Covers + originals in 1 set?

[solo4652]

Folks,

I recently joined a covers band that's rapidly turning into an originals band. It has been suggested that we could do a 50/50 split but I'm not sure whether this is viable. Are covers and originals different "markets", played in different venues to different sorts of audiences? The band leader (an experienced pro muso and songwriter) says that all will be well providing we choose originals that are dance-y, poppy and accessible and in that way sit easily alongside the covers we play. "We'll write and play songs that the audience think they know, but don't, so they'll still get up and dance..." To be fair, the originals that I've been played [i]are[/i] catchy and "commercial", but is this covers/originals blend going to work?

What do you think?

Steve

Edited April 21, 2011 by solo4652

[Lozz196]

Having been in the same situation, you can generally get away with it if you put one original in between at least 4 or 5 well known songs that people are happy to dance to. And, whilst introducing them, do it later in the set, when they`re reaching their enjoyment peak - as in, have drunk lots. Once these songs become better known, they can be brought forward in the set, and the process repeated with newer originals.

I would still think that 50/50 is pushing it though, unless to an audience that fully knows your own songs already. Otherwise, 75/25 would be the maximum to a completely fresh audience, in my view.

[Salt on your Bass?]

I do exactly that in my current band, depending on venue and line up etc. In particular theres one pub where an eclectic mix of bands is always put on, but the 'regulars' take it upon themselves to do things like cut the power on walk 'onstage' and make it thier business to tell you what you should be playing

Since a few incidents at that specific venue, we've played a 50/50 mix of covers and originals which seems to work well as we get to play our own stuff, but mix it up with some catchy numbers that people recognise, but carefully chosen so it all sits in similar vein/genre.

Other places we'll just do original sets or throw in only one cover or something.

Probably a bit of a negative reason for going that route to be honest, but its fun. Its also good introducing your own songs along the lines of "here's another well known classic for you all! Sing along of you know the words!" followed by silence and blank looks around the pub! ha!

[Scotticus]

I reckon it largely depends on the venues you're aiming at and what the purpose of playing originals is for you. Here in London, most nights are either one or t'other. There's a fairly strict eye kept on it because of licensing. Venues where the staff/promoters actually listen to what's being played (there are a few who still do) won't be impressed if you start mixing and matching.

Covers at an originals night - "aaaaargh, you can't play covers here, PRS licensing are gonna crack down on us".
Originals at a covers night - "no, people want songs they know while they're drinking our wonderfully watered down beer".

That said, I know of a pro cover band who throw in originals if they've had a drink or three by the time they get on stage (pretty much always). If your originals are good enough, you can probably get away with that, but I'll be amazed if an established covers venue books you again if they catch on. That, of course, means that making a big thing of your original music to the people watching is a no-go.

Dunno if that's all specific to London, but that's how it is here at the mo.

Scott

[icastle]

[quote name='Lozz196' post='1205689' date='Apr 20 2011, 12:13 PM']Having been in the same situation, you can generally get away with it if you put one original in between at least 4 or 5 well known songs that people are happy to dance to. And, whilst introducing them, do it later in the set, when they`re reaching their enjoyment peak - as in, have drunk lots. Once these songs become better known, they can be brought forward in the set, and the process repeated with newer originals.

I would still think that 50/50 is pushing it though, unless to an audience that fully knows your own songs already. Otherwise, 75/25 would be the maximum to a completely fresh audience, in my view.[/quote]

+1

That sounds spot on to me.

[NJE]

I think it depends on what market you are looking to tap into. If you are playing covers in a pub and bars etc then I would say you could get away with playing some originals in the set but I wouldn't do a clear set of each as people tend to lose interest if they dont recognise material.

If however you are playing weddings/functions/corporate stuff I would stay well away from originals as without being harsh in 90% of cases noone cares about your original material apart from some mental stoned bloke up the back of the venue in my past cases.

I have played in so many orginals bands and its great fun, but in my experience (and the experience of many friends and contacts) it is so hard to get anyone interested in original material unless you have a great music scene in an area with good venues that really push live original music.

It depends what gives you a buzz, if thats playing your songs go for it and work at it and enjoy it. I will say you are more likely to get gigs playing good covers though.



[quote name='solo4652' post='1205679' date='Apr 20 2011, 12:06 PM']Folks,

I recently joined a covers band that's rapidly turning into an originals band. It has been suggested that we could do a 50/50 split but I'm not sure whether this is viable. Are covers and originals different "markets", played in different venues to different sorts of audiences? The band leader (an experienced pro muso and songwriter) says that all will be well providing we choose originals that are dance-y, poppy and accessible and in that way sit easily alongside the covers we play. "We'll write and play songs that the audience think they know, but don't, so they'll still get up and dance..." To be fair, the originals that I've been played [i]are[/i] catchy and "commercial", but is this covers/originals blend going to work?

What do you think?

Steve[/quote]

[flyfisher]

We do it. If, as you say, the originals are in the same spirit as the covers you play then it'll be fine - as long as you're not billing yourself as a tribute band

After all, depending on your covers, it's quite likely that some of the audience may not have heard all your covers anyway, or perhaps you play a version that they've not heard before. For example, we play 'Call Me The Breeze' in the original JJ Cale style and not the generally better known Lynyrd Skynrd version, which always seems to go down well, so even with the covers the audience gets used to hearing something different. From there, it's a short step to introducing an original into the set if it's in a similar style.

Having said that, we've now got about 50 mins of original songs and we're constantly debating how to spread them over two sets. We recently played our first originals-only gig (one set only) and for our next gig we're thinking of all-originals for the first set then all-covers for the second set, on the basis that the audience will be more lively by the second set. But who really knows, so we'll just try it and see what happens. Still, it's only the local cricket club so it's hardly going to make the front pages if it all goes wrong!

[thisnameistaken]

I doubt a pub full of non- music-liking punters who just want a piss-up and a sing-a-long will be too happy about being required to try something new, but good luck anyway.

I would recommend splitting your activities into two bands, and doing the originals for audiences that like that sort of thing. Those audiences are considerably harder to find and retain, but it's rewarding work.

[Piggery Bandana]

There is no way of 100% gauging this one IMHO......

As someone above has already stated "if the song is good enough, catchy enough and has a good chorus" it wont really matter ...it will go down well....
If its an angst filled dirge about teenage depression might be as well saving that for the CD tho!

We do obscure cover versions within our set ... EG a journey album track (album is a bit like a CD for younger readers :oP) called "edge of the blade" We have had countless people saying to us after a gig "you should record that one its amazing"..... admittedly we have never offered to put em right (but how many of you guys would?)

I think the rule has to be ... try the tune live and if it clearly a dead spot in the set ... save it for another time.

[Low End Bee]

As long as the songs are fairly catchy and accessible to the audience I think there is no reason not to do originals in a pub.
We're doing two sets without a single cover in pubs that have formerly only put on covers and tribute bands and it goes down very well.
If we did 'difficult' music I agree it wouldn't work.

[ZMech]

didn't the rolling stones start as a covers band? I assumed many amateur bands throw in the odd cover, even in an originals set.

[EssentialTension]

About 40% songs written by band members and 60% written by not band members. I don't think of the latter as covers - we play our own arrangements of them.

The trick, I think, is to make it all sound like one band and for all the songs to be good.

[clauster]

I've tried it with an earlier line-up of my current band. We pretty quickly ended up with a covers set (1 hour) and an originals set (30 mins) as most places wanted one or the other. The few that said it was up to us (so we played a bit of both) didn't ask us back as it confused their punters.

Now we just do originals (up to about a one hour set) but throw in a twisted cover at least once in most sets.

[chris_b]

Only one of my bands doesn't play at least one original number. Most of the sets are a mixture and it works with our audiences. If your originals are good enough you should be able to take the audience with you.

[solo4652]

Update.

Thanks to everybody for your helpful comments.

The singer has made it clear that she is much more interested in originals than covers. Given that 3 of the 5 band members are keen songwriters, it may well be that the band decides to go down the originals route. I'm not unhappy with that - in many ways I'd rather do that then try to do both covers and originals and end up falling between 2 stools. We'll see how it pans out over the next couple of months.

Steve

Edited April 21, 2011 by solo4652

[Michaelg]

It depends how you market yourself for live performances. If people are expecting originals and hear more covers, it won't necessarily go down well and vice versa.

[JTUK]

Sure, why not? If the tune is good and along the same lines as the rest of the set, you may find a lot of people wouldn't even notice.
When we pick songs the only criteria is, do we do it well, does it sit aside the rest of the set and is it a good tune?

A good song is a good song is a good song.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='JTUK' post='1206849' date='Apr 21 2011, 10:58 AM']Sure, why not? If the tune is good and along the same lines as the rest of the set, you may find a lot of people wouldn't even notice.
When we pick songs the only criteria is, do we do it well, does it sit aside the rest of the set and is it a good tune?

A good song is a good song is a good song.[/quote]
+1

[bremen]

[quote name='JTUK' post='1206849' date='Apr 21 2011, 10:58 AM']A good song is a good song is a good song.[/quote]


Agreed with just about all the resposes to the OP (well, the sun's shining and I've taken my medication...).

Overheard at my last (covers with 2 originals sneaked in) gig:

'Who's Gregory Isaacs?'

and

'That's not a Bob Marley song! It's Eric Clapton!'

[wateroftyne]

Pretty much all of my bands are varying ratios of originals : covers

You can just adapt to the situation. If it' a listening, musical crowd, more originals.

If it's a dancing pub crowd, more covers.

If it's a combination of the above, and your original songs a re good, stick 'em in but don't make a fuss about it.

[dmccombe7]

[quote name='Lozz196' post='1205689' date='Apr 20 2011, 12:13 PM']Having been in the same situation, you can generally get away with it if you put one original in between at least 4 or 5 well known songs that people are happy to dance to. And, whilst introducing them, do it later in the set, when they`re reaching their enjoyment peak - as in, have drunk lots. Once these songs become better known, they can be brought forward in the set, and the process repeated with newer originals.

I would still think that 50/50 is pushing it though, unless to an audience that fully knows your own songs already. Otherwise, 75/25 would be the maximum to a completely fresh audience, in my view.[/quote]

Agree with this.
Been there, done it and bought the T shirt.
Works well if done well.

Good luck
Dave