This happens to some degree in our band for diff reasons. At first we were learning sp many so fast, we made some goofs. Sometimes a new guitarist comes in, play it slightly different and i dont feel like fighting it. But what i will NEVER tolerate is playing Folsom as a 12 bar, when its really an 11 bar. Its the tiny things sometimes that really make a song what it is. Fought one guitarist on this tooth and nail. I had to nod him all the time.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
No, we learned the tune, the lyrics, the melody, the changes, and the general feel. Then we played it to create the same general feel using what we had on hand. Of course this was back in the 80s when both musicians and audiences expected some creativity from live bands, not just a "repeater pencil" as Prez would have said.
Generally, first time through, I ask what key we're playing a tune in. It is generally expected of professional musicians that they be prepared to play a tune in a different key than a particular recording, usually to accommodate a singer's range.
Once in a great while someone will call "C Jam Blues" and I get to ask, "What key?"
I agree, sometimes the small things are what sets the pros apart from the amateurs. One of the bands I'm in tried to "fix" an editing mistake they thought they heard in a Beatles song. I'm thinking George Martin didn't really make those kinds of mistakes and argued in favor of doing that particular bit as recorded. It's surprising the things people feel the need to fix that don't need fixing and the nuances like this are what shows you're paying attention.
I dunno, I guess I come from a different background. When I was a young-un you were expected to have your own particular sound and add your own particular "something" to songs. A band that spent all their time trying to duplicate records would have been called "trained seals". Sometimes the way you want to do it doesn't work out that well, so don't do that again. If it comes out well, do more of that particular thing.
Don't forget, rock and roll, at base, is an African-American improvised music with a strong emphasis on individual style; with a strong influence of country music - where individual style is also highly prized. If you don't have enough creativity to add your own personal stamp to what you're playing, you need to give up rock and roll, jazz, or country music. If your technical skills are up to it you could always go into classical music.
Don't forget, rock and roll, at base, is an African-American improvised music with a strong emphasis on individual style; with a strong influence of country music - where individual style is also highly prized. If you don't have enough creativity to add your own personal stamp to what you're playing, you need to give up rock and roll, jazz, or country music. If your technical skills are up to it you could always go into classical music.
I think we need some clarification among ourselves.
Note-for-note - I'm in a tribute band, I strive for perfection but even so there are minor variations. I've put in the work. I have transcribed the bass line to every song we play. Still...
Making it your own - This includes reworking the song to put your signature on it. Doing AC/DC as a polka, changing a rocker into a ballad, changing the arrangement to better suit your band, etc. Changing the key to better suit the vocals is not, IMHO making it your own. Just something that needs to be done. Making it your own should be obvious to anyone listening.
Screwing the song up - You're not making an artistic statement when you don't know the chord progression. You're lazy.
Beyond signature licks I don't think most cover bands need note-for-note. I also don't think you're making it your own by playing the wrong chords. While I'm thinking, I also think some people can go overboard.
Find a balance and pick your battles. If half the band is playing a minor chord while the other half is playing a major - well, that needs to be addressed. That one part of that one song where it sounds like the acoustic guitarists dropped his pick - you might could let that one go!
Note-for-note - I'm in a tribute band, I strive for perfection but even so there are minor variations. I've put in the work. I have transcribed the bass line to every song we play. Still...
Making it your own - This includes reworking the song to put your signature on it. Doing AC/DC as a polka, changing a rocker into a ballad, changing the arrangement to better suit your band, etc. Changing the key to better suit the vocals is not, IMHO making it your own. Just something that needs to be done. Making it your own should be obvious to anyone listening.
Screwing the song up - You're not making an artistic statement when you don't know the chord progression. You're lazy.
Beyond signature licks I don't think most cover bands need note-for-note. I also don't think you're making it your own by playing the wrong chords. While I'm thinking, I also think some people can go overboard.
Find a balance and pick your battles. If half the band is playing a minor chord while the other half is playing a major - well, that needs to be addressed. That one part of that one song where it sounds like the acoustic guitarists dropped his pick - you might could let that one go!
JeezyMcNuggles
Inactive
- Feb 23, 2018
- 14,723
- 20,970
- Disclosures
- I suck, but nobody really notices
O
Or, just play them all the right way. When they comment on it, let them know that's how it's played. Then you also have to let them hear it though. But, you'll probably get the whole "It sounds better the way I play it" or "It's easier to dance to this way" but, at least they'll know they're doing it wrong. The most common change coverers do with music is change the key so they can sing it. I hate that. It literally changes the entire song. Sure, the progressions are the same, so it flows naturally, but it sounds completely different. But whatever right? Still playing.
Or, just play them all the right way. When they comment on it, let them know that's how it's played. Then you also have to let them hear it though. But, you'll probably get the whole "It sounds better the way I play it" or "It's easier to dance to this way" but, at least they'll know they're doing it wrong. The most common change coverers do with music is change the key so they can sing it. I hate that. It literally changes the entire song. Sure, the progressions are the same, so it flows naturally, but it sounds completely different. But whatever right? Still playing.
For some of us wasting countless hours at "rehearsals" because certain band members are not using the blueprints provided by the record is problematic. I can't practice your versions of a 50+ song set list at home. (let alone a hundred or more) I sacrifice personal/family time to do paid gigs and it's a given occasional rehearsals are needed. Key phrase here is occasional.
I'm not about to waste one or two nights a week on a regular basis to rehearse covers you can keep polished at home. You want to write your own lines? Do originals. Want to be in a working cover band? Then cover the tune. IMO rehearsals for covers should be for new material only.
Every successful cover band I've ever been in uses some form of this basic format. I do understand some guys use weekly rehearsals as an excuse to get away from the wife and kids, etc. For me that's what paid gigs are for and I prefer to work with players with a similar outlook.
As always IMO, IME, & YMMV
If I find the band’s arrangements and/or sound really bothersome, I’d just leave. If it isn’t 100% “correct”, but still sounds great, I’m alright with that. Audiences are usually just fine with bands making a cover their own so long as they sound fantastic and provide a great show. VanHalen didn’t exactly play accurate covers of Your No Good, or You Really Got Me, but people ate it up.
We have a new guy calling us out for some of the stuff that we'd grown comfortable playing slightly wrong. It's fine as long as you're diplomatic and the band is cool. If you explore what you want to change and the band is resistant to the change, you may want to ease off, but you aren't going to know until you give it a mention.
Yes, by all means step into the situation and proclaim yourself the musical enlightenment for your perceived band of misfit hackers. I’m sure it will go well.
Am I missing something? Is the OP playing with Ray Charles or Ella Fitzgerald?
Does my head in as well. So sick of "we put our own spin on it" as an excuse for not fully and properly learning the material.
There's a huge difference between "we've re-arranged this song for some artistic/musical reason" and "we haven't bothered to learn it correctly". The first is ok, but is often uses as an excuse for the last. Either do it right, or make your own version. But it better be good, or else I prefer the original, thank you.
Had this situation with an 8 piece band, 4 horn players (jump swing etc). The horn parts were just plain wrong, so were a lot of the chords. I had to re-arrange everything to get it right. Some protests, of course. "Well, this is /my/ version!". Ok, but if you voice 4 horn parts with 3 parts on the 5th and 1 on the root, I (usually) don't think you know what you are doing.
If you think it is frustrating to have to relearn tunes you already know with incorrect changes, it will drive you nuts trying to forget those changes for the next five years after you leave this band. Speak the truth to the band and get out now...
okcrum
in your chest
The second time I heard the wrong change in a Beatles tune (like a minor instead of a major chord, something hard to miss) was my last gig with that band. There's no fixing tin ears.
