peteb

[quote name='ivansc' timestamp='1442649511' post='2868405'] Having worked both sides of the Atlantic, I would have to say the standard of players I saw & worked with in the USA absolutely obliterated most of the pub and club bands I see in the UK today. Part of the problem is the number of people like yourself, who do it for the love of playing with no thought to the money aspect. You crowd out a lot of the bad bands, but also reduce the number of paying gigs a professional player can go after. There is a whole other level above lightly-rehearsed amateur bands where a good 4 hour show is perfectly do-able IF you put the time in to get road-hardened. Not easy, but then if you are working at that level it IS your job [/quote] Surely any professional player expecting to make a living playing in pubs (certainly in the UK) needs to have a word with himself and get a day job! Simple economics mean that a pub is not going to pay more than £200-£300 (at the most) and a share of that is not going to provide what most people would consider a half-decent living. The real problem is the number of ‘amateur’ bands that are just not good enough but still get plenty of work in pubs crowding out better bands and there are not enough good quality bands to displace them...

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1442611950' post='2868292'] Personally..and I think I speak from experience 2 hrs is a HUGE ask for a band to be able to pull. It isn't a show then..it is just a list of numbers where you don't play a planned set...you just fire off the numbers. There isn't then a planned thought out set. And from that...you would need a very very able reader of the audience to have any sort of flow in the set. In all my years playing... I've only seen one front person be able to call that.... and that was a function act. Anyway..it doesn't matter...there doesn't seem an appetite for it and I'm glad not to get asked to play more than 2x1hrs.. Our vox can't handle any more anyway.. and I think a sustained period of abusing your voice will impact greatly on your vox and range in a pretty short period of time...( too many don't have traoedn voices or have a regime for lookimg after it) My mates band in Florida have 4 or 5 main vocals for this reason... that also wouldn't work here. It is hard enough for a band to have one.. [/quote] That’s true – I don't think that you can play a structured set for that long. I have some friends who often tour in Holland / Belgium playing 4 hours a night in bars / clubs. They play all sorts of stuff at the end of the night to pad out the final sets and, of course, lots of guitar solos…!

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1442600764' post='2868190'] Thing is, in our circuit, most of the bars we play have built up a reputation as a live music venue. So, it makes a big difference when the clientele comes there to hear a live band. Where it can get dicey is when you take a gig at a bar not necessarily known to have bands.Then it's a hit or miss proposition. Normally it's a miss. Blue [/quote] It's pretty much the same over here.

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1442568443' post='2867809'] 'Solid' is an acceptable epithet that, to my ears, means 'competent', 'reliable' but not exceptional. There are many stages above 'solid' (virtuoso, monster etc) but, if you achieve 'solid' you are on the first 'proper' rung of the ladder and will work. If you haven't yet acheived 'solid', you are probably a lightweight [/quote] There's plenty of bands where 'solid' will get you the gig but 'virtuoso' or 'monster' will rule you out. After all, you don't need to be Jaco to play in AC/DC - and they are one of the classic rock and roll bands...!

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1442567292' post='2867794'] There are a lot of British bands who could do with putting in the time. Many of the guys you see playing in pubs and clubs have no groove and are plainly not listening to each other or playing as a unit. Hopefully if you had to play for 4 hours a night the bad and indifferent players would fall by the way side and the whole music scene would improve. [/quote] I think that you may have a point there BUT the UK's licensing laws and British drinking habits mean that not many landlords would want to have a band playing for 3 or 4 hours. They certainly would not want to pay extra! Also, a landlord is only interested in whether a band can pull in punters and assist him to sell beer! He doesn't care how many people are in the band and will understandably pay the same for a three piece as he will for an equally popular seven piece band...

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1442460550' post='2867119'] I joined my band for years ago because it was a job, a paying job. Not wishing well of creativity. Now, while it's a job, it's a very fun job. Blue [/quote] Basically I just want to play – money is a factor but not an overriding one. I certainly wouldn’t want to play in a band where I didn’t like the material and tend to stick to genres that I know that I can be convincing. I’m quite happy to take a lead in running a band but equally, I’m happy to just be a hired hand if the band is good enough. The most fun I ever had in a band was a few years in the backing band of a blues rock guitarist. He did virtually everything and I just turned up and played. It was a good band; we played all over the country, made decent money and had a great laugh. I certainly didn’t feel the need to be running the band or anything…

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1442515314' post='2867542'] I'm more impressed or pleased if they pay for tickets... but yes, nice to have people consistently appreciate what you do. Not sure about the second point but my friend moved to Orlando and really can't handle the lenght of the gigs they are asked to do... I think he said 4x45 and 1x hr. I think the money is better, iirc... but then it needs to be 2 and half times better as he plays over 2 and half times as long. He has always loved playing more than 'playing' if you understand what I mean, but he says he is getting too old for that sort of gig. We NEVER play for more than 2 hrs...find we don't need to and the money doesn't really go up even if we did. There are some pub gigs that I wouldn't be interested in tbh... and I'd do my homework about them...even if they are on the 'circuit' but some are quite good, do things properly and geta good crowd. £350 plus is quite achieveable in a decent pub if you get and keep the crowd...but that crowd will come and see music...and so the band is more critical than just being a music night. This is why there is a large difference between bands and what they can ask for. Quite a few of the better pubs are doing doors and security and will pay for semi name bands. Their budget will have to be £1000 plus so obvious the size of the pub matters a LOT. But any decent and above average music pub with a good reputation will get 'offers' from touring acts and some will be able to take those gigs... the deal will typically be an mid week night, tickets and £600 plus fees for solo upwards. The offers to do these sort of gigs come from the acts agents and not the pubs... It largely works, IMO. [/quote] Just goes to show that there are differences in pub gigs in different parts of the UK, yet alone between here and the US. I assume that you are based in a far more affluent part of the country than me, but round here punters would (unfortunately) not be interested in paying on the door for a pub gig, although they might accept a modest hike on the price of a pint. Of course, people will pay to see semi-name acts in a club (usually tributes or genre based acts) but not in a pub. Also, no landlords round here would consider paying £350 for a pub gig – the economics of it would just not be sustainable. But then again that might be because I’m living in a less affluent area. I have certainly been paid that much in pubs in other parts of the country, but that was generally as it was a special event / the fact that the gig was promoted as a non-local band playing. I think that the 2x45 sets plus a 15 minute encore pub gig is more a reaction to UK licensing laws / drinking culture. Certainly gigs in northern Europe follow the American model where bands are expected to play for anything from 2 ½ to over 4 hours. However, they do tend to pay better and bands seem to be more highly valued by bar owners.

Ideally you want guys who can put a set together without needing too much rehearsing...

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1442359305' post='2866410'] Good story Pete and your lucky. Sounds like you found a rare and good opportunity. Again, very cool. Most start ups aren't together long enough to see their 1st gig. Blue [/quote] Of course it helps if you're dealing with the right people with a start-up as it does with any band. In music, contacts are everything...

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1442337116' post='2866182'] Like Sprocket mentioned above, "Were All Different". When I was looking for a band 4 years ago,I knew exactly what I was looking for. I had no interest in originals or start up projects. I'm not picky about the genre however I restricted my search to established bands (meaning bands that had at least a couple of years up and running with the original core members) with a history of consistent paying gigs as well as future gigs on the books. We call this a "turn key" opportunity. I was lucky and found that band. Not easy, I basically followed them around and let them know I was looking and was interested. Turned out at some point their bass player was going in a different direction. After auditioning about 3 times , I was offered the job. They all turned out to be cool, knowledgeable, fair and trustworthy people. 4 years later I'm still with them and couldn't be happier. Thing is, if the band folded I would be sunk. In my area finding bands that are into making money and gigging a lot, basically don't exist. All most every ad for bass players has the phrase [i]" We only do this for fun and gig once every couple of months."[/i] Blue [/quote] Personally I wouldn’t be so against doing a start-up band. About 18 months ago I was asked to join an established local rock covers band that gets plenty of local gigs. Even though they’re an OK band, I wasn’t particularly bothered and passed. Instead I accepted an invitation to join a start-up band (doing broadly similar stuff) with a couple of guys who I knew could play. It took a bit of time to get off the ground but we were gigging about 6 months later and doing far better than the other band that I could have joined. Getting gigs was no problem as me and the guitarist were gigging regularly in other bands and I could have a big say in the material and impose my own view on playing standards etc, which I probably could not have dome coming in as the new guy in an established band. If you have got the right people involved and you have some contacts, a start-up band can be just as feasible as an established one and you will have more opportunities to ensure that things are done how you want them to be…

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1441970442' post='2863348'] Yeeuch. I always found Rich's big band a bit thuggish. This is too fast (as a lot of Rich arrangements were) and doesn't groove as a result. Great players badly utilised. I love the '8.30' version toneknob mentions. THAT swings like a mofo. Buddy Rich, for all his chops, thought Jazz was arm-wrestling (to be fair, so did Zawinul after Weather Report) Warrington does not need to worry about barnets nowadays. If you want to look at barnets, look up the youtube version of the tune by Manhattan Transfer (the band features Wayne Johnson on guitar) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxIo6nrgVa4 [/quote] I was mentally prepared to accuse you of some jazz snobbery here, preferring a more obscure version by some bebop outfit, but then I played the clip and you are, of course, quite right! He counts in way too fast, then the band bludgeon the tune half to death...

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1441667142' post='2860805'] I see what you mean and you're right. If the OP had caved in to pressure from certain individuals he wouldn't have been subject to personal abuse ... er ... doesn't sound so good when we put it like that But it still comes down to the fact that some peoples' self esteem is so fragile that they perceive a politely expressed general observation as a specifically personal attack to which they respond with ad-hominem insults. So it all turns nasty and eventually you get muppets turning up to further their pre-existing vendetta. There's another thread running at the moment where exactly the same thing is happening. And where are the mods while this is happening? Are they putting out the fire? No. With a couple of honourable exceptions, they're lobbing brick-ends along with all the other malcontents. All part of the general forum decline. The country's going to the dogs, I tell you. [/quote] Skank, I fear that your sensibilities are a little delicate for the brave new world of the internet. My main concern is that the keyboard warriors chucking their toys around are so badly informed! The other thread to which I assume you refer is merely someone amusing themselves by making a ridiculous statement then accusing anyone who disagrees of doing so through vanity. Just a bit of attention seeking, quite harmless really. As far as this thread goes I can't see why anyone is arguing, yet alone getting upset and throwing insults around. The Beatles have undoubtedly had the biggest impact on popular culture of anyone in the last 70 years! Now I'm not even a fan of the Fab 4, but to deny their influence or importance is just daft...

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1441319987' post='2857994'] I don't understand why you can't understand. [/quote] Neither do I...! Some people are saying that the audience don’t care about whether you use mediocre or high end gear, but they do. They don’t know why one band sounds better than another, but they can tell the difference. A better bass sound is just one small component of that, but it is a factor – just not as important as playing / singing in tune and in time or having decent material, etc. Also, some audience members know a tiny bit about types of instruments and feel reassured that they are watching a superior band if they recognise the brands of the guitars on the bandstand. Also, many band leaders have a certain preconceived idea of what a bass should look and sound like. Never underestimate what the appeal of having ‘Fender made in USA’ written on your headstock can be to some people. I recently watched an interview with a session bassist called Sean Hurley, where he says that for 95% of the time he now just takes Fender Precisions on recording dates as he knows that artists and producers will immediately be comfortable with them (both in terms of sound & pedigree). If you turn up for an audition with a Squier then the band leader may question your choice of instrument. Of course, if you can play like Jaco then he will quickly forget about any reservations that he may have had but if it is between you and a guy of broadly similar abilities with a US Precision and a decent amp then you are likely to lose out. I would advise anyone thinking of spending £500 on a mid-priced bass to save up another couple of hundred quid and buy a secondhand Stingray (or something similar). For that you get a well-made American bass with a recognised pedigree that will play well as well as look and sound the part across a number of genres. It will probably satisfy the gear snob in any potential band leader / audience member and could see you right for your whole musical career! Once you have got a decent bass and a suitable amp I would then advise that you stop searching for ever elusive minor supposed improvements in tone and concentrate of playing the damn thing, which is the important thing after all…

When I started playing my main teachers were John Paul Jones, Andy Fraser and Roger Glover. I also had a book that showed me how to play a 12 bar blues and some basic technique / music theory. Over the past 40 years I have had a handful of lessons (maybe about a dozen in all) but I certainly learnt the most from listening to records and trying to copy great bass players, that basic instruction book and of course, gigging / playing with other musicians…

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1440473911' post='2851057'] [i]"If your standing up playing in a rock band, doesn't matter what genre, you have been influenced by The Beatles at some level whether you know it or not."[/i] IMHO Blue [/quote] Equally you will have been influenced by Chuck Berry, Muddy Waters & Elvis (as indeed the Beatles were)...

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1440531433' post='2851693'] Just the one. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mr-P-C-Chambers-Popular-History/dp/1845536363 [/quote] Talk about getting an extreme reaction from your readers - only two Amazon reviews, one 5 star & the other a 1 star...! :-) Well played Sir...

I recently played quite a big festival where the house bass rig was a Demeter preamp, a Crown power amp and two Purple Chilli cabs (a 4x10 & 2x10). I thought that it looked rather tasty - different from the Ampeg rigs you often get at these type of gigs and certainly a cut above the Ashdowns you sometimes have to use. Unfortunately it was awful. I couldn’t get a half decent sound out of it in the minute or so I had before we had to do a very quick soundcheck – the eq was very unintuitive, it sounded very dry and to cap it all, one of the speakers appeared to be on its way out. It wasn’t just me either, a mate of mine (who is a serious player) had to use it the following night and he hated it as well…

Very cool...! I've been listening to Eric Martin since his early solo albums - one of the best singers I've ever seen / heard! Must have been great to share a stage with him...

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1439378666' post='2842255'] One of the attractions of Prog for me was what I call the virtuosity element. [/quote] I think that there is a degree of truth in that, but probably the biggest selling and most enduring prog band from that period is Pink Floyd - a line-up that includes a couple of nice players but not exactly dripping in virtuosity! I think that the key element is (as ever) the strength of the material...

I don't think that anyone has mentioned The Yes Album yet? My favourite, probably because it isn't 'too proggy'! Close To The Edge is immense as well. Funny how of all the prog stuff I listened to in my youth, Yes are the only band that left a lasting impression...

I would just jump in and get a USA Stingray. They’re going pretty cheap right now and great value – if you set yourself a budget of £700 to £750 and are prepared to wait for the right one, you will get a decent Ray off ebay soon enough. The one bass I regret selling was a 3EQ Stingray a few years back…

Thanks for posting that - very interesting...

I regularly use an iGig double bag. However it always goes in a car or the van. It's a great bag but it is rather weighty with two basses - the one time I had to carry it fully loaded on my back was rather heavy going and I wouldn't attempt to use public transport with it to be honest...

Just watched this BBC Scotland documentary on Jack Bruce (whilst he was still alive) with lots of commentary from his wife, Clapton, Baker and Pete Brown. Baker pretty much comes across as a bit of a buffoon in his sections and is constantly contradicted by Bruce and, more tellingly, by Clapton https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3KBEq95N5U Interestingly, Bruce claims that Baker sacked him from the Graham Bond Organisation “at the wrong end of a knife”…

Just bought a powered mixer off Dave – no problems at all and a very affable guy on the phone I didn’t actually meet him as he was on a gig when I went to pick it up so he arranged for his Dad to demonstrate how to use the mixer etc, who was very helpful as well…