Cover Band

[tornandfrayed]

These are all great ideas! I wonder, if every cover band followed this advice would that make them successful?

I am curious to see if there is any way to quantify this. Could we take a cover band that is "not succesful" and make them a hit by following these rules? Would that be a trip! We could sort of setup our own reality TV show kind of thing!

[Mistress_DB]

Unfortunatly it's not a one size fits all formula. What works for band A might not work for Band B. The music business in general doesn't come with a guarantee for success. It's all hit and miss.

Someone mentioned Promotion earlier. I'm gonna back up that notion. Get your name out there and NETWORK NETWORK NETWORK. One of the things i learned over the years is that no connection is too small or insignificant.

[Banned]

Again, what defines success?

The advice on this post is all good, however there is no set formula and becoming successful still takes a bit of luck.


It takes time to get known and that's why promotion is important.

Every band is different whether it be cover, original or a combination of both, so that's why there is no set formula or guarantee.

So it is my belief that if you are a decent musician at the very least and stay within your musical boundaries, know your material and the crowds that you're playing your stuff for, you stand a better chance of getting return gigs, thus improving your chances of getting crowds. Believe it or not, some club owners do recognize drawing potential and will ask you back even if your initial crowds are light. Not everyone is like that, but that's when you have to juggle the price and all that bullshit. It still takes time and effort, patience and persistence.

The cream will eventually rise to the top no matter what type of band you're in.

[bassist_25]

I definitely agree with Scott. I also think that Kevin and Rob had very good points. I especially agree with Rob's point that longevity plays an important role. You have to play out - It's as simple as that. And to really be successful, you have to play out almost every weekend. The Hurricanes didn't get where they are by gigging out once every month or so.

Also, I agree with what Kevin says about equipment. A Mesa/Boogie guitar rig is much higher quality than a Behringer guitar rig: END OF STORY. You'll never meet a bigger adovcate of good technique and ability than me, but a bass player going through an Eden/SWR/Aguilar/G-K/Genz Benz/Trace Elliot/Sunn/ect. rig is always going to sound better than if he/she is going through a Beheringer/Drive/Crate/etc. rig. Nobody says that you have to play boutique-level gear, but if you want to have a professional sound, then pro-level gear is a must. If you are gigging steady, then there's no excuse for running inferior equipment. I've played less than stellar gear, but I made it a point to upgrade.

Just my two cents.

[songsmith]

The cream will eventually rise to the top no matter what type of band you're in.

This soooo true. As a musician, you have to prepare yourself (and your expansive ego) that it's an extraordinary amount of work, drive, self-education, and sacrifice. If your music comes easily to you, it's probably your ego talking. Now don't get me wrong, creative inspiration is a gift from the ether for me, but then I have to bust my ass to get people to listen to the finished product. Even then, it doesn't always turn other people on, and I have to admit to myself when it doesn't. The world doesn't OWE me it's attention and adulation. Sometimes, no matter how much I want it to rule, it sucks. I have two paths in that instance. Persevere, maybe hone my craft a bit, and keep plugging. Or step back and analyze why it sucks, cut my losses, and learn a valuable lesson about music, art, and life.
There are many valuable lessons about your life to be learned, even in a little backwoods bar band. As I always say, at the far end of your music career, no matter what level of "success" you achieve, you will look back at a life filled with adventure, satisfaction, and great depth of self. You might not reach your dream, but the pursuit of the dream is it's own reward.---------->JMS

[RobTheDrummer]

Good Post Johnny!

I think being in a variety of different varieties has turned me into a lemming that dove into the sea of music.

Catch my drift?

[Banned]

They say variety is the spice of life. I hope they're right.

Anyway, I agree wholeheartedly with Paul in the fact that good gear is essential no matter what style, band, material, etc.

The rule of thumb was always buy the best you can afford. If you're able to upgrade, then do so. If you were a carpenter or a mechanic, you would want the best tools for the job. Same with music.

[RobTheDrummer]

I dunno about the good gear argument. I've seen people make junk look great. And I've seen guys with all kinds of great gear sound bad because they overplay or overuse stuff. Gear can only do so much, you have to do the rest.

[bassist_25]

I dunno about the good gear argument. I've seen people make junk look great. And I've seen guys with all kinds of great gear sound bad because they overplay or overuse stuff. Gear can only do so much, you have to do the rest.

I dig what you're saying Rob, but I have to disagree. A good guitarist is going to sound good on a Samick Strat-knockoff, but he's going to sound even better on a REAL Fender Strat (or a PRS or a Gibson or a Parker or a Rickenbacker or insert any other high-end guitar company). A higher-end instrument is designed to be more reponsive to all of the nuances of a professional-level player's technique. A Samick or a Rogue just isn't going to respond to all of the nuaces of an experienced player. Low-end drivers in a cabinet are not going to reproduce all of the harmonic overtones. They may have scooped voicings and end up sounding honky or muddy. Low-end pickups in guitars and basses aren't going to be distinct and may have timbres that are nasally, muddy, or harsh. I didn't notice some arppegios in one of the songs we do until old sKool switched out the stock pickups in one of his Schecters for a set of aftermarket Seymour Duncans. Compared to a Kurzweil, a cheap Casio keyboard is going to sound like a....well, like a cheap Casio keyboard.

I know that if we guitar players and bass players have to contend with a lower-end instrument, then we must face a huge problem that usually comes with lower-end guitars/basses: Bad fretwork! There's nothing worse than bad fretwork, because then you're fighting the instrument because your action has to be so high, otherwise you get dead notes, buzzing, and fretting out. Forget about tapping technique.

Again, you won't find a bigger advocate for good musicianship than me, but there's a huge difference between a low quality instrument and a high quality instrument, a difference between a Samick Strat-knockoff and a real Fender Strat, a difference between an Avatar bass cabinet and an Epifani bass cabinet, a difference between a Royce drum kit and a DW drum kit. The later option in all of these examples is a pro-quality piece of equipment, and likewise, it sounds like pro equipment.

[RobTheDrummer]

It really depends on the sound you are looking for. Look at Felix's guitar, he makes that thing sound awesome. It's been through hell and back.

[SpellboundByMetal]

well, im poor. i barely have anything. I dont even own a guitar anymore. Shit...or an amp!! Luckily, the CE dudes have extra stuff
I probably will never play through a mesa. If someone gave one to me, sure....but thats it! Ive never had top of the line gear... except picks
Eventually, maybe, ill get some decent stuff.

I never even played a guitar that was properly set up until i met Scott Bush. I didnt really know much about it...and i still dont know how to set one up!
I just play it. Stuff like that i will have to learn.

I cant talk too much tech, as i dont know alot about all of it.
I agree 110% with Rob though. Gear really can only do so much.
Ive seen guys with the best rig sound like total shit. Im not talking about the tone...im talking about the playing. Like where more time was spent getting gear than really leaning how to play. Allthough, i havent had lessons...and i can not read music @ all. Maybe that explains alot, huh??

[MeYatch]

I think whats more important than the gear (especially what it says on the headstock, or amp) is knowing how to use the gear you have. I'm not just talking about knowing how to play. I'm talking about knowing how to set up your instrument, knowing how to EQ your amp. There's a million little tricks. You can have a high end, rear ported, bass cab, stick it up against the wall, and it sounds like feces, because you don't know how to use it.

As far as instruments go I think having a good set up is way more important than having it say "made in the USA" on the headstock. If you know what you are doing, you can go get yourself a samick, drop in some kickass pickups, adjust the trussrod, and file your own frets smooth, and you are off to the races with an awesome guitar than cost you probably all of about $200 and quite a bit of your time.

EQ is another thing. Not that I can think of any examples off the top of my head, but you see all kinds of people playing high end gear and it sounds like ass. Because they scoop the mids on their amp. Mid scooping is for homeboys. Don't get me wrong, I scoop the mids on my home practice amp, because it sounds better when you are playing by yourself, but as soon as you start playing with other people, when you scoop your mids all the sound dissapears. Most of what makes an individual instrument sound unique is in the mid range.

[MeYatch]

But, back to the original topic.
I think that one of the most important success strategies is to know what your band sounds good doing. Play to your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

You won't see Echo Chamber singing any songs with much background harmony, because Eric and I are among the worst singers known to man. We always wanted to do don't fear the reaper, in fact we learned it (the middle is a BITCH) but it just sounds like garbage. Not only can no one do the background vocals, but the main vocals are pretty significantly out of ken's range.

However thats not to say that just because Ken's a low singer that we can't do anything thats not right in his range. We have been known to cover Pat Benetar, and even Michael Jackson. Its all in how you do it.

In fact I've said before that I think we are actually a pretty lousy cover band. Because we don't sound all that much like the original recordings. But the songs still sound good. We still get the ladies dancing, and the fellas drinking. People are entertained.

In the recent switch to one guitar we were worried we'd end up dropping about half the songs we do. But most of them sound fine. I've been worrying a lot less in the last year or so about wether we sound like the recording and just worry about wether it sounds good. People have been adapting music for different instrumentation for hundreds of years(probably more). As long as it sounds good, I could care less if it sounds like the original recording.

[bassist_25]

I never even played a guitar that was properly set up until i met Scott Bush. I didnt really know much about it...and i still dont know how to set one up!
I just play it. Stuff like that i will have to learn.

There's nothing wrong with that. I didn't always know a lot of technical stuff either, and I still don't claim to know everything. Actually, it's probably good for players to put off being "techie" for a while. Concentrating on being a proficient player is much more important.

I cant talk too much tech, as i dont know alot about all of it.
I agree 110% with Rob though. Gear really can only do so much.
Ive seen guys with the best rig sound like total shit. Im not talking about the tone...im talking about the playing. Like where more time was spent getting gear than really leaning how to play.

Again, I think people are missing my point. I'm not saying that if you go and drop $5k on a guitar and rig you're going to automatically sound good. Actually, a beginner is going to sound worse, because high-end gear is designed to be more responsive and it's going to show flaw's in technique. I'm just saying that (for example guitar equipment) such as Mesa/Boogie, Bogner, Soldano, Diezel, Ampeg, Orange, (higher-end) Marshall, Kittyhawk, Fender, Krank, Vox, etc. is pro-level gear, and it's going to have a professional sound in the hands of a skilled player. We could sit and argue subjective stuff like SS vs. tubes, and Les Pauls vs. Strats, but the objective fact is that a Behringer cab costs $300 and a Mesa Traditional costs $1000. There's a reason for that price difference.

As far as instruments go I think having a good set up is way more important than having it say "made in the USA" on the headstock. If you know what you are doing, you can go get yourself a samick, drop in some kickass pickups, adjust the trussrod, and file your own frets smooth, and you are off to the races with an awesome guitar than cost you probably all of about $200 and quite a bit of your time

Pickup upgrades can really bring an instrument alive, but they won't immediatley take a ho-hum instrument and make it amazing. As some of you know, for a back-up, I have an SX Jazz Bass copy. It's a surprisingly good instrtument, and I'm constantly astounded by how nice of fretwork it has considering its price. I wanted to upgrade it, so it really would be a good pro-sounding backup. I dropped a set of Bartolinis in it, which ironically costs more than the bass itself. It definitely improved the sound; the lows were much tighter, and the mids were much smoother. Still, the highs are a little harsh. This is probably just due to the timbre of the wood. I could stick a set of EMGs, DiMarzios, or Norstrands in it and the highs would probably still be harsh. My point is while the SX is still a nice instrument, even after upgrades, it still isn't even in the same class as my Carvin.

[Daxman]

I get what you're saying Paul and agree with you totally...Even Toona man said it, but people must understand that it's just a step in the process (good gear that is)...As it has been said here already, we all heard people make good gear sound bad...But, it's much easier, and puts you ahead of the game, if you start out with good gear...Making good gear sound great is much easier than making crap sound good...Remember, you can polish silver, but you can't polish a terd.

[Banned]

it's much easier, and puts you ahead of the game, if you start out with good gear...Making good gear sound great is much easier than making crap sound good...Remember, you can polish silver, but you can't polish a terd.

Talk about practicing what you preach . . . Dax's rig costs more than my house did. Well, that may be a wee bit of an exaggeration.

On the gear topic, I think the high-end gear is more crucial in the studio. That's where you really maximize the nuances.

Live, you have so many variables working for or against you. Your high-end goodies end up being foiled by weird acoustics, or bad power, or the tonal inclinations of the soundman. It gets crappified by the ravages of the road. And worst of all, good gear doesn't include a better player in the box. So live, I tend to use whatever breaks down the least. I sound equally crappy to me whatever I'm using.

But anyway, the way most funnest thing about playing in cover bands is that there are surprisingly few rules for what you can and can't play. If people like it, it works.

You can do spot-on accurate covers. You can do completely twisted revisions of familiar tunes. You can play one genre. You can mix it all up. You can be serious. You can be goofy. If an idea sounds completely risky and unsane, it's surprisingly likely to work.

[Banned]

Again, you should start out with the best gear you can afford. If you're making money via the band or your job or babysitting or whatever and choose to upgrade, great. Hopefully your playing has upgraded as well.

Yes, gear can only do so much. There was a saying that the sound you make comes from you and you alone and I wholeheartedly believe that.

I think the point, and I'll second or third it or whatever, is you need to learn how to play before you do anything. I've heard several bands in the past month that shouldn't even be playing. No clue. No talent. Yet the ego was there, that's for sure. That's a sure-fire way NOT to succeed.

By the way, Felix can probably make a cardboard box sound pretty good.

However, this is all good fodder for several other topics.

Sorry, got way off there (the topic, that is).

[bassist_25]

No, I think it's cool to go off on all of these tangents. It's good to get a number of ideas flying around from various members. We're all trying to get information from each other, so it's good when conversations steer off.

Though I dig Jimi's point, I still think that a pro-quality piece of equipment is still going to be better in a live situation. Obviously, some of the subtle nuances of a piece of gear may get lost in the room, but a well-voiced EQ is going to make it easier to tweak to a room. Quality drivers aren't going to turn muddy, etc. Even though the rich tonal qualities of an Eden rig or an SWR rig may get lost in a difficult room (i.e. Burgi's), I'd still rather try and tweak with that equipment than with something that's a budget line. There's a point when it just becomes goofy to upgrade. I'm not going to walk into a local bar rockin' a Ritter through a Glockenklang bass rig or anything, but I think there's a certain threshold of equipment quality that you must meet to have a professional sound. Of course, there's the subjective aspect of gear. I find Line 6 stuff to have a very compressed sound, but I would never argue by saying it isn't pro-level stuff.

But enough about gear talk...I agree with those who have said that there's no set forumula. Still, I think that there are things that are universal. I really think connecting with the fans on a personal level, whether you're playing original or cover material, is very important. I can come off aloof. It's not because I'm walking around with a big head; it's just simply because I'm an introvert. But over the past 8 months or so, I've tried to overcome that. Fans really dig it if you talk to them on breaks or at the end of the night. Sure, there's always the obnoxious drunks that you want to just leave you alone, but I find that most people are very down to earth and respectful of what we as musicians do. Likewise, I respect it when I'm talked to as a normal person. I've met a lot of cool people through gigging. I'm busy all week, so gigging is most of my social life. When I have a night off, I usually drive the 45 minutes to Altoona to hang out because there are friends there that I've acquired through gigging. I can show up at City Limits or Aldo's or Burgi's by myself and end up hanging out with some cats, either because they're fellow musicians or just simply people I've met through gigging.

[Banned]

Definately.

If you don't schmooze, you lose.

[MeYatch]

Pickup upgrades can really bring an instrument alive, but they won't immediatley take a ho-hum instrument and make it amazing. As some of you know, for a back-up, I have an SX Jazz Bass copy. It's a surprisingly good instrtument, and I'm constantly astounded by how nice of fretwork it has considering its price. I wanted to upgrade it, so it really would be a good pro-sounding backup. I dropped a set of Bartolinis in it, which ironically costs more than the bass itself. It definitely improved the sound; the lows were much tighter, and the mids were much smoother. Still, the highs are a little harsh. This is probably just due to the timbre of the wood. I could stick a set of EMGs, DiMarzios, or Norstrands in it and the highs would probably still be harsh. My point is while the SX is still a nice instrument, even after upgrades, it still isn't even in the same class as my Carvin.

you start to get into the incredible subjectivity of musical instruments. You have your rig set up for your carvin bass, your SX sounds different, as of course it would. I'll assume you probably messed with your EQ and stuff to try to get the best sound with your SX. But it is still quite possible that your SX would sound great through my rig, or someone else's rig. I know you go for a considerably higher toned sound than I do. Perhaps that works with your carvin, but not with the SX, and it might or might not work with my instruments. (which I consider to sound good)

I believe that there are good and bad instruments at all price points. Not just good value, or good for the price, but just flat out good.

Supposedly the old japanes squiers are phenomanal instruments, but with lousy electronics. I've heard from several people that the japanes fenders are equal to the american ones, but the pickups are not as good.

Pickups upgrades are obviously not the end all be all of how an instrument sounds, but it is an important factor.

I'd still rather play a squier with a good setup (including nut and fretwork) than an american fender with a craptacular setup.

[bassist_25]

I definitely do have my rig setup differently for my LB75 than I do my Jazz Bass, especially considering the Carvin is active whereas the SX is obviously passive. But the SX is still a little harsh in the upper regions. It's not a tone issue, but rather a timbre issue. It's dealing with the quality of the sound, and I don't think there's anyway to EQ it out. Again, the SX is still a quality instrument and I wouldn't think twice about using it live or recording with it. But if I play it, then pick up the Carvin, it's still night and day. old sKool has a Charvel 650 which I love the sound of. But still, even with a professional fret job and a set of active pickups, he feels and hears the difference of about a $1K when he puts it down and picks up his Jackson Soloist.

[MeYatch]

I definitely do have my rig setup differently for my LB75 than I do my Jazz Bass, especially considering the Carvin is active whereas the SX is obviously passive. But the SX is still a little harsh in the upper regions. It's not a tone issue, but rather a timbre issue. It's dealing with the quality of the sound, and I don't think there's anyway to EQ it out. Again, the SX is still a quality instrument and I wouldn't think twice about using it live or recording with it. But if I play it, then pick up the Carvin, it's still night and day. old sKool has a Charvel 650 which I love the sound of. But still, even with a professional fret job and a set of active pickups, he feels and hears the difference of about a $1K when he puts it down and picks up his Jackson Soloist.

word
but I doubt the audience does.

you had made the point that pro gear is one of the factors that helps a cover bands success. I agree, but only to a point. I don't think that a band that plays all boutique gear is going to get any more gigs or have any more success than the same band playing through instruments of an acceptable level of quality, whether that means playing squiers/epiphones, or if it means american fenders/gibsons.

I think somewhere in the middle is where it stops making any difference to anyone but the dude playing it.

[bassist_25]

Yeah, I doubt that the average audience member is going to say, "Wow, now that the guitarist is using that new JCM800 head, his tone has improved 10x." But pro gear helps in creating an overall professional sound. I went and saw The Hoods at Aldo's last week (killer band BTW, I'll be checking them out next time they come through). They're pretty much an original hardcore band. There guitarist was using a Mesa rig. He didn't have his mids scooped. He had a totally professional guitar sound. Everything he played was harmonically rich and full. He didn't sound muddy, and everything he played was as clear as a bell. That's what I'm getting at.

[MeYatch]

agreed, but I still maintain that the guitar players ability to use his rig tastefully is more important that what it says on the front of the thing. And I'm not factoring in playing ability.

[VENTGtr]

"I've been worrying a lot less in the last year or so about whether we
sound like the recording and just worry about whether it sounds good."

Excellent point. Playing with conviction the way that you like and having
fun doing so is way more entertaining, better sounding and interesting
than trying to play something the way it was recorded but not feeling it.

YOU have more fun and it shows. People can feel it. I'm always wary
when I hear people say, "They sounded just like the record" (Okay, it's
not quite the verbiage you hear nowadays, but you get the point).

When that's the case quite often when the band plays something not in
a similar vein it DOESN'T sound like record and can sound forced.

For example, I read on here a lot of people applauding the backing back
on RockStar. In fact, even they (Session guys and professional sidemen)
added THEIR own feel to the stuff that was covered.

Not to mention, live is different than a recorded version anyway (Anyone
prefer the studio version of "Want You to Want Me" over the "Live At
Budakon" version? Not a chance).

Live it, love it and do it up right.

My new proj has ended up with a bit more of a funk feel than anything I've
been in before and it's pretty cool. SO, we're goin' to embrace and I'm
looking forward to the whole writing new material process because I have
NO idea where it'll end up.

BTW, for anyone who doesn't know; Tim, who started this thread is actually
a really good drummer who does have giggin' experience.

Still, I think a lot of the posts on here are probably things we can all be
reminded of again and again. Regardless of what we play, originals, covers,
both, this is a subject the occasional revisit can't hurt.

Later,