So I'm doing a complete scene transition...

[hrodbert696]

50s, 60s, and 70s tributes still exist, and cover bands still play stuff from the 50s and 60s. No reason why it can't be said for the 80s and 90s.

No argument here - several of the cover bands are around here are strictly 80s cover bands. My own band is not strictly 80s but we've got Pat Benatar, the Police, Donnie Iris, Loverboy, Tommy Tutone, J. Geils, lots of 80s on the list. And it's true that songs that didn't chart well sometimes go big-time in their cover band afterlife; Love Shack was #94 for the year it came out (in year-end standing) but it's #3 on the current DJs' most-requested-songs list.

I am curious how 90s will play out on the cover band scene, though, because my impression is that audiences were a lot more splintered in the 90s than they were in the 80s. People had different tastes in the 80s but they overlapped more; one person might like Madonna and another liked Metallica but just about everybody listened to Van Halen.

But in the 90s the people who listened to the boy bands, to hip hop, or to grunge were much more separate groups. A lot of songs didn't chart because they appealed to one sector or other, and people bought the album rather than a single (CDs had killed the 33 rpm single and digital downloads weren't available yet) so the individual classic songs didn't show up on sales charts. It's hard to guess what will still "play" twenty years later, until you try it I guess.

 

[jive1]

I am curious how 90s will play out on the cover band scene, though, because my impression is that audiences were a lot more splintered in the 90s than they were in the 80s. People had different tastes in the 80s but they overlapped more; one person might like Madonna and another liked Metallica but just about everybody listened to Van Halen.

But in the 90s the people who listened to the boy bands, to hip hop, or to grunge were much more separate groups. A lot of songs didn't chart because they appealed to one sector or other, and people bought the album rather than a single (CDs had killed the 33 rpm single and digital downloads weren't available yet) so the individual classic songs didn't show up on sales charts. It's hard to guess what will still "play" twenty years later, until you try it I guess.

Good point, and that's what I observed as well. You have the cheesy 90s of boy bands, R&B/Hip Hop, and Pop trying to pass itself off as Alt on one side, and then you have the heavier bands that were popular for their live act but didn't chart as much as the pop acts, or were very popular in a specific niche.

But, I don't think it's that different than the 60s. Contrary to popular belief, there was a lot of lame music in the 60s. We've just had more years to forget about it. Here's the Billboard top 40 of 1969, the summer of love:
1 Archies Sugar, Sugar
2 Fifth Dimension Aquarius / Let The Sunshine In
3 Temptations I Can't Get Next To You
4 Rolling Stones Honky Tonk Women
5 Sly and The Family Stone Everyday People
6 Tommy Roe Dizzy
7 Sly and The Family Stone Hot Fun In The Summertime
8 Tom Jones I'll Never Fall In Love Again
9 Foundations Build Me Up Buttercup
10 Tommy James and The Shondells Crimson And Clover
11 Three Dog Night One
12 Tommy James and The Shondells Crystal Blue Persuasion
13 Cowsills Hair
14 Marvin Gaye Too Busy Thinking About My Baby
15 Henry Mancini and His Orch. Love Theme From Romeo And Juliet
16 Youngbloods Get Together
17 Friends Of Distinction Grazin' In The Grass
18 Elvis Presley Suspicious Minds
19 Creedence Clearwater Revival Proud Mary
20 Jr. Walker and The All Stars What Does It Take (To Win Your Love)
21 Isley Brothers It's Your Thing
22 Neil Diamond Sweet Caroline
23 Oliver Jean
24 Creedence Clearwater Revival Bad Moon Rising
25 Beatles Get Back
26 Zager and Evans In The Year 2525
27 Blood, Sweat and Tears Spinning Wheel
28 Andy Kim Baby, I Love You
29 Friends Of Distinction Going In Circles
30 Lettermen Hurt So Bad
31 Creedence Clearwater Revival Green River
32 Stevie Wonder My Cherie Amour
33 Three Dog Night Easy To Be Hard
34 Smith Baby It's You
35 Elvis Presley In The Ghetto
36 Johnny Cash A Boy Named Sue
37 Smokey Robinson and The Miracles Baby, Baby Don't Cry
38 Jerry Butler Only The Strong Survive
39 Zombies Time Of The Season
40 Fifth Dimension Wedding Bell Blues
Click here for the top 100 http://www.bobborst.com/popculture/top-100-songs-of-the-year/?year=1969

There's alot of classic artists and songs of that time missing, along with some that haven't passed the test of time. Considering the country was more segregated at that time, some of those songs crossover now much more than they did back then. Nostalgia tends to soften us, and we'll take what was intolerable back then and appreciate it more because of what it symbolizes more than the content itself. I feel that way about the 80s stuff. There's a bunch of guys who wouldn't be caught dead listening to Madonna, or girls who made you turn off the stereo when Motley Crue was on that will rock out to both now that they are in their 40s. Since that time is gone, they'll grasp onto whatever's left.

 

[MarkMgibson]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Invalid Link Removed

In addition to the disco tributes, check out the songlists of any of the corporate or wedding bands. Plenty of YMCA, Raining Men, Celebration, Le Freak, Get Down Tonight, etc. and that's just from a couple years worth of music. If a blip of music such as Disco can survive over 30 years, no doubt 2 decades worth of rock and roll will too.

50s, 60s, and 70s tributes still exist, and cover bands still play stuff from the 50s and 60s. No reason why it can't be said for the 80s and 90s. I have a pretty safe bet.

Bands Plus seems to be a decent agency that may last for another 10 years. So how about, if at least 5 bands on their roster have at least 5 80s or 90s tunes on their playlist, we'll consider it still alive. Or we can use the DJintelligence Top 200 requested songs of 2022. If there's at least 20 songs from the 80s and 90s on there, then I'll be getting some new bass strings. Or we can use both as criteria.

Yep, that sounds fair. I just hope they don't start gold plating bass strings! You're right about there being plenty of lame music in the 60's, but I don't think that period as been matched in terms of variety. I actually think all these sub-genres stifle creativity in a way, as many artists fear aliening their niche audiences. I liked it better when they just called it Rock & Roll, and when people ask me what I play, that's what I tell them.

 

[ChrisB2]

But, I don't think it's that different than the 60s. Contrary to popular belief, there was a lot of lame music in the 60s. We've just had more years to forget about it. Here's the Billboard top 40 of 1969, the summer of love:
1 Archies Sugar, Sugar ....

Not sure what your point is with this list, but it appears that you're claiming those are lame songs. If so I would have to disagree, lots of great songs on that list, many that I've played in cover bands.

If not, then just ignore the above.

And BTW the "Summer of Love" occurred in 1967.

 

[jive1]

Not sure what your point is with this list, but it appears that you're claiming those are lame songs. If so I would have to disagree, lots of great songs on that list, many that I've played in cover bands.

If not, then just ignore the above.

And BTW the "Summer of Love" occurred in 1967.

You're right about the Summer of Love. For some reason '69 seems to stick in my head for love more than '67. Lots of lame music in '67 too.

It's a matter of taste, but some of those songs to me are pretty lame. The number one song was from a cartoon, for Chrissakes! Can't get any less Rock and Roll than that. I hate bubblegum pop, and that was era it was birthed from. There was alot of great music from the 60s, but they weren't on the charts and lots of stuff on the charts were lame, IMO. For example, Tommy by the Who came out that year and is considered a landmark album. But somehow the one-hit wonders Zager and Evans made that chart and the Who didn't. Hendrix is arguably one of the most influential musicians of that time, but you won't find any of his originals on a chart. The point is that every era has good and bad music that was popular, and music that is considered classic now may not have been popular then.

There's lots of songs on that list that a cover band would play, but there's also lots that they wouldn't unless they were in the pit for 'Hair'.

 

[fishdreams]

1. How does the dynamic change in a cover band compared to a band that writes it's own music? Is there less ego problems when it comes to the task since the music is already written? Are the people who play in cover bands generally more professional than hard rock and metal bands?

2. How does your band react to you improvising throughout songs? After learning some of the songs, I've found they are fairly simple and boring to play. So I've been improvising whilst practicing at home. Do your band members invite it or do they want you to play it exactly as it was written?

3. Is playing in a cover band a primary source of income for any of you? If so, how many gigs per week/month do you play? If it isn't, what else do you do for income? (relevant for me at this point in time as I have recently been made redundant from my job)

4. How often do you and your band rehearse?

5. The drummer and I have differing views - he wants two guitarists whilst I think one guitarist and a keyboard player would be ideal. What do you think is the better combination?

First off, good luck (and better then you experienced thusfar) in your new endeavour!
My 2 cts:
1.It depends how you'd define 'professional'-but cover bands that play for money typically would need people in it that are disciplined in matters both musical and otherwise (money, time management ect)
2.It depends on the concept of the cover band. If the band goes to the tribute end/fake band of the spectrum, definitely not. I suppose you'd have to see and test with an audience existing of members of your target market, what you can get away with.
3. IME, I made the most money per gig with a tribute band consisting of weekend warriors; while some of them were not the greatest musicians, I could clearly see then that being in a band with guys older than myself (at the time) who had families and responsibilities etc, informed the business side of the operation to great effect. (see also point 1)
4. Once a week seems fine for such an operation; the aim is not so much to be able to play the tunes, but to be convincing on stage, by putting on a smoothly running show under any live circumstances. For example, you'd be pacing various setlists suiting different occasions, which will take several rehearsals to settle properly.
5. A second guitarist who doubles on keys?

 

[MarkMgibson]

You're right about the Summer of Love. For some reason '69 seems to stick in my head for love more than '67. Lots of lame music in '67 too.

It's a matter of taste, but some of those songs to me are pretty lame. The number one song was from a cartoon, for Chrissakes! Can't get any less Rock and Roll than that. I hate bubblegum pop, and that was era it was birthed from. There was alot of great music from the 60s, but they weren't on the charts and lots of stuff on the charts were lame, IMO. For example, Tommy by the Who came out that year and is considered a landmark album. But somehow the one-hit wonders Zager and Evans made that chart and the Who didn't. Hendrix is arguably one of the most influential musicians of that time, but you won't find any of his originals on a chart. The point is that every era has good and bad music that was popular, and music that is considered classic now may not have been popular then.

There's lots of songs on that list that a cover band would play, but there's also lots that they wouldn't unless they were in the pit for 'Hair'.

In The Year 2525 was a great one hit wonder though!

And that list is still better than any year in the last 2 decades as far as I'm concerned.

 

[rtslinger]

Yes as you did I started out doing only original music. and after taking sometime off decided to join a cover band

1. How does the dynamic change in a cover band compared to a band that writes it's own music? Is there less ego problems when it comes to the task since the music is already written? Are the people who play in cover bands generally more professional than hard rock and metal bands?
A: most people in my area were coming out of original projects so it was important to surround myself with prof. who were like minded.

2. How does your band react to you improvising throughout songs? After learning some of the songs, I've found they are fairly simple and boring to play. So I've been improvising whilst practicing at home. Do your band members invite it or do they want you to play it exactly as it was written?
A: depending on the gig sometimes you did to do it note for note other times you are free to improvise. We started out note for note type of band but found that our making the song our own brought us more success for the lack of a better word in our area.

3. Is playing in a cover band a primary source of income for any of you? If so, how many gigs per week/month do you play? If it isn't, what else do you do for income? (relevant for me at this point in time as I have recently been made redundant from my job)
A: no none of us are in it for the paycheck we play because we enjoy playing we do not however ever play for free and that is just us thinking about the struggling musician out there that need the extra cash to make ends meet. As for gigs we are doing 4 times a month on average. As for paychecks we all have day jobs that pay very well let's leave it at that.

4. How often do you and your band rehearse?
A: never! for practice our band never ever gets together for a band practice we have always worked through emails someone suggests a song if the singer can sing it and everyone agrees we learn it as homework once everyone has their part down we agree to play it live! again these guys are prof. so I don't think it would work for everyone but it works for us.

5. The drummer and I have differing views - he wants two guitarists whilst I think one guitarist and a keyboard player would be ideal. What do you think is the better combination?
A: we had just two guitarist in the beginning but add a keyboard player because we found ourselves handcuffed to certain artist. A second guitarist really is a nice full sound when the lead starts keys alone does fill that void imo.
Good luck. RTS

 

[JumboJack]

Hmmmm.

 

[jive1]

In The Year 2525 was a great one hit wonder though!

And that list is still better than any year in the last 2 decades as far as I'm concerned.

You know what they say about one man's trash........