El Pr0n wrote: » So what do new bands actually have to do?
El Pr0n wrote: » All great advice. But the practice bit is a no-brainer (for me anyway). I mean, once your band has all the tunes, can play them all, don't have any rusty bits. Once your band is worth its salt. It's all well and good to say 'gig'. But does the trawl-MySpace-and-ask-for-support-slots approach really work anymore?
waltersobchak wrote: » are all the hours spent adding people worth it reallly?
Fandango wrote: » Not at all! Love to see a stat of people on myspace to see how many of the bands they have added that they have gone to live/got their CD? Id say 1 band in about 20 at best!
MilanPan!c wrote: » Can I just say that toooo much gigging Is a bad thing. Most of the hard work can be done with out gigging. If you're playing to noone or have nothing to flog at the gig then it's just a glorified practice. Nothing wrong with practice, but a LOT of band I personally know implode, because of gigging. Gigging is not necessarily gonna do thats much for most bands and most bands do not get signed cause o gigs, they get signed because someone hears their songs and thinks they can sell them and make some money.. And gigging is prolly the worst way to really hear a bands songs for the first time (read that carefully before you get offended please).
waltersobchak wrote: » And how many bands/people judge success on how many "fans" or views they have on myspace too.
drumdrum wrote: » In my experience, the whole "get really tight then gig your hole off to get noticed" simply does not work in this country. The scene for anything outside of radio-indie is too small to generate enough prolonged interest. Also, this coupled with not only the lack of places to play, but more importantly, the lack of places WITH DECENT SOUND CAPABILITIES are even less. I mean, if the sound is crap with too much drums or whatever, then how are punters ever going to hear the song itself? I think that the number one thing for any band should be a product in the form of a professional sellable CD/download of a very high production quality. How this is achieved is up to the bands (invest in some equipment for themselves, or invest in studio time). No label is going to touch you these days without you having a product to promote. Being great live is obviously a great bonus, but it is the product that will get people in the doors in the first place. People that listen to a well recorded product are more likely to be able to like the song (or not!) but at least the songs potential is given a fair shot. Ive heard some great songs recorded badly and really ruin what should of been a great listening experience. Dont get me wrong, gigging is very important too. Live energy is essential to sell your music to the masses at your shows. Its what will keep them coming back. When coupled with a great product behind you, this will help you to shift units of you product (either sell them or give them away) and help the word-of-mouth press spread quickly about your band, which is always well worth it in the long run. In simple words, having a great product will get people in the doors to your shows, but being great live will keep them coming back to your shows. My two cents anyways....
raindog.promo wrote: » * On a sidenote, what with homerecording and easier to use/afford/steal software for programming and whatnot, I'm seeing a new form of band emerging, the "project" which seems to be suiting a fair few musicians at the moment. Cuts out having to deal with/rely on other people and has a less "total commitment" approach to a band.
raindog.promo wrote: » Things that can kill a band: 1) Members stop putting in as much time as others: Not working by themselves at home and a lacsadaisy approach to jamming (showing up late, leaving early, everything else taking a preference over jamming - "can't make it, there's a match on I want to watch" etc) Builds up resentment with other band members. 2) Power struggles within band: All of a sudden, someone wants to be the face of the band and band decisions now become power politics and again builds up resentment with other band members. 3) No income. A thankless chore, personally, I think gigging gives you the impetus to go on and is its own reward. Seeing no money come in can seriously harm members commitment to the band. I think it's a rule of thumb that band life is usually 3 years in length. Imagine how hard a marraige can be and then multiply that between 3-5 or (god help ye) up to 16! Basically, respect the individuals in the band and unless you're paying them to be playing don't be arrogant enough to presume they're there for your benefit. * On a sidenote, what with homerecording and easier to use/afford/steal software for programming and whatnot, I'm seeing a new form of band emerging, the "project" which seems to be suiting a fair few musicians at the moment. Cuts out having to deal with/rely on other people and has a less "total commitment" approach to a band.
Papa Smut wrote: » Jesus Raindog, thats a bleak outlook! Doesn't 1) and 2) get covered under the "fcuking keep talking to each other. Too many bands fall apart as they bottle $hit up when dealing with each other, being too sensitive about each others feelings etc. You have to learn how to communicate effectively with each other."? I agree wholeheartedly with no. 3. I can't remember the exact quote, but I'll paraphrase... "With both eyes fixed on the destination, there is no eye to look where you're going, so you might trip"* Too many bands are fixated with "making it big" or "getting a record deal" that they forget to enjoy the journey.
MilanPan!c wrote: » IMO and IME gigging is at best a fun way to sell some crap. People like gigs sure, but we ALL know bands that bust their hump playing shows for years an get absolutely nowhere. Why? Well, the most common culprit is crappy/unmarketable songs. If you want success, that is if that's your goal, then you need good songs. Period. Now, most record folks realise at this point that it's quite hard to REALLY tell if a band is any good by seeing them live. Being able to make drunk punters happy is no way to judge songs. What business folks want is decent quality recordings of good songs or better yet PRO recordings of amazing songs. That's the market we're all competing in. Instead of spending your time playing for nobodies who can't help you at all find ways to record and promote and create a presence for yourself. That's my advice anyway.I never ever knew a band to suceed on the back of playing live. Ever.
MilanPan!c wrote: » People like gigs sure, but we ALL know bands that bust their hump playing shows for years an get absolutely nowhere. I never ever knew a band to suceed on the back of playing live. Ever.
Papa Smut wrote: » I agree with 90% of your post, except the bit in bold. Still to this day, if you play in a band (so it's fair to say a rock/indie/organic musical instruments band) before you sign any contract, the label will be following you live and will expect a showcase. If you don't have the practice in front of a live crowd, or you make great recordings, but can't actually play your songs live, the label will have no interest.
raindog.promo wrote: » Not that I'm totally disagreeing with you , there's always going to be examples that contradict your point. But, I'm pretty sure (though not 100%) that Republic of Loose financd their English tours from the money made gigging in the Olympia/Academy over here and may have also paid for the recording of their second album. Seasick Steve, Thin Lizzy and plenty of others made it on the back of playing live for years before getting noticed. It just depends how good your tunes are and how committed you are to touring them and for how long. And a shedload of luck too.
MilanPan!c wrote: » Of course there will always be exceptions, but smart money plays good odds. The odds are that MOST bands that ever are formed in the world will not get famous/signed because they rock live or connect emotionally live or whatever. Bands spend WAY to much time trying to play out when they have no fans, no product and have to PAY to play to no one for no money.
El Pr0n wrote: » I know The Flaming Lips were touring for something like 10 years before they got to 'making it'. And then there's Anvil.
raindog.promo wrote: » In your opinion. And it also depends what the bands goals are. I think the days of having oodles of money are gone unless you want to go the xfactor way. Fame isn't the only reason to get into music.