Now that I've drawn you in, I thought I'd rant at you guys for a little about about trite, cliched and boring local bands. It doesn't just apply to acoustic acts (by any means) but is the reason I won't see an acoustic act unless I know them or they happen to be playing a show I'm going to. Every single acoustic act I've seen live is the same. A single person sitting on a stool with an acoustic guitar and singing some cover songs. They usually rely on their little bit of charisma and decent voice to get themselves through. But after 10 minutes of open position chords in the key of G or C, everything sounds the same. Even when they almost inevitably put a capo on the 2nd or 3rd fret and switch up the keys. It's still just open chords with predictable chord progressions and even vocal melodies. I always feel like they should add a bassist or drummer or pianist or a little box that they can stomp on in rhythm or something. Or maybe a Jam man. Not to say there aren't quality acoustic acts out there, even in my city. But I won't go see one if I don't know who they are because there are too many like this. Why do I pick on acoustic acts? Well, I guess it's because there's only one member. In a contrived, cliched terrible metal band (of which my city has a TON) there are 3 to 5 unique members. There's a much higher chance that at least one of them has something unique or memorable. Because of the fact that they use electric instruments, they can at least change effects or tones or something. But for the solo acoustic instrumentalist, it's just that acoustic instrument and their voice. I don't know where this rant is going, really. I just feel like if those types of people are really serious about their craft, they should either learn to write and play some more interesting parts (maybe even Andy McKee type stuff) or maybe fill out the band to make it a little more interesting. Does anybody else ever have the same annoyances? Or am I just hypercritical?