Trio

[MultiScaleMale]

For whatever reason every band I've worked with has had four or more, sometimes man more, members. Last night one of the guitarists couldn't make it to practice so we were a trio. Nothing against the guitarist that wasn't there, but I haven't had that much fun playing bass in a long time. Call me Pino in the John Mayer Trio. Well, Pino's a god, so maybe I'm a lower case pino and just the first letter. Little p. Heh. I digress, it was very liberating. Instead of living in the land of roots, you get to reach out and do more chording, play more intricate bass lines that fill in the lack of another guitar all while holding down the bottom end. Also felt locked in more with the drummer. I think I like the power of the trio.

 

[CGremlin]

Well, Pino's a god, so maybe I'm a lower case pino and just the first letter. Little p.

"Piccolo Pino"?

I had the same experience a few times with the jazz quartet I gigged with 30 years ago. It gives you more space to play around in, and more responsibility for the harmonic content of the performance. It's quite fun, and in a rock context it's worked for Rush for decades, right?

 

[Arvin]

Trios are a blast. It's great to have all that musical space to play around in, or to just leave as space.

 

[hrodbert696]

Definitely prefer a trio setting. Less occasion for drama, for schedule conflicts, and more room to play how you want to play.

 

[BBox Bass]

I started playing in bands with one guitarist about 4 years ago and found it very liberating after dealing with a rhythm player who stomped all over me with his hamfisted power chords and mid-scooped tone. When my current band's singer quit last month, we briefly considered hiring a singer/guitarist, but decided to try it as a trio first. So far it's working well. I'll be handling singing duties on about half of our set list, which is going to be a challenge, but I think I'm up to it.

 

[DiabolusInMusic]

I pretty much only play in trios for that reason.

 

[LukeSlywalker]

Trios are fun. My first band was a trio. Guitar, bass, drums. When we broke up I started a new band. Now it's guitar, bass, keys, sax, drums, female singer. We get WAY more gigs and can fill a 100+ room locally. So there's that to think about

 

[obimark]

That's my band- 70s rock power trio. DOn't see myself going back to a larger band.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Depends what you want to play - some stuff can't be done as a trio. But it can be fun, and fewer shares to divy up after a gig.

 

[Misfit Wookiee]

I'm currently in a trio playing hard rock/heavy metallish-types of songs and a couple of covers. Haven't gigged yet, but will probably have our first (and my first ever) in the next few months.

It's amazing having the freedom that I have, where the guit/vox will back off of riffs to let me have my melodic spots take center stage. Arrangements are great being able to negotiate between just two others rather than a slew of opinions (and the egos that usually complement them). Coming even from a four-piece, there's so much more room to have fun and occasionally get busy. Okay, continuously get busy.

Now that I've got a fiver, I'm really looking forward to our next full practice. Our guit plays with a baritone Les Paul and I've been tuning a P to B-E-A-D for far too long. Now that I've got the G again, the melodies will continue until morale improves.

 

[theduke1]

Trio has always been my favorite configuration. Each player has to work harder but you get a bigger WOW factor from your audience. And as stated above less drama bigger pay shares you can charge less per night and make more. I don't know about anyone else, but tend to get a little lazy in a 4 or 5 piece band so much going on it can cover a lot of mistakes. Yes there are many songs you can't cover in a trio but 1000s you can.
What my trio does is we play acoustic or full on electric 2,3,4 hour shows depending on what the customer is looking for.
The group I'm with now we all sing and back each other which IMHO is a 4th instrument.
This is the day the Lord has made let us rejoice and be glad.
Love & Peace
Duke

 

[MickyD]

Trios - only once you play in one do you realise just how much fun they are!!

 

[friendlybass]

Love three pieces, less people to disagree with me

 

[bassliner50]

Many reasons to prefer trios...

 

[cchorney]

Depends what you want to play - some stuff can't be done as a trio. But it can be fun, and fewer shares to divy up after a gig.

Everything can be done as a trio, it just will sound like a trio is doing it. Usually the audience won't care as long as you do it well.

 

[tbirdsp]

Our cover band is basically a trio plus vocals (singer occasionally plays some keys). While I like it and it can be liberating, I sometimes find the opposite of what you mentioned - rather than freeing me up, I have to stick to the basic structure of the song - if the guitar is soloing there's nobody else holding it down.

 

[podiumboy]

^ I'm with tbirdsp. I've played both bass and guitar in a trio, and found it limiting more than anything. When I was the guitarist, I found it quite restricting, forcing myself to just play the riff or the chords to carry the song, instead of playing the little lead bits, licks and solos that really make the songs. I found myself utilizing my reverb more so that the root notes would ring out a little bit so I could do a few fills, and it kind of sounded like poopie. We were a trio with a singer who could occasionally strum chords if we needed him to, but he wasn't very good and we usually preferred that he not play, thus leaving less equipment to have to mess with. The day we got a rhythm guitarist was a good day, indeed!

When playing bass as a trio, I found it much more enjoyable. I enjoyed the space it created, and loved to challenge of having to hold down the track all by myself during a guitar solo or whatever. But for us, the overall sound was just better as a 4 piece.

 

[Misfit Wookiee]

...it can be liberating, I sometimes find the opposite of what you mentioned - rather than freeing me up, I have to stick to the basic structure of the song - if the guitar is soloing there's nobody else holding it down.

When my guit stops the rhythm for his solos, I'll have a riff that I'll be playing that doesn't make it feel like the rhythm just dropped out of the music. It helps that my tone is dirty from a modded ODB-3. For the bass parts they came up with before I joined, I keep the same feel as the rhythm but I changed the bass to make it a bit more complex so I don't get too bored. But in my situation, I don't really have too much difficulty holding down the rhythm. I'd post sound clips, but there's no good recordings (and our guit/vox is an actor and has some "issues" with posting our material).

 

[RustyAxe]

Many reasons to prefer trios...

For me, the biggest ... fewer moving parts. We actually thought of naming a trio "FEWER MOVING PARTS", but thought the two guys we cut from the five-piece might get butt hurt over it ...

 

[the harp unstrung]

We actually thought of naming a trio "FEWER MOVING PARTS", but thought the two guys we cut from the five-piece might get butt hurt over it ...

That really is a cool, creative name for a band...and thoughtful of you guys not to use it for fear of hurting your former partners. Betcha somebody reads this and steals it!