• 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.

When the band sounds the same on every song....

PauFerro

PauFerro

Jun 8, 2008
3,361
4,204
United States
#1
I watched a band at a bar last weekend. It was a 90's band.

One thing I noticed was that although the band played covers from a lot of different artists, they basically sounded the same on every song. The same tones, the same blend, the same guitar solo tone, the same vocals. Any thoughts on how to prevent this? A band that sounds the same on every tune is boring in my view. I only stayed for one set.

Thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eli_Kyiv, dbsfgyd1, Prof.Dr.Metz and 7 others
#3
I've noticed this on occasion. I think some approach music in a stylistic fashion, meaning, they absolutely love a certain tone, by certain player(s) and marry themselves to that. This can be good, as they become quite masterful at that sound.

But you've seen the end result - a narrow band of perspective = a narrow sounding band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluesrock and RattleSnack
#4
I too have seen cover bands that seem to 'genericize' songs, taking away some of the energy and turn everything bland.

I think perhaps song choice may be one factor. For instance, back in the days of my youth in my first classic hard rock cover band we played 'Highway Star' by Deep Purple, which has tons of energy and with that song you can't really half-ass it. Same with 'L.A. Woman' (which got everybody up and dancing), 'Lights Out' from UFO, 'The Song Remains the Same,' 'S.A.T.O.' and 'Freewill'. We would mix in slower songs like 'Wish You Were Here', 'The Rain Song' and 'Closer to the Heart' but again we would stick very close to the spirit of the original song and always got great audience reaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EricOnTheBass, NotColinGrigson, MrAB4003 and 2 others
#7
Some guitarists will use the same chord form on everything instead of listening to what inversion is actually being played. Now with the internet and youtube you can find how to play a lot of stuff. There was a guitarist in a local band who is pretty talented but when I saw him in his latest band he was using a flanger all the time. When I saw a friend who is a guitar teacher, my friend said, but that guy is using a flanger all the time. Things like that can stick out and make everything sound the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BassGuyFL
#10
Have multiple vocalists, mix things up.

Make sure one person isn't doing all of the song selecting and arranging.

Make sure there is one person who can tell the lead guitarist "no". Not joking - one of the things I hate is seeing a band doing a mix of music from whatever style/era, but every intro and every solo sounds Clapton-ish, or SRV, whatever.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Anjohl, MCF, Wasnex and 1 other person
#11
PauFerro said:
A band that sounds the same on every tune is boring in my view. I only stayed for one set.
Click to expand...
tumblr_o211hqrE7f1tty1rio1_500.gif
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Dlew919, BassGuyFL, Bar Band Bassman and 14 others
#12
PauFerro said:
I watched a band at a bar last weekend. It was a 90's band.

One thing I noticed was that although the band played covers from a lot of different artists, they basically sounded the same on every song. The same tones, the same blend, the same guitar solo tone, the same vocals. Any thoughts on how to prevent this? A band that sounds the same on every tune is boring in my view. I only stayed for one set.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Different types of drive pedals and other effects. Different guitars. Different keyboard patches. Bass can switch instruments and use different techniques such a finger-style, pick, slap. Players can really try and nail nuances of the original recordings...or go totally off the reservation.


Having a vocal chameleon. I have heard a lot of bands that get pretty close to originals, and then the vocalist start singing. Not only do they not sound like the original, they sound bad. To put it more bluntly, more often than not I find the weakest link is the singer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrWolf14 and Bassic_desires
#14
Mix up the instrumentation. Play acoustic guitar on some songs, electric on others, Keys on some, not on others, piano, organ, rhodes, mix it up. Have backing vocals on some songs, and not on others. And most importantly, have all band members on some songs, and some with only some of the members. Like the drummer could play percussion, a singer, and acoustic guitar, for a few songs. Then full blast on others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anjohl
#15
IMHO the biggest impact is simply with the instrumentation. A live band clearly does not have all the same options that exist in a studio, but it is possible to do some significant changes across songs with a combination of the following:

- having a keyboard player in the first place (keys can easily change their sound completely)
- guitarists and to a lesser extent bassists using different pedal effects between songs
- switching between acoustic and electric guitars
- changing the main singer
- having a multi-instrumentalist who can be e.g. 2nd guitarist in one song and play the saxophone in another

These are not always possible of course, and such changes might also require some person dedicated to mixing in real time.

Even with fixed instrumentation and sounds, obviously a variety in terms of song speed, rhythm, dynamics, structure, key/mode and lyrics theme should be able to go a long way.

The arrangement of individual instruments also can really make a difference. If the guitarists are always strumming chords in every single song, and the bassist is alwyas playing 8ths/16th/shuffle roots, and the drummer is always playing the same basic 4/4 pattern, no wonder that every song sounds the same. This is unfortunately too common, and IMO especially with bands doing originals without spending time writing some (at least vaguely) creative arrangements for each instrument; my personal feeling is that this is often caused by a band-leader who writes his song only focusing on the vocals, and thinking they can get away with telling the guitarist to just strum chords, the bassist to just walk the bass, and the drummer to keep a steady rhythm... and then wonder why their songs are not interesting to anyone else. For cover bands it shouldn't actually be that difficult, if everybody tries playing by the record (i.e. note-by-note) as a starting point, they will be playing a good variety of parts for their instrument; but a cover band that just "wings everything" with only guitar and keyboard chords, and by-the-book bass & drums, is going to dig their own grave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluesrock, Nedmundo and dougjwray
#16
PauFerro said:
I watched a band at a bar last weekend. It was a 90's band.

One thing I noticed was that although the band played covers from a lot of different artists, they basically sounded the same on every song. The same tones, the same blend, the same guitar solo tone, the same vocals. Any thoughts on how to prevent this? A band that sounds the same on every tune is boring in my view. I only stayed for one set.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I observed something similar at a benefit on Sunday. We were one of a five-band lineup. One of them does hard-rock style covers of 80s pop tunes - Safety Dance and stuff like that. I usually hate when someone wants to "rock up" a pop song because it usually kills the groove that made the original worthwhile, but they pull it off pretty well, and I give them credit for actually "making it their own" in a credible way. But after three or four of them it got to sounding all the same.

I would point out that even original artists vary the genres of their songs, making one track a little funkier and another a downtempo ballad and so on. If they're variations on a "core" sound, it's still cohesive. "Closer to the Heart" is different from "YYZ" but they're both unmistakeably Rush songs.

The simplest way to avoid the monotony is to actually do the work to capture the sound of the studio recording as closely as you can with the gear and skills you have. If you ARE going to "make it your own," do so with the variability that an original artist would bring to it - don't put everything through the same grid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluesrock, bobdenver1961 and dougjwray
#19
Honestly - the 90's era music is some of the most sonically diverse you'll find. There is a HUGE variety of songs, all that were big hits, that sound very different from each other. I never understand why some people think it was homogenous. That being said - there is a band sort of in my area, they are headquartered about 1.5 hrs away but get down in my area to play a couple venues. They play 90's-2000's rock, more on the butt rock side than the alt/grunge side. You can't deny that the band is fairly talented. They have a decent drummer, a decent bass player, good guitarists, and a singer with a good voice. But, they have that ability to make every single song they play sound almost exactly the same. Guitar tones never change, singer's vocal delivery, while technically good, never changes. All songs are the same tempo. It's all competent, and even above average, but to me, every song sounds the same. They can take a Chili Peppers tune and make it sound like Godsmack. It's tone, and tempo, and vocal delivery. They are fairly popular, but I can't listen to them for more than a couple songs. In contrast, there is another 90's type band in the area that is very popular, and they do a much better job with tempos, tones, and vocals. Their covers do much more justice to the original, and they are really a great band. I think good bands actually THINK about stuff like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobdenver1961 and Nedmundo

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back