Are Trios the Way to go for Pub Gigs

[Chienmortbb]

More and  more venues are seem to line smaller bands/acts and I recently came across a venue only licensed for up to three performers. 
 

Oit five piece is struggling in many ways at the moment but even before the current problems, we list gigs either because of the size of our fee or we were too big. We could drop out fee as a three piece and still make more money but I would need to do more singing. 
 

Has anyone else slimmed down this way and what were your experiences? 

[chris_b]

I haven't seen any gigs restricting the number of musicians!

 

I do a lot of guitar, bass and drums gigs. The money is better but there's no room for other musicians in the arrangements.

[OliverBlackman]

Pubs tend to stick to solo musicians around me

[Dan Dare]

I've never heard of a venue being licensed for a certain number of performers in recent times. The old "two in a bar rule" that the MU campaigned against for years no longer applies to my knowledge. Guidance on the need for music licences can be found on the .gov website. Requirements for licences are governed by audience size and the hours when music is performed, but not by numbers of performers.

 

The venue you spoke to may have had insurance that limited the number of performers, or they may have decided that they don't want any more than three people playing. Or they may just have been looking for a convenient reason to say no.

[Norris]

It's years since I heard of any restrictions on numbers of performers, and 3 was never one of those numbers iirc.

 

We've always been a trio, because it suits us. We've always filled out to sound bigger than you'd think, and never been afraid of arranging songs that were originally done by much bigger bands. 

 

Three is the magic number

[police squad]

Trio works great if you have two singers, singing harmonies a lot

I sometimes play the odd pub gig with my Policed band but playing general covers. We both sing and it sounds great, especially the Beatles stuff

 

Locally there is more solos and duos, I think because of price. A lot of musos packed it in during covid here too

Edited yesterday at 07:25 by police squad

[bassbiscuits]

Yup - the pub gigs I do are with my blues trio (all three of us sing and play) or as a solo performer (guitar, vocals, harmonica) for the even smaller places which don’t have the space or the budget for bands. 

 

I love playing in a trio. Plenty of room musically and onstage, we can travel light, plus fewer people to organise dates around too. 
 

[Gasman]

16 hours ago, OliverBlackman said:

Pubs tend to stick to solo musicians around me

Very true - today it's more 'monos' than 'trios' around here in many venues - one player and backing tracks, played senselessly loud most times.

 

The old '2 in a bar' rule went out years ago - to get round it my trad jazz band (yes, I'm sorry!) in the 60s used to have a bass drum and pedal that the banjo player (double-sorry!) bashed as well while the trumpet, sax and trombone played one-at-a-time, sitting in the audience until coming out to do a solo, then returning after a couple of choruses... and yes, we only got paid for a duo but it was still a quid each (plenty for a couple of halves of Mild, a chip supper,  and a deposit on a new suit from Burtons... ah, those were the days!)

Edited yesterday at 15:49 by Gasman
incomplete parenthesis set

[fretmeister]

I've never heard of a 3 people limit either.

 

My favourite set up is a trio, or 3 and a singer, mainly because it usually leaves more space for me to badly rip off Jack Bruce.

[Len_derby]

From my experience in the midlands, three factors have made a smaller band-size attractive.

Frozen or reduced fees paid to performers.

Increased car parking restrictions and congestion charges.

The rise of the micro-pub and cafe bar, which usually have very little space for a band.

 

 

[itu]

Once we were asked to play in a flat. No worries, we loaded cars and drove to unload our stuff to a living room (which was modern, and quite big). That eve we were 3 singers and 8 players, and we (and them) had some very good time.

 

Afterwards they told our keyboardist that they were amazed of so many people carrying PA and other stuff, because they expected to see a trio.

[warwickhunt]

I presently play in 2 tribute bands NOT trios but for the last 12 years I've also been in a pub/rock/covers trio/band and the main reason it was a trio was financial.  Pubs weren't paying any more than they were 30 years ago but the cost of gigging has gone up massively (equipment, strings, fuel etc), being in a band with 2 (or more) guitarists in, didn't make sense.  Venues certainly weren't bothered if you were a 3 piece as opposed to 4/5/6, so long as you were a full live band and you were entertaining!

 

Easier to manage 3 diaries and no negatives to speak of!  

[Norris]

4 minutes ago, warwickhunt said:

the main reason it was a trio was financial

Absolutely when we started out. A 4th member would need to add a lot to a band to justify the others taking a hit on the pittance wages.

 

There's also no excuse for not throwing in some backing vocals at least. Even better if you can lead a couple of songs to give the main singer a break

[jezzaboy]

A trio would suit me fine. 2 less idiots to fall out with, win win!

[NJE]

We have just gone up from a 7 piece to an 8 piece 🤣

[synthaside]

I'm in two bands,  a 6 piece and a 4 piece the 4 piece despite being a bit heavier and less "pub-friendly" has no issues getting gigs compared to the 6 which cant secure them for love nor money ... 
once the 3 guitarists have dragged their spaceship pedalboards out there's no pub left for the punters 😉

 

[Chienmortbb]

I should say that in my band there are two dinosaurs, and they are the two youngest. It might take a giant meteor crash to get us to a trio very quickly.

[diskwave]

Never hard of this new restriction thing but a good trio with a good lead singer and backing vox is hard to beat, tho it all hinges on the singer being a good all rounder. I can remember two or three outfits from long ago who had this setup and they were great fun to go see. Good fun to play in too... loads of space. 

[Chienmortbb]

32 minutes ago, diskwave said:

Never hard of this new restriction thing but a good trio with a good lead singer and backing vox is hard to beat, tho it all hinges on the singer being a good all rounder. I can remember two or three outfits from long ago who had this setup and they were great fun to go see. Good fun to play in too... loads of space. 

Fewer people to disagree with too?

[Happy Jack]

When playing pub gigs on bass I always prefer a 3-piece. There's more room for expression in the music, more room for the band in whatever space we've been given by the door to the Gents' Toilet, and there's no need to discuss who's going to set up where - it's blindingly obvious where each of us is going to go. That's less of an issue at club gigs of course, since there's usually some sort of stage.

 

When playing keys it's pretty much inevitable that I'll be playing in a 4- or 5-piece, but then my role is entirely different, plus I set up at the back alongside the drummer.

 

I always assumed that it would be easier to get gigs for a 3-piece but in fact my 5-piece soul band seems to have no trouble bringing them in ... it's just that there's less money for each of us. Luckily enough, I don't do this for the money.

[Franticsmurf]

I played in a trio for years - it was a fluid line-up that could expand to four or five for appropriate gigs or shrink to a duo if necessary but the core of the singer/guitarist, drummer and me played most of the gigs during that time. This was in the mid 90s to mid 2000s in the South Wales valleys. At the start I was vaguely aware of some kind of restriction that meant that many pubs could only have duos and risked some kind of penalty should they have a trio or more but I couldn't tell you if that was a licensing issue or insurance or just them not wanting to pay a band.

 

I found the trio format very satisfying as there was a place for everyone in the arrangement and you couldn't hide. Great for me during my formative years as a bassist (I was transitioning from guitar at the start) as it gave me the self confidence I needed. I also started to sing BVs in this band so it really was a great school for me. As has been said above, it really depends on the abilities of all and out line-up had a drummer who was able to fill the sound, a singer/guitarist who played appropriately for the line-up and me - a fairly busy bassist which helped fill out the gaps during solos. Although we played some memorable gigs as a four piece (with an extra guitar) and a five piece (added keyboards), the trio gig are the ones that stand out and are the ones I measure new bands against.

Edited 10 hours ago by Franticsmurf

[Stub Mandrel]

I think in the old days if you wanted more than two musicians, the venue had to be 'licensed for music and dancing'.

 

I'm in a 'blues rock power trio' 😎 and a five piece classic rock band.

 

Trio is brilliant as it is much easier to be loose and improvise, but to sound good you need to be on top of your game.

 

The five piece, even though it only adds one guitar the sound and discipline needed  are very ddifferenn but lets you tackle a wider sonic landscape.

 

I was in a six-piece that added keyboards and that could be a nightmare for agreeing arrangements.

[Chienmortbb]

12 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

I was in a six-piece that added keyboards and that could be a nightmare for agreeing arrangements.

Keyboards are a no no for me. Tried three times, but they were all convinced that the band was about them, as was the whole audio spectrum.