you assume 'animosity' which is a broadly generalized view by some folks
original bands promote the undiscovered future
cover bands promote the already-established past
we do 20+ originals and 10+ covers for a 3-set night
i'd rather not do covers as it isn't promoting us originally, it only promotes us doing renditions of someone who has done the original before us
i'll open for anyone within an hour driving time and do it for nothing. anything more than 45 minutes of playing needs to be reimbursed in some form. that is our limit of acceptibility
you can only be jealous about being paid (more) if you are in it for the money
i'd rather play a night of originals for a bar tab than play a night of covers for $1000
sure it is fun to sometimes play someone else's music, i just don't want to do it on my personal time
there ARE two sides to this discussion and you are in a place where you don't desire to do originals and i don't wanna do covers
and yet, we both get gigs. you get paid more (i guess?) and i get a chance to reach the masses with never-before-heard songs that might even be covered one day
s'all good! there is no wrong or right.
i think the only animosity might be from cover or original bands who get ticked because Original_Band_X might lower the median income expectage for a gig if they play for next-to-nothing in the hopes of exchanging cash for the chance of affecting someone who might come see them again or tell/bring a friend about them
bring it!
who cares!
it is an argument that no side can win and yet we debate
