Frustrations...

[BrunoBass]

It’s time again for us to think about choosing some new songs for our set, and as usual nobody can agree on which songs to play. 

We play the local pub circuit doing alt rock and indie covers from the last decade or so. As far as I’m concerned we are there to entertain people which means playing big songs that people want to jig about and sing along to on a Saturday night. Whether or not we like the song in question is largely irrelevant, in fact there a couple of songs that I can’t stand and don’t like playing particularly, but I tolerate them because they go down a storm. 

Several song suggestions were made over the weekend by members of the band but our drummer has, as usual, vetoed every single one of them: ‘not playing that, don’t like that one, don’t like this one’, despite the fact that all the songs suggested are guaranteed crowd pleasers, which surely is what we’re trying to do? 

The complete inability/unwillingness to see beyond your personal feelings on a song is really frustrating, and holding us back as band. None of the songs I played when I was doing the function circuit were songs I’d go home and listen to, but give me a floor full of people loving you playing Katy Perry over a couple of blokes staring at you from the bar while you play a Pendulum album track (yes really, we used to...) because the drummer likes it any day.

So, I’m venting because this happens every time we choose new songs; we always get past it in the end, but damn it’s frustrating...

[Yank]

Is it the drummer's band or a democracy?  I can see if someone really,   really hates a song,  but he should get one vote,  majority rules,  not total veto power.   Tell him to take it like a man.

[Coilte]

A band is supposed to work as a team, both on and off the stage. There should be some give and take. It's obvious and natural that no one will like EVERY song on the list. IMO the most diplomatic way would be to take turns choosing a song. 

[BrunoBass]

24 minutes ago, Yank said:

Is it the drummer's band or a democracy?  I can see if someone really,   really hates a song,  but he should get one vote,  majority rules,  not total veto power.   Tell him to take it like a man.

We’re a democracy to a point. We have unanimity on every band decision. That’s the way it was when I joined, and still is now. Nice idea, but it doesn’t always work. 

Edited April 30, 2018 by BrunoBass

[madshadows]

Put all the song titles in a hat and get everyone to pull one out !!

 

John

[Guest]

Hate to say it but... wrong drummer?

[chris_b]

Always saying "No" is indicative of a problem. Either you guys are suggesting bad songs or the drummer has to start accepting some of your choices.

Tell us some of the songs he has vetoed. What songs does he suggest?

If he's a good enough drummer to work around and not just fire, change the rules and tell him that he has to agree to something or the rest of you will impose songs on him.

[kyuuga]

Honestly it seems like everyone isn't on the same page. The main thing about these cover bands I tend to see is that the members who play there don't fully realize or have the self-esteem to realize what they're doing. There's something called "musician's ego" which is and has always been very prevalent - musicians, like most human beings, like to show off and think that they need to play the most technical and advanced songs in order to show the public they're good so that they can fulfill their ego. And in cover bands that's impossible because not only do you have to play OTHER PEOPLE'S songs but you also have to stay true to the original (that means no random drum fills on Another One Bites the Dust you stupid prick Joe...). 

What you should do, in my opinion, is gather up your bandmates and schedule a serious meeting. Be realistic and talk to them about the band goals. Ask everyone: "are you here to make money or have fun?" Obviously the best of both worlds is doing both but everyone has to compromise. If you have to play Katy Perry songs then do it and no one can say "no" unless they're only there to have fun (which isn't the main purpose of a cover band really...). You can't only play boring pop songs though or everyone will burnout so add a few still popular but amazing songs to play (Bruno Mars comes to mind for instance, very fun to play but also well known) and also a couple of personal favorites from your members (everyone gets one pick for instance). 

In the end it's all about balance but EVERYONE should know what you as a band are aiming for and what the consequences are. If the drummer chooses to say "well but I don't wanna play boring songs" then he's not your guy. You're in a cover band, you're gonna play mind-numbing songs from time to time because it pleases the crowd. Either be ready for the commitment or go play prog metal with your friends.

[lowdown]

12 minutes ago, madshadows said:

Put all the song titles in a hat and get everyone to pull one out !!

 

John

'Rabbit', by Chaz & Dave? 

[BrunoBass]

31 minutes ago, kyuuga said:

Honestly it seems like everyone isn't on the same page. The main thing about these cover bands I tend to see is that the members who play there don't fully realize or have the self-esteem to realize what they're doing. There's something called "musician's ego" which is and has always been very prevalent - musicians, like most human beings, like to show off and think that they need to play the most technical and advanced songs in order to show the public they're good so that they can fulfill their ego. And in cover bands that's impossible because not only do you have to play OTHER PEOPLE'S songs but you also have to stay true to the original (that means no random drum fills on Another One Bites the Dust you stupid prick Joe...). 

What you should do, in my opinion, is gather up your bandmates and schedule a serious meeting. Be realistic and talk to them about the band goals. Ask everyone: "are you here to make money or have fun?" Obviously the best of both worlds is doing both but everyone has to compromise. If you have to play Katy Perry songs then do it and no one can say "no" unless they're only there to have fun (which isn't the main purpose of a cover band really...). You can't only play boring pop songs though or everyone will burnout so add a few still popular but amazing songs to play (Bruno Mars comes to mind for instance, very fun to play but also well known) and also a couple of personal favorites from your members (everyone gets one pick for instance). 

In the end it's all about balance but EVERYONE should know what you as a band are aiming for and what the consequences are. If the drummer chooses to say "well but I don't wanna play boring songs" then he's not your guy. You're in a cover band, you're gonna play mind-numbing songs from time to time because it pleases the crowd. Either be ready for the commitment or go play prog metal with your friends.

Spot on.

[BrunoBass]

36 minutes ago, chris_b said:

Tell us some of the songs he has vetoed. What songs does he suggest?

Here’s an example. Our singer suggested Rebel Yell by Billy Idol. It’s not something I’d listen to at home granted, but I can see that it’s a proper shout along crowd pleaser which would go down a storm.

He dismissed it instantly because it’s ‘not his thing’. His most recent suggestion was a Chemical Brothers track I’d never heard of, which is basically just a groove. Perfect excuse for a pub full of up-for-it punters to go outside for a fag, and probably not return.

[musicbassman]

1 hour ago, BrunoBass said:

We play the local pub circuit doing alt rock and indie covers from the last decade or so.

That statement you made contains all the information and job description necessary for your drummer -

It's a covers band? = YES

So you're going to be playing popular covers that people know, so you get gigs? = YES

So are you going to play shoegazey obscure album covers? = NO!

No band can demand that punters stay and listen to the band's personal favourites, they'll just vote with their feet. And there's no fun in playing to an empty room.

[chris_b]

As has been said on another thread. . .  . this is often a problem with people who want to be in a band for a hobby and just play what they want or like.

If he won't come to terms with the compromises needed to marry "his thing" and the "band's thing" then you need to start looking for a new drummer.

Edited April 30, 2018 by chris_b

[Coilte]

28 minutes ago, BrunoBass said:

He dismissed it instantly because it’s ‘not his thing’. 

Does not sound like a team player to me. 

[BrunoBass]

2 minutes ago, chris_b said:

As has been said on another thread. . .  . this is the problem with people who want to be in a band for a hobby and just play what they want or like.

If he won't come to terms with the compromises needed to marry "his thing" and the "band's thing" then you need to start looking for a new drummer.

Yes. Problem is he’s good friends with the frontman, and was long before I came along. Therein lies the problem 🙂

Edited April 30, 2018 by BrunoBass

[Coilte]

9 minutes ago, BrunoBass said:

Yes. Problem is he’s good friends with the frontman, and was long before I came along. Therein lies the problem 🙂

 

By this, you imply that because they are friends, the drummer and frontman will back each other up, regardless of what the others suggest. IMO  a working harmonious and professional relationship between all band members is a must, and it  trumps...or should do...any personal friendships. It's the band as a unit that should come first.  

[lemmywinks]

Set up an action camera recording the audience for one of your floor fillers, do the same for one of his self indulgent B sides or album tracks. Watch them back as a band to gauge the audience reaction, if that doesn't make a difference then either bin the drummer or leave.

 

What do the rest of the band think about it?

[Switch625]

1 hour ago, BrunoBass said:

Here’s an example. Our singer suggested Rebel Yell by Billy Idol. It’s not something I’d listen to at home granted, but I can see that it’s a proper shout along crowd pleaser which would go down a storm.

He dismissed it instantly because it’s ‘not his thing’. His most recent suggestion was a Chemical Brothers track I’d never heard of, which is basically just a groove. Perfect excuse for a pub full of up-for-it punters to go outside for a fag, and probably not return.

How can Rebel Yell not be anybody's "thing". Fire him. Fire him now.

[Count Bassy]

2 hours ago, kyuuga said:

Honestly it seems like everyone isn't on the same page. The main thing about these cover bands I tend to see is that the members who play there don't fully realize or have the self-esteem to realize what they're doing. There's something called "musician's ego" which is and has always been very prevalent - musicians, like most human beings, like to show off and think that they need to play the most technical and advanced songs in order to show the public they're good so that they can fulfill their ego. And in cover bands that's impossible because not only do you have to play OTHER PEOPLE'S songs but you also have to stay true to the original (that means no random drum fills on Another One Bites the Dust you stupid prick Joe...). 

What you should do, in my opinion, is gather up your bandmates and schedule a serious meeting. Be realistic and talk to them about the band goals. Ask everyone: "are you here to make money or have fun?" Obviously the best of both worlds is doing both but everyone has to compromise. If you have to play Katy Perry songs then do it and no one can say "no" unless they're only there to have fun (which isn't the main purpose of a cover band really...). You can't only play boring pop songs though or everyone will burnout so add a few still popular but amazing songs to play (Bruno Mars comes to mind for instance, very fun to play but also well known) and also a couple of personal favorites from your members (everyone gets one pick for instance). 

In the end it's all about balance but EVERYONE should know what you as a band are aiming for and what the consequences are. If the drummer chooses to say "well but I don't wanna play boring songs" then he's not your guy. You're in a cover band, you're gonna play mind-numbing songs from time to time because it pleases the crowd. Either be ready for the commitment or go play prog metal with your friends.

This, except I disagree (quite strongly) with the highlighted bit.

[Delberthot]

If I was honest, there's nothing in our set list that I would play at home but They are songs that get people up and keep people up and most of them are really enjoyable to play.

There are only 3 songs that I am aware of that I would say a definite "no" to - Sit Down by James, The Whole of the Moon by the Waterboys and All About the Bass

 

When new songs are suggested, I may not like them or have even heard of them but I give them a chance.

[chris_b]

7 minutes ago, Count Bassy said:

This, except I disagree (quite strongly) with the highlighted bit.

+1

By definition a tribute band would usually stay true to the original but a cover band doesn't have to at all.

[chris_b]

1 minute ago, Delberthot said:

There are only 3 songs that I am aware of that I would say a definite "no" to - Sit Down by James, The Whole of the Moon by the Waterboys and All About the Bass

I've played 2 of the songs listed and I'd happily play the 3rd if it went down well with the audience.

Last Friday's gig was more to my taste but yesterday we played a lot of "old" stuff that went down a storm. Same band, two different gigs and two different sets. Two totally different and successful sides of the same coin.

[Dad3353]

I'm a drummer, and maybe I'm just unlucky (I doubt it...), but most modern pop songs are very, very uninteresting as such for a drummer to play (think Rolling Stones...). There is little in many cover band repertoires for personal expression for the drummer; it's mostly 'four on the floor', straight beat with occasional fills, and even more rare 'hooks'. All that to say that, if that style of performance is not accepted, 'covers' drumming is not the right genre for the drummer, and a covers band not the right environment. For my part, I find interest in just about any drum part, and treat it as a challenge to play 'simple' stuff cleanly and regularly, in the same way as I approach my 'rudiments' exercises at home, which can involved an hour or so of 'disco' beat on the hi-hat, for instance, or even longer on snare patterns. Some songs (SOAD, Muse, Bowie...) may have a particular 'drum style' which can be technically pleasing to perform correctly, but one would rarely have opportunity for such in a whole evening's repertoire in a typical pub band playing chart pop.
Either the bloke is in the wrong band, or the band is aiming at the wrong 'market'. I'd suggest the former, and look to either changing drummer or changing bands.
Just my tuppence-worth.

[musicbassman]

56 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

For my part, I find interest in just about any drum part, and treat it as a challenge to play 'simple' stuff cleanly and regularly,

This absolutely, and the same should apply to any bass part - no matter how simple it might appear on first listen - there's always something to hold your playing attention, or there should be.

Prime example - Higher and Higher - (Jackie Wilson) - just one repeating bass pattern, but so many people seem to play it sloppily or with slightly the wrong feel!

[bassbiscuits]

I'm afraid i've been in the same position and it's part of the reason i left that band.

The guitarist, whose band it was, would only do songs that he wanted - regardless of how dull/boring/done-to-death they were.

Mostly chose songs because they were easy, rather than good - and he never bothered to learn any of the better ones I suggested.

Now i play solo and play whatever i like at gigs. Much happier.