Do Covers Bands 'pull' an audience?

[4000]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1185215' date='Apr 1 2011, 08:13 PM']That's probably 95% of basschat me included I'm sorry we can't meet your high standards [/quote]

Me neither, which is why I hate the idea of us playing covers too .

[stingrayPete1977]

They pay for the gear to do the fun stuff you want to do.

[JTUK]

Depressing.

If a player wasn't in the original line up, sematics says he is covering a part.

You need a degree of talent to sell your act which ever genre you may pursue.

Cover bands often take the easy way out with choices of material etc etc ..but there are a few round here worth seeing...and that includes the dep line-up of standards as that will include a few choice grooves and spins that make a line and song work. The players are mostly deent..and if they aren't it doesn't work.
Tribute bands take an easier route and trade off on a polular theme...they still need to cut it as far as their audince goes, though.
I have seen as many poor tributes as covers though...thinking Pink Floyd here

Jazzers...good and bad..
Originals...well, if you can't play...it is harder to notice as you have no reference
So what we are left with is if you get paid, you are worth it to the venue..the rest is a subsidy or pay per play.

If you get out and about and listen to local music, you will come across who does what and like it or not.
I don't pretend that a band that pulls enough to gross £6000 a night over a bar is the best band around, but the landlord sure loves them..and the band has been going long enough to have that following and they will have something going for them
That..we are told is the benchmark round here... but how that same band would cope out of their comfort zone and playing circle..who knows..?

Criteria and opnions..who'd have it..???

[mrtcat]

I personally will only go to see either big name original acts (where I know and like plenty of their stuff) or a covers band. Original bands (especially at pub level) rarely float my boat. There's a venue here that snobishly says "we only do original bands here". That venue has gone bust 3 times in two years.

I understand however that we need people and venues who like originals bands or new bands will never break thru. I personally am happy for someone else to discover these bands tho.

In answer to the OP's question then the answer is both yes and no. Soooooooo many variables. In certain pubs only covers will draw a crowd and in others only originals will. Some venues will be busy whether there's a band or not. In larger venues covers won't pull enough to fill a venue unless the performance and technical ability of the band is of a very very high standard. Think about bands like The Hamsters. Possibly one of the best pub bands I ever saw who started with covers only and then some good original stuff. They moved to larger venues after almost 20yrs of plugging away at pubs and teaming up with some bigger names they filled bigger clubs but to me they reached their limit. A good originals outfit can go on to Wembley stadium if they get it right.

As people rightly acknowledge a decent tribute act can pull a huge crowd. Tribute acts are a funny thing tho as they get the benefit of the reputation of the band they cover and then their own reputation on top. It's no wonder so many quality musicians do the tribute thing.

Another fine case of horses for courses methinks

[Telebass]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1184512' date='Apr 1 2011, 11:55 AM']If you're good, you'll get a following. It doesn't matter who wrote the tunes.[/quote]

That's the point. We've done a good job here at the Wharf in Tavistock, and that's no freebie. And another two there this year. You don't get people paying seven or eight quid a pop going to see something that's in some way s**t, now do ya?

[SteveK]

[quote]Do Covers Bands 'pull' an audience?[/quote]
I don't have a clue. But, personally, if a band tried to play covers as per the original, then I would avoid like the plague.
However, If a band took songs apart, put a completely different slant on them, and did them exceptionally well, then I would be interested.

[simon1964]

[quote name='robocorpse' post='1184934' date='Apr 1 2011, 04:02 PM']Looks like I annoyed some people here. I have a major problem with a stage full of 40-50 somethings with brand new boutique equipment wailing away aimlessly, adding 25 extra solos to "Mustang Sally" and playing everything in dead military 4/4 with no feel or swing while they disguise their paunch with something "the wife" picked up for them from Burtons, over their brand new loose fit 501s. It just smacks of desperation,[/quote]

You've not annoyed me at all. Amused me, yes, but not annoyed me!

I'm sure I fall within your description of a desperate, paunch ridden 40-50 something (although I have never owned a pair of 501s, and am still capable of going to Burtons myself). So I apologise for causing you a problem. Thing is, 25 years ago, I was playing in originals bands who were moderately successful, and I despised the middle of the road covers bands who, i thought back then, had sold out. But I ended up with a day job and a family, and now find myself enjoying playing songs I like to play, to an audience that likes to hear them. Yes, I've given up the dream of hitting the big time, but I enjoy doing what my band does. And I like to think most of the people who listen to us enjoy what they hear. Which is good enough for me.

And I've never played Mustang Sally

Edited April 1, 2011 by simon1964

[icastle]

[quote name='SteveK' post='1185426' date='Apr 1 2011, 11:22 PM']I don't have a clue. But, personally, if a band tried to play covers as per the original, then I would avoid like the plague.
However, If a band took songs apart, put a completely different slant on them, and did them exceptionally well, then I would be interested.[/quote]

+1

As an 'aside' to the regular covers band, we formed a little splinter group.

We take songs apart, rearrange them, change the instrumentation and have no qualms about rewriting portions of the song.
It's been a long process and a real gamble, but we're getting repeat bookings and a nice little following now.
Audiences like it enough to sing along and dance and it's quite entertaining watching the realisation dawn on their faces as they realise they know the song but can't quite put their finger on it...

[JTUK]

[quote name='icastle' post='1185503' date='Apr 2 2011, 03:05 AM']+1

As an 'aside' to the regular covers band, we formed a little splinter group.

We take songs apart, rearrange them, change the instrumentation and have no qualms about rewriting portions of the song.
It's been a long process and a real gamble, but we're getting repeat bookings and a nice little following now.
Audiences like it enough to sing along and dance and it's quite entertaining watching the realisation dawn on their faces as they realise they know the song but can't quite put their finger on it...[/quote]


Not something that most bands want or are up to do tho, and the audiences can take their time getting to know anything but an easy listen.
I woudl imagine this took longer than a year or two to get a decent following and probably the same to re-write the songs

[dmccombe7]

[color="#0000FF"][quote name='4000' date='Apr 1 2011, 08:00 PM' post='1185199']
To answer 2 comments (and I'm rather disappointed that I have to explain this; if you can't tell the difference between The Musical Box and the typical band playing down the pub on a Friday I'm really not sure you should be playing ), [b]a tribute band, whilst obviously playing covers, are attempting to emulate everything about a particular band, from the music, to the exact performance, to the look, as accurately as possible[/b] and so invest in the audience a feeling of what it might be like to see the real band in their heyday. It goes far beyond "playing the songs", if nowhere near as far as creating the art in the first place. It is often done from a place of real love of the original band, and is often done with a sense of perfectionism.
[/color]

Have done the originals tours and also covers within original bands and have been playing since late 70's.
Huge fan of early Genesis and most other music and quite open minded when it comes to bands and musicians.
Based on what you described above as a tribute band Musical Box, although very talented musicians, don't exactly look like Genesis. ?
Therefore you have a group of guys covering early Genesis songs who just happen to be very good at playing them.
To be honest they are very good and i would pay to see them.

No different to a group of guys covering various acts provided they do them well.
Where do you draw the line ?

Yes there is a difference between a tribute band playing well and a covers band playing badly and vice-versa.

Is your gripe not more to do with quality and that you've been very unlucky to have only seen poor musicians doing covers.

Just read your response to my other post and you highlight the quality as being the issue.
Provided covers are done well within an originals band you have no issue.

Quality then

Dave

Edited April 2, 2011 by dmccombe7

[4000]

[quote name='4000' post='1185199' date='Apr 1 2011, 08:00 PM']To answer 2 comments (and I'm rather disappointed that I have to explain this; if you can't tell the difference between The Musical Box and the typical band playing down the pub on a Friday I'm really not sure you should be playing ), [b]a tribute band, whilst obviously playing covers, are attempting to emulate everything about a particular band, from the music, to the exact performance, to the look, as accurately as possible[/b] and so invest in the audience a feeling of what it might be like to see the real band in their heyday. It goes far beyond "playing the songs", if nowhere near as far as creating the art in the first place. It is often done from a place of real love of the original band, and is often done with a sense of perfectionism.
[/color]

Have done the originals tours and also covers within original bands and have been playing since late 70's.
Huge fan of early Genesis and most other music and quite open minded when it comes to bands and musicians.
Based on what you described above as a tribute band Musical Box, although very talented musicians, don't exactly look like Genesis. ?
Therefore you have a group of guys covering early Genesis songs who just happen to be very good at playing them.
To be honest they are very good and i would pay to see them.

No different to a group of guys covering various acts provided they do them well.
Where do you draw the line ?

Yes there is a difference between a tribute band playing well and a covers band playing badly and vice-versa.

Is your gripe not more to do with quality and that you've been very unlucky to have only seen poor musicians doing covers.

Just read your response to my other post and you highlight the quality as being the issue.
Provided covers are done well within an originals band you have no issue.

Quality then

Dave
[/quote]

The Musical Box attempt to look exactly like the Genesis of the period, even down to the singer mimicking Phil's beard and T shirt/Pete's make up etc "Mike" dressing like Mike etc. They dress as similarly as they can and look as similar as they can, given they still have to play the parts properly. From a distance they look pretty darned close, and that's what I mean. They sound VERY close. I think you're rather splitting hairs here, but then I suspect you know you are. I've paid to see them 3 times. I can't imagine ever paying to see my description of a cover band, for reasons already stated, but also because even if they were really good, in addition to those reasons given, I don't really like the whole "musical jukebox" concept. Whenever a name band goes into a segue of rock'n'roll/r'n'b hits (e.g. Genesis doing the Blues Brothers thing), I really, really don't enjoy it. I don't tend to listen to music as a "selection of hits", I listen to something that suits my mood at that time. So, I'll put on an album that fits. It may be Genesis, it may be Floyd, it may be Motorhead, RTF, Duke Ellington, ABBA, RHCPs, whatever, but I will tend to listen to it all the way through.

Of course if a "cover band" did unusual and interesting arrangements of cover songs, then that might be different. I like the concept of a band like Hayseed Dixie, because they have an identity of their own, which I think is my issue. I prefer bands and musicians to have an identity, and I feel many cover bands don't. Of course a good tribute band has someone else's identity, but at least it's still an identity.

I'll add (as I have before) that I come from a fine art background so maybe this is something ingrained in me; "original = good, copy = generally pointless". Whilst I might love Van Gogh, Degas or Klimt, I wouldn't be interested in seeing someone paint copies even if they were really good. To see someone paint mediocre copies; well, what's the point, other than as a learning exercise? I can understand their enjoyment in doing it. I can understand a layman/punter being impressed by it. But it wouldn't impress me, and I wouldn't enjoy it, I would see it as utterly pointless [i]to me[/i], so would not be interested in witnessing it.

Edited April 2, 2011 by 4000

[largo]

[quote name='4000' post='1185649' date='Apr 2 2011, 11:03 AM']"original = good, copy = generally pointless".[/quote]

Surely taking your point to the extreme means that unless something's an exact copy (which it can never be) then it'll always be original. You should be just as interested in how someone has interpreted to copy a Van Gogh painting, as you are in the original Van Gogh painting.

[4000]

[quote name='largo' post='1185664' date='Apr 2 2011, 11:25 AM']Surely taking your point to the extreme means that unless something's an exact copy (which it can never be) then it'll always be original. You should be just as interested in how someone has interpreted to copy a Van Gogh painting, as you are in the original Van Gogh painting.[/quote]

Yes, that's taking my point to the extreme. I really don't see what's so difficult about the point I'm making. Ok, so if I say (again) that trying to make something [i]like[/i] the original but obviously inferior is pointless to me, do you understand? Do something different. If you're making some comment (i.e. with intent) on the original then ok, but that isn't the point I'm making.

FWIW, it may not be pointless to you, or anyone else, but as I said before, it is to me. I'm not interested in seeing it. Personal opinion.

FWIW I'm with Robocorpse all the way on this.

Edited April 2, 2011 by 4000

[dmccombe7]

[quote name='4000' post='1185649' date='Apr 2 2011, 11:03 AM']Of course if a "cover band" did unusual and interesting arrangements of cover songs, then that might be different. I like the concept of a band like Hayseed Dixie, because they have an identity of their own, which I think is my issue. I prefer bands and musicians to have an identity, and I feel many cover bands don't. Of course a good tribute band has someone else's identity, but at least it's still an identity. [/quote]

Would probably agree with you when you put it as an identity issue. I can see your point.
Took a while but we got there.
With some cover bands it could be anyone playing on that stage. And to coin your earlier phrase "Musical Jukebox" there is generally no "show" to relate to with a covers band whereas a tribute or originals band have something specific to watch and hear.

PS : Yep. I was splitting hairs earlier - got your attention though and its all part of the show.

Dave

[4000]

Yeah, I think we got there Dave.

[icastle]

[quote name='JTUK' post='1185513' date='Apr 2 2011, 06:29 AM']Not something that most bands want or are up to do tho, and the audiences can take their time getting to know anything but an easy listen.
I woudl imagine this took longer than a year or two to get a decent following and probably the same to re-write the songs[/quote]

Took about a year on material and about 7 months to get people interested enough to make it a worthwhile exercise for both us and the venues.
We're lucky enough to have out own rehearsal space close to hand and enough free time to be able to do it though - it started out as a bit of fun, so the fact that people like it is an added and unexpected bonus.

[SteveK]

[quote name='JTUK' post='1185513' date='Apr 2 2011, 06:29 AM']Not something that most bands want or are up to do tho,[/quote]
Sadly, you are probably correct.

[quote name='JTUK' post='1185513' date='Apr 2 2011, 06:29 AM']and the audiences can take their time getting to know anything but an easy listen.[/quote]
I've always been of the opinion that, an audience will know, and appreciate, when something is done well. Even when it's a little off the wall.

[spinynorman]

We need a new category for this endless discussion of the merits of covers and originals bands. Lucklily for you all, I have a name for it - "Derivatives" bands. These are bands who write their own material, think they are breathtakingly original, but have "influences" even an old fogey like me can spot 10 seconds into the first song. Usually they have very little in the way of equipment, other than guitars and huge trays of effects. They never have more than 30 minutes of material, so have to roam in packs of 3 or 4, or do support slots for covers bands, who can fill the rest of 90 mins and provide backline and PA. They don't like to do covers, not because it compromises their integrity, but because they've seen other bands who do get to the end of their set, ask the audience what they'd like for an encore, and get screaming demands to repeat the cover.

Obviously no one on Basschat would be in a derivatives band.

[Adrenochrome]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Speaking for my main band Delirium - in Bradford where the band is based we can bring quite a few punters and the same goes to a lesser extent for the rest of West Yorkshire, and Harrogate [where I live]. Further afield we genereally rely on impressing the punters that are already there, and maybe get a handful of people there that might have seen our reviews or read about us.

[flyfisher]

Seems to me that the covers band phenomenon is well established these days, which, presumably, answers the original question.

I remember going to see The Bootleg Beatles on their 20th anniversary tour - that's about twice as long as the original band lasted! Last year I saw them again on their 30th year anniversary tour.

There are loads of cover bands on the circuit - and so what? The ones I've seen are pretty good and, quite frankly, I'd rather go to see the likes of The Counterfeit Stones in a small local venue for £25 than fork out £150 to stand among 80,000 other people 100 yards from the real band.

But that doesn't mean I don't also go to see originals bands as well - large and small, depending on my prevailing mood at the time. Variety is, after all, supposed to be the spice of life.

As I've said before, there is no right or wrong in these matters - only what people like or dislike and are prepared to pay for. Why all the angst?

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='spinynorman' post='1186013' date='Apr 2 2011, 06:05 PM']We need a new category for this endless discussion of the merits of covers and originals bands. Lucklily for you all, I have a name for it - "Derivatives" bands. These are bands who write their own material, think they are breathtakingly original, but have "influences" even an old fogey like me can spot 10 seconds into the first song. Usually they have very little in the way of equipment, other than guitars and huge trays of effects. They never have more than 30 minutes of material, so have to roam in packs of 3 or 4, or do support slots for covers bands, who can fill the rest of 90 mins and provide backline and PA. They don't like to do covers, not because it compromises their integrity, but because they've seen other bands who do get to the end of their set, ask the audience what they'd like for an encore, and get screaming demands to repeat the cover.

Obviously no one on Basschat would be in a derivatives band.[/quote]
This is quite harsh IMO. If you knew more about the scene at that level you would know that most of the time you are given 30 or 45 minute slots to fill, we used to put a lot of effort into timing our set to fit usually about 6 or 7 songs as they were very strict on set lengths. And your second point is way off as many of the venues don't allow covers as they are meant to make notes of artist/title and the duration you played it for if they are a PRS venue. On a more local (out of London) scene many originals bands don't do covers because you play 40 mins of trip hop jazz and throw in a Chili's cover at the end and all of a sudden your labelled as a bit like the Chili's!

This was all many moons ago for me now as a failed rocker, now where are my loose fit 501's

[Norris]

There seems to be more than a hint of trolling in places on this thread.

Basically, it comes down to economics. If a band is no good (whether original, covers, tribute, derivative, or any other label you care to apply in between), places won't re-book them, audiences won't seek them out at other venues. If it is a good tight band, a bit of banter, a bit of a show ... things that give the audience a good night, they will get more work and get more of a following. To answer Bilbo's original question, yes cover bands do have followings and can 'pull' an audience ... but only if they are worth following in the first place.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Norris' post='1186121' date='Apr 2 2011, 07:54 PM']There seems to be more than a hint of trolling in places on this thread.

Basically, it comes down to economics. If a band is no good (whether original, covers, tribute, derivative, or any other label you care to apply in between), places won't re-book them, audiences won't seek them out at other venues. If it is a good tight band, a bit of banter, a bit of a show ... things that give the audience a good night, they will get more work and get more of a following. To answer Bilbo's original question, yes cover bands do have followings and can 'pull' an audience ... but only if they are worth following in the first place.[/quote]

All of this +1

[Pete Academy]

In the 80s, Stoke had a massive amount of venues, including pubs and workingmen's clubs. In fact, a covers band could work professionally just in our area. The amount of venues has now depleted massively.

In response to Bilbo's OP, yes, a covers band can pull people in. I remember me and a lot of my friends going to see a quality covers band in these venues. However, when karaoke and discos started to creep in, the amount of venues dropped considerably.

Live music, regardless of whether it's original or not, is always going to be preferable.

[Conan]

[quote name='4000' post='1185199' date='Apr 1 2011, 08:00 PM']To answer 2 comments (and I'm rather disappointed that I have to explain this; if you can't tell the difference between The Musical Box and the typical band playing down the pub on a Friday I'm really not sure you should be playing )[/quote]

Maybe you're right. Maybe I shouldn't be playing. Although quite what the connection is between me asking a rhetorical question and my perceived worthiness to share a choice of instrument with your good self is unclear to me.

I have never seen The Musical Box. In general, I don't "do" tribute bands - but as I am a big fan of early Genesis maybe I should check them out?

However, as you have already explained (at great length) that they are highly skilled and very professional, surely the comparison with a "typical band playing down the pub" is somewhat bogus? Clearly the difference is down to quality rather than choice of material. Or maybe both in your case.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to condescend to reply to my question. And sorry to disappoint you.

Well, not really.

Edited April 2, 2011 by Conan