Do you drink alcohol before and/or during a gig ?

Rigsby

Personally, I find that even one or two drinks affects my concentration, so I never drink until after the gig.....if someone else is driving.

Herb Powell

Usually both.

raindog.promo

Horses for courses.

There is an argument here every so often that goes round and round whether it's acceptable to do so or not.

It worked for me

irlirishkev

Depends.. Usually I'm driving so no booze.

If I'm not driving, which happens occasionally, I'll usually nurse a pint during the 1st half, and then the same for the 2nd half. Then have one afterwards.

I know my limits when it comes to how much I can drink and still perform to standard, so I don't go over it. At the end of the day, I'm being paid to do a job.

rcaz

irlirishkev wrote: »

At the end of the day, I'm being paid to do a job.

Would you nurse a pint through the first half of a day working in an office, then another one after lunch?

irlirishkev

rcaz wrote: »

Would you nurse a pint through the first half of a day working in an office, then another one after lunch?

No, but I don't work in a pub during the day. And there are lots of barmen who would have a pint while working.
Also, I'm being paid by the pub, and if they don't see a problem with me having a slow pint while doing what they're paying me to do, then neither do I.

raindog.promo

rcaz wrote: »

Would you nurse a pint through the first half of a day working in an office, then another one after lunch?

Plenty of Germans do it apparently (according to a guy I heard down the pub).

And playing in a band is different to working in an office. It just is. I hate when that argument is used. Are all painters/poets stone cold sober when they paint/compose? (and I mean canvas, not floors and ceiling!) Should they be?

happyman81

No, although it can be fun.

Siamsa Sessions

It depends on the gig.

In some places you'd never even think about having a drink, but in others taking the odd slug from a pint adds to the image and/or raucous atmosphere.

As someone said above - horses for courses.

Herb Powell

rcaz wrote: »

Would you nurse a pint through the first half of a day working in an office, then another one after lunch?

I would
Whether that's acceptable is a different story.
Playing music is not the same thing though, you know that. Sure, you have to play to a standard, but it doesn't require the same level of concentration (ime). Having a pint before you play is always nice-sometimes I do, somethimes I don't, but whenever I do, I enjoy it. Nothing wrong with it.

cloptrop

Once it doesnt affect your performance why not , who joins a band for a life of sobreity and resisting temptation. ?Crank up the debauchry thats what I always say.
If you are in a covers band or church choir maybe you should act semi professional though .

Hands up, I locked this by accident when I was dealing with the streaming spam.


Won't happen again etc.

rcaz

Herb Powell wrote: »

Sure, you have to play to a standard, but it doesn't require the same level of concentration (ime).

Sure, playing the stuff you've rehearsed a million times is fine with a pint or two on board, but if something unexpected should happen, some technical fault on stage or an instrument breaks or you have to deal with a weird crowd or something, that's when you need to be at your sharpest.

I've played a few gigs with pints, and I've gotten away with it, but when I sat down to really evaluate how I've been working with my music, I thought of it in a new light. When I go on a stage I really really want everyone to take me completely seriously and let me have their ears for however long I'm playing. If I'm trying to make a serious musical argument to a crowd, then out of respect, I should be treating it like the most important job I'll ever have, 'cause that's how important it is to me.

I think playing music and having fun get mixed up too much... Sure playing music is the best fun there is, but for me anyway, it's also the most important and honest kind of communication there is... I dunno, I'd rather not dumb it down by treating it all as time off.

raindog.promo wrote: »

And playing in a band is different to working in an office. It just is. I hate when that argument is used. Are all painters/poets stone cold sober when they paint/compose? (and I mean canvas, not floors and ceiling!) Should they be?

You're missing my point. Painting and writing poetry are different to playing a gig. When you're writing your tunes, do whatever you like, whatever puts you in the right mood to work out the music. But when you're playing a gig you're presenting your work to an audience, and if you want that audience to take your work seriously, I think you owe it to them to be on top form, alert, full working condition, whatever. Playing in a band isn't the same as working in an office, but putting on a show is.

raindog.promo

rcaz wrote: »

Playing in a band isn't the same as working in an office, but putting on a show is.

As I said, "Horses for courses". In some performances it may not be acceptable. In others, it is.
Some performers also use improvisation a lot and use alcohol as an aid to get those juices flowing. Being so drunk you can't play is a problem but the amount of adrenaline that hits you on stage would counteract the negative effects of alcohol too.

I've been to shows where the intensity on stage has blown me away and kept me buzzing for weeks. The performers in some of these instances were definitely drunk among other things. I've never had the same experience from getting a passport form stamped or picking up an undelivered letter from the post office.

billybenner

it really depends on the person, a few pints can be grand to settle the nerves but it can also makes you makes mistakes, basically if you dont get really nervous going up on stage i would nt bother having any as you will play and sing better, but if do get nervous just have one or 2 and that should do the trick, i've often gone up on stage after drinking too much and played fine but there is times when I've made easy mistakes that i would nt of made if i was sober and that was because of having one too many, so basically dont drink too much if your going to i reckon!!

Fandango

rcaz wrote: »

Would you nurse a pint through the first half of a day working in an office, then another one after lunch?

Many songs have curse words in them, would you curse at a customer in an office job? Comparing the two is pointless as they are very different. Personally I always have a few pints before going on and one during. I suffer from anxiety and panic attacks tho so wouldnt even make the stage without something to calm the nerves.

raindog.promo

Fandango wrote: »

would you curse at a customer in an office job?

I've been bloody tempted on a number of occasions.

Then I was fired, solving the problem.

Yussbear

Would I have a wee dwink? No, wouldn't be able to play anyway decent, that's for afters.
Once I met a bandmate a few hours before a gig. He had been drinking the night before, hadn't slept or stopped, and at this point was drinking caramel vodka from a dutch gold can on the dart (wonderful stuff I know). He almost took a piss in the middle of afternoon town, almost pulled his amp down during the show... Almost many things, BUT, all that being said, he had a great time, and still counts it the most fun he's ever had gigging

cloptrop

Id love to know Keith Moons view on this . Id love to know if rock n roll legend lies to us as much as I think it does.
If these bands were so drunk and drugged up all the time how did they ever gig.

Prefab Sprouter

I've had a pint before a gig, never more than 1, but thats just me, I want to be sure I can fully concentrate on what I'm doing. I find that the context of the gig is as important.
For example if you are playing a wedding or similar function (and I've djed a number of these) it doesnt look great to see the band/DJ swilling pints whilst playing. Also if anything goes wrong, what tends to happen is that you can be accused of being pissed, thus giving someone a reason not to pay you. Whether you are or not is irrelevant, its the perception that could be an issue

roast

I occasionally have a pint or a shot before a set, but never more than that. I purely do it to calm my nerves, I'm terrified of crowds sometimes.
I know for sure that if I took the piss and had any more, it would impede my playing. I'd much rather be terrified of a crowd than play shíte.

MrStuffins

I can't believe some of the stuff in this thread!

Lads, you're in a band. if you can have a few beers and can handle it or if it greases the cogs, then do so! Comparing it to working in an office is just rubbish!

Also, it really depends on what kind of band you're in. If you're in a band where your music is low on energy and high on precision, then by all means, be as sharp as possible in your execusion.

However, if you're in a band where energy is important, crown interaction, improvisation etc, then having a couple of pints can be important. I know for me that I feel much more comfortable getting up on stage after a couple of beers. In no way would I be close to drunk ever getting up there, but i'd be in that merry state of mind. Helps me enjoy it too.

I don't think I really need to say you shouldn't drink too much, so much it effects your performance, because that's common sense.

happyman81

happyman81 wrote: »

No, although it can be fun.

First gig in five years last night. Suffice to say, I broke my rule.

leeroybrown

I don't gig but as far as I'm concerned anything goes so long as the band can still put on a good show. If you've had a few and are still playing great music then happy days. The one exception I'd give though is that if someone is teching then they should be sober enough to deal with equipment problems that come up.

rcaz

raindog.promo wrote: »

Some performers also use improvisation a lot and use alcohol as an aid to get those juices flowing.

If you feel like you need a drink to be able to improvise, then you can't improvise.

raindog.promo

rcaz wrote: »

If you feel like you need a drink to be able to improvise, then you can't improvise.

Sorry, but that's Bollox.

rcaz

raindog.promo wrote: »

Sorry, but that's Bollox.

Tell me why?

Improvising is a completely involved mental approach to making music, you need to be 100% on point, in the moment, perfect every time. Getting drunk just means you're less afraid of making mistakes and less concerned about making the perfect decisions every time. That isn't improvising, that's "**** it this'll do".

the_syco

I know a few bands that used to drink before and during the gigs, but now wait until after, as they'd miss one or two notes, and be overall unhappy with their own performance.

People paid to see them, so it's bad that they can't play what we paid to hear. If anyone heard that drunken fúcker Lemmy "perform" (badly) at last years Bloodstock, they'll know what I mean.

raindog.promo

rcaz wrote: »

Tell me why?

People have many different ways of doing things. You seem to be equating drinking to being out of your head drunk. Alcohol affects the brain in a number of ways, some of which may lead you to think about doing things in a way you do not usually do. I've written things while drunk that I'd never come up with while sober, and took chances (chord changes, solos) while improvising drunk that I'd never take while sober.

There's another argument here that has already been touched on (and I've read a few John Frusciante interviews where he's commented on the same) as to whether it's better to be technically perfect or get across the feeling of a piece.

You saying if someone does X then it is not Y is bollox. It's your opinion, not fact. And if other people are happy to use this technique, who are you to tell them that they're wrong.

Horses for courses.

EDIT: If you wanna hear the note-perfect version, get the album and stick it on. I pay to see a live performance and don't mind a few mistakes, they can be quite funny sometimes.
Your definition of improvising is flawed. You take chances, when they pay off it's great. When they don't, that's how it goes.

rcaz

raindog.promo wrote: »

People have many different ways of doing things. You seem to be equating drinking to being out of your head drunk. Alcohol affects the brain in a number of ways, some of which may lead you to think about doing things in a way you do not usually do. I've written things while drunk that I'd never come up with while sober, and took chances (chord changes, solos) while improvising drunk that I'd never take while sober.

There's another argument here that has already been touched on (and I've read a few John Frusciante interviews where he's commented on the same) as to whether it's better to be technically perfect or get across the feeling of a piece.

You saying if someone does X then it is not Y is bollox. It's your opinion, not fact. And if other people are happy to use this technique, who are you to tell them that they're wrong.

Horses for courses.

EDIT: If you wanna hear the note-perfect version, get the album and stick it on. I pay to see a live performance and don't mind a few mistakes, they can be quite funny sometimes.
Your definition of improvising is flawed. You take chances, when they pay off it's great. When they don't, that's how it goes.

Fair enough, I think about improv different to you (funny that you'll base your argument around 'horses for courses' and then tell me my own idea of improv is flawed). But if you need to be a bit drunk to come up with an interesting chord change or passage in your solo, fair enough. But those kinds of happy mistakes are just extensions of the music you already know.

If you listened to more new and varied music you'd probably find some kind of playing or some trick that's completely outside your current musical universe, all my favourite things I'm working on right now came from the last stack of new CDs I bought (Er I hope that doesn't sound completely arrogant, it's just the last time I went CD shopping I went with a list of names I'd literally never listened to before, only read about, mostly jazz and 20th century art stuff. It was a little project/experiment that paid off hugely).

And then a good improvisor, in my opinion/experience, is someone who can know so much about all the different possibilities of the music they're playing at the time, that they don't fit into any category or style other than the session they're in the middle of. And that isn't 'taking chances' or anything, that's being a on the ball and constantly thinking and figuring out directions... You know, in my opinion and all.

Herb Powell

rcaz wrote: »

Fair enough, I think about improv different to you (funny that you'll base your argument around 'horses for courses' and then tell me my own idea of improv is flawed). But if you need to be a bit drunk to come up with an interesting chord change or passage in your solo, fair enough. But those kinds of happy mistakes are just extensions of the music you already know.

If you listened to more new and varied music you'd probably find some kind of playing or some trick that's completely outside your current musical universe, all my favourite things I'm working on right now came from the last stack of new CDs I bought (Er I hope that doesn't sound completely arrogant, it's just the last time I went CD shopping I went with a list of names I'd literally never listened to before, only read about, mostly jazz and 20th century art stuff. It was a little project/experiment that paid off hugely).

And then a good improvisor, in my opinion/experience, is someone who can know so much about all the different possibilities of the music they're playing at the time, that they don't fit into any category or style other than the session they're in the middle of. And that isn't 'taking chances' or anything, that's being a on the ball and constantly thinking and figuring out directions... You know, in my opinion and all.

See in my opinion/experience, to be improvising well, you really can't think very hard about it-there's just no time for that. You have to already be at a certain level. So a few drinks (within reason-I think this is the point that everyone agrees on) really shouldn't kill your ability.
If anything, the fact that alcohol makes you care less about mistakes can enhance your performance. First of all it's all about confidence-if you see a player who ****s up and knows it, but doesn't let it get to him, and keeps playing on (well, obviously. If he's shiit the whole time this doesn't apply ) then you aren't really going to care about the mistake either. The second point here is that if a player doesn't care so much about making mistakes, there's not going to be this fear of playing something that mightn't sound great, so he'll experiment more, which usually, with a confident player, means a better song.

Paulie Gualtieri

my uncle used to have a couple before a gig and more after but he quit doing that as it did effect his concentration plus spending the nights few quid in the pub .

rcaz

Herb Powell wrote: »

See in my opinion/experience, to be improvising well, you really can't think very hard about it-there's just no time for that. You have to already be at a certain level. So a few drinks (within reason-I think this is the point that everyone agrees on) really shouldn't kill your ability.
If anything, the fact that alcohol makes you care less about mistakes can enhance your performance. First of all it's all about confidence-if you see a player who ****s up and knows it, but doesn't let it get to him, and keeps playing on (well, obviously. If he's shiit the whole time this doesn't apply ) then you aren't really going to care about the mistake either. The second point here is that if a player doesn't care so much about making mistakes, there's not going to be this fear of playing something that mightn't sound great, so he'll experiment more, which usually, with a confident player, means a better song.

Yeah I went on a bit of a mad one on my last post alright... Sorry :pac:

First of all it's all about confidence-if you see a player who ****s up and knows it, but doesn't let it get to him, and keeps playing on (well, obviously. If he's shiit the whole time this doesn't apply ) then you aren't really going to care about the mistake either.

This is the bit I'm interested in here... It's about confidence, sure, but it's about respect too. If I went out to a gig to see a band play to an audience, I kinda like to think they respect their audience and appreciate they're in a gigging situation, 'cause so many bands aren't... I dunno, for me, drinking before and during the gig doesn't fit into that picture of respect. Do what you like after, sure, but don't take any beer-related risks beforehand/during that can potentially lead to you not giving your audience their money's worth.

true

remember the line from the song" before the chieftans could start to play, 4 creamy pints came out on a tray.."

raindog.promo

rcaz wrote: »

And then a good improvisor, in my opinion/experience, is someone who can know so much about all the different possibilities of the music they're playing at the time, that they don't fit into any category or style other than the session they're in the middle of. And that isn't 'taking chances' or anything, that's being a on the ball and constantly thinking and figuring out directions... You know, in my opinion and all.

I'm not picking a fight. Even if someone was stone cold sober and improvising and knowing a load of different styles could pick playing something in a certain style that just doesn't work with what's going on or it does. They take a chance and if it works, great; if not, then try again.

Herb Powell

rcaz wrote: »

Yeah I went on a bit of a mad one on my last post alright... Sorry :pac:



This is the bit I'm interested in here... It's about confidence, sure, but it's about respect too. If I went out to a gig to see a band play to an audience, I kinda like to think they respect their audience and appreciate they're in a gigging situation, 'cause so many bands aren't... I dunno, for me, drinking before and during the gig doesn't fit into that picture of respect. Do what you like after, sure, but don't take any beer-related risks beforehand/during that can potentially lead to you not giving your audience their money's worth.

Don't be sorry! You were just expressing an opinion I didn't entirely agree with

Rigsby

Interesting discussion lads. Lots of different views and opinions too. There is no doubt that even one or two drinks impairs your concentration. So IMO whether a person consumes alcohol at a gig would depend on a few things.

1. The type of music being played.

2. The general attitude of the musician towards the music, the audience, his instrument, and his contribution to the band's performance.

3. How well an individual is able to "hold his/her liquor".


Personally, I much prefer a few drinks after a gig. These, combined with the knowledge that you have done your best, and the good feeling you get when you know the band have performed well, far outweigh the buzz I'd get from drinking during or before the gig itself.

YMMV etc...

Tazz T

I always drink when I'm rehearsing so I'd feel a bit 'out of sorts' playing live without a drink in me. I stick to 2/3 pints before I go on to get the blood going, helps the stage presence and I bang it down my neck when I'm on stage just in case the bar is shut when I get off.

I'll admit to being so out of my gourd at one gig that I didn't even realise I was on stage 'til about halfway through the set. I was completely immersed in the music, it was only when the drummer pointed out the crowdsurfing did I realise I was actually playing!
Strangely enough, best gig I ever played. I usually wouldn't be in this way, would limit myself to a pint before and during, but this was day three of a festival. The crowd were very much on the same buzz when they started crowdsurfing and had a stage invasion.
It is, horses for courses. But (and I think this is important) if your band tell you your cr@p after a few pints, you should listen to them.

Rigsby

Tazz T wrote: »

helps the stage presence

You have the better of me there.

Rigsby

Rigsby wrote: »

You have the better of me there.

I presume he means the dutch courage that comes from the gargle.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

might have a pint before and a pint during if im not driving. We dont take a break during our 2 hour set, so we cant drink too much even if were not driving.

theboat

I personally don't drink at all before playing, because I prefer not to risk any lapse in concentration. That said, in most cases, I don't think one or two pints will affect concentration to such an extent that you can't play well. But I never feel the need to drink to help me play; thankfully, nerves aren't much of an issue for me. I prefer to wait until after and really enjoy the pint without worrying that it might affect me.
I'd agree with rcaz's point about respect. If you can have a drink before or during the gig and it doesn't have a noticeable effect on your ability to deliver a performance, fine. But if it begins to influence your playing negatively, even slightly, there's a problem, because people have, in many cases, paid to see you play (or at least have paid to be there).

Interesting article in the current New Scientist about alcohol. Unfortunately there's only a preview available for free, but the basic point is there: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328565.200-alcohol-boosts-ability-to-solve-problems-creatively.html

Having said all this, if you're getting paid to do the gig, as in a session situation, then I don't think it's ever acceptable to drink before/during.