. It serves us well, and has worked since we started the band around 2002 or 2003.

2. I joined a Blondie tribute that was in its early stages, before any gigs had been played. This was to be a note-for-note tribute, as there were backing sequenced tracks with keyboards, percussion, etc. NO deviations at all... We played one gig. The band rehearsed every week for months, with the plan of working up to a steady schedule - which never materialized. Rehearsing continued, I didn't. I don't think the band has played more than once or twice, since beginning about 3 years ago.

Just two examples, but I can tell you which method I MUCH prefer...

 

[lfmn16]

Second I can sometimes come up with a better bass line than the original recording.

+1

First of all, 99% of the bass players on CDs are no better than the average bass player you hear in a club; that's where most of them came from.

Second, producers are paid to make a hit, which usually involves safe choices, generic songs, and only things that have been done before so they can shove it down the public's throat with a minimum of effort.

In hitting a home run, you are going to strike out sometimes; producers rarely want to take a chance.

 

[MegaSwing]

Not playing a song note-for-note is not an an excuse for not knowing what the actual notes are. It's similar to the notion that ya gotta know the rules before you can justify breaking the rules.

Having said that, I also think the money on the original has already been made --by the original artists, not by me. It is a moment frozen in time, easily repeated by playing the recording.

As a player, it's up to me to make the experience as good as it can be for the audience with the other players on hand.

The only time note-for-note replication should be expected is when the part is fully written out in standard notation. Most other times, it's about feel.

 

[lowfreq33]

I've played in bands that didn't do ANY song note for note, and people still gave us the "you guys sound just like the record" line. Most people who aren't musicians can't tell the difference, it either sounds good or bad. They don't know why, and they don't care either. They just want to have a good time. No need to split hairs about it.

 

[Joe Nerve]

On the other hand, I find quite ironic that Won't Get Fooled Again is touted as a bass line that people want copied note for note. John Entwistle was one of the first bassists to really break out of the mold and demonstrate the power of improvised bass lines in a rock format, and was probably my biggest influence as a bassist.

Same here. And i actually thought as you until recently when i listened to a bunch of versions of wont get fooled again. Entwistle knew precisely what he was playing in the studio, and pretty much repeated that in the live versions i pulled up on youtube. Yeah, the who played with a lot of arrangements and jammed, but entwistle wrote the majority of what he played and repeated a great deal of it note for note.

 

[Floyd Eye]

Hard to say. Some songs I play exactly, others I change up. Though usually the changes are in song arrangement, not bass note choices. I guess I'm old school and look at people who learn the main licks and fake the rest as hacks. It's one thing to change a little bit after you know the song or whatever, but if you can't figure the notes out or can't execute them properly and change because of that, you wouldn't be in any band that I play in.

 

[DBCrocky]

Hmm, perhaps you are right, Joe. I've never played WGFA so perhaps I am assuming since he jammed a lot of other songs that he jammed that one as well. It sounds like it was jammed...

 

[onosson]

Same here. And i actually thought as you until recently when i listened to a bunch of versions of wont get fooled again. Entwistle knew precisely what he was playing in the studio, and pretty much repeated that in the live versions i pulled up on youtube. Yeah, the who played with a lot of arrangements and jammed, but entwistle wrote the majority of what he played and repeated a great deal of it note for note.

I'm sure he's not the only one who works like that. I'm going to post a link to a video my band did waaaay back in 1995 or thereabouts. I used to play a lot more in this kind of style than I do now. The parts I played generally came out of jam sessions (as did the vast majority of our songs at the time), but I can assure you they were entirely "written out" (at least in my head) and I played them pretty close to the recording most of the time.

That being said, I wouldn't think that anyone covering this song would need to stick to my bass line - it's a supporting line for the guitar chords, and any similar fast walking (running? ) line would work just as well.

The New Meanies 7620 36th ave - YouTube

 

[electracoyote]

My variety/upscale band (weddings, corporate events) uses the original radio edit hit version as a template. Then we take it from there. There are some songs where we want to be faithful and shoot for that 95%; other songs provide some wiggle room. You have to know your audience expectations and cater to that, especially for the kind of money we charge.

Some bands are very creative, and their audience appreciates and even expects them to put their own spin on cover tunes. Other audiences, not so much.

Let's be honest: We've all heard "bad covers," where the band took too many "artistic liberties." It becomes very subjective; they probably think they sound great.

You have to be careful and use discretion. Sometimes it comes down to whether or not the band has a good arranger who can come up with a good-sounding alternate to the original, or at least get everyone's parts to sync up and gel. Bands that just free form it with no arrangement usually just come up with a mess.

 

[lfmn16]

My variety/upscale band (weddings, corporate events) uses the original radio edit hit version as a template. Then we take it from there. There are some songs where we want to be faithful and shoot for that 95%; other songs provide some wiggle room. You have to know your audience expectations and cater to that, especially for the kind of money we charge.

Some bands are very creative, and their audience appreciates and even expects them to put their own spin on cover tunes. Other audiences, not so much.

Let's be honest: We've all heard "bad covers," where the band took too many "artistic liberties." It becomes very subjective; they probably think they sound great.

You have to be careful and use discretion.

I hate it when I'm wrong. You just pointed out a great example of when a band SHOULD play very close to the record - wedding / corporate event band. This is one of the times when the audience can't vote with their feet. They are stuck at the event.

Thanks!