Conference napalm::guitar

    
    This weekend I got out to see some friends of mine in two different
    bands.
    
    Band A had a lot of enthusiasm, but no great players.  More than a few
    bad notes, nothing really terrible.  "Learning to
    play lead" is a good description for one of the guitar players.   The
    vocals were OK, but nothing to write home about.  But, Band A must know
    100 good, well-known, danceable songs,  and they tried to play as many
    of them as possible.  No more that 2 seconds between songs, 15 minute
    breaks, and everyone having fun.
    
    The dance floor was *packed*, the crowd was having fun, and the cash
    register was making happy noises.
    
    
    Band B had *great* musicians and strong vocals.  Two guitar players
    doing intricate harmony work, interesting solos, right-off-the-record
    stuff, etc.  The band was *very* tight -- never a bad note or flubbed
    part.  But, if I had to intentionally pick undanceable music, I
    couldn't do any better than Band B's song list.  Jeff Beck's "Freeway
    Jam" is a great song, but not exactly a toe tapper.  The rest of their
    material wasn't much better.  Lots of Led Zep, obscure album cuts, some
    Allman Bros. They also took at least 30 seconds, maybe more, between
    songs without even trying to keep people up dancing.
    
    Few people danced during the night.   Most of the tables that
    had 2 or more women at 10 o'clock were empty by midnight. It was
    starting to look like men's night by the start of the last set, and
    even the men were leaving. 
    
    IMHO, Band B better wake up and smell the coffee!  When someone in the
    crowd yells out for Aerosmith, they usually aren't looking for "Seasons
    of Wither" (if that's the title..)  Ditto on the Black Crows.  People
    want to hear songs they recognize, and the women expect to dance to
    them!
    
    I know some folks here say they would leave if they hear a band do xxx
    because it's so over played.  Saturday night, Band B's audience would
    have *loved* xxx.
    
     
    Kevin
    
    

    Deja Vu on this subject (did this surface about 2 years ago?!?).
    
    I know this scenario all too well.  Usually, I play in band B, although
    one of my bands is a Band A...which do I prefer?  Well, Band
    B...because it's just generally more interesting to me, but I fully
    realize the crowd potential of Band A.  I know Band A will work more,
    but it's not really as fun, so...
    
    life is a compromise

    
    
    
    Yep, I feel right now that My trio with my pal Debbie and our new bass
    player is absolutely the gig that gives me goose bumps... But all this
    other stuff is a great opportunity to learn new music, sharpen my lame
    chops and make real money.. so, I'm just not closing any doors...  

re: band's selection of tunes

Ya know, I was just gonna start a topic on this, being prompted by Greg
House's comments in the setlist topic about hearing "The Song Remains The
Same" over "Taking Care of Business". I guess it comes down to whether you
consider yourself a musician or an entertainer (most of us are somewhere
in between, but where???).

I like to consider myself more of an entertainer. I like playing songs that
the *people* want to hear, not just what *I* want to hear! Sure, there are a
ton of good songs that I'd love to play in a band, but I know I'd never
do it. I might get a kick out of playing "The Song Remains The Same", but
its not near the kcik I get out of playing "Mony Mony" to a packed dance
floor with everyone singing along!!!

(I'll also admit that I happen to *like* a lot of pop music, so its not
really a "compromise to my principles" to play this stuff - I love it!!!)

alan

    re:  .1208
    
    You made an intersting comment about whether people consider themselves
    to be musicians or entertainers (first).
    
    The flip side of that is whether an audience, when they put on their
    duds and grab the car keys, is looking for musicians or entertainers
    (on that given night --- at that given venue).
    
    I guess it's a tough call:  what is customer satisfaction, what is
    quality, what is art, what is commercially viable, etc?
    
    I haven't got the answer but it's an important question for the band.
    \Gary

    why ask why?

    Definitely entertainers first.  Music *is* just entertainment to most
    people.
    
    My current band has just split into three bands for this exact reason. 
    The first band will do all original material, and I'm sure make no money
    whatsoever doing it.  The second band will take our current repertoire
    and add similar material that is much better known.  This band will
    probably make pretty good money, we expect to be doing more private
    parties and less clubs.  The third band will be doing a niche style and
    trying to leverage the presence of two founders of the area's currently
    *very* successful (and only) band working in the same style, doing
    again mostly private parties and few clubs.
    
    Note that all three bands have the same core of three members (myself,
    guitar and drums with all three singing), and the sum members of all
    three bands have worked together in numerous permutations over the last
    five years.  This way, there is enough variety to keep everyone busy
    without playing one style into the ground or overexposing any one band.  
    
    							Brian

    Well, I personally balk at calling it an "entertainer" vs "musician"
    split.  The band I'm involved in is way over in the band B camp;
    we do non-commercial, non-danceable, mostly original material.  But
    to suggest that I'm a "musician" and Alan Starr or Brian Rost aren't
    isn't right.  And I'd like to think that at least somebody in the
    audience is somewhat entertained at our gigs.
    
    I see it as more of a target audience thing.  Maybe 99% percent (or
    whatever) of the people that go to hear live music want to hear songs
    they recognize, like, and can dance to, and don't care how much a 
    virtuoso you are on your axe.  If you want to work a lot, it makes
    sense to target your material there.  There is small market for
    original and/or unusual music in a non-commercial vein.  We choose
    to target our material there, because it's what we like to play.
    We realize that we can't expect to work much and it's a tradeoff
    we're willing to make.
    
    /rick

Yeah, I'd have to say just about that ssame as everyone else.
I'd like to introduce a new phrase to:

Who here "Plays to musicians"  ?

A crowd of people dancing gets me off.  I can't help that, and I think
everyone would get off on it (else you wouldn't play in a band).  But 
"playing to musicians" is rush also.

"Playing to Musicians" is "Gee, the crowd won't get off on this as much as
 <insert your fave 1-4-5 progression here>, but the musicians in the audience
 will flip when we get this punch right (and not perspire).

I find that type of audience makes me a bit nervous.  Strange eh ??  But I 
promise that if y'all showed up at a HardBall show, I'd have butterflies like
condors...  And I'd certain try to rip up fretboard.

But there was another point here too.  And that was that musicians musicians
are mostly in the audience...No flame, but it seems to me if you want to play
out a lot and be a really happening band, you work on material that will please
a wide range of people (radio stuff !!).

jc

(Yes Buck, I was nervous when you showed up at The Mine that night  :^)

    re: Alan 

>Ya know, I was just gonna start a topic on this, 

    No need, I just did it.

>    being prompted by Greg
>House's comments in the setlist topic about hearing "The Song Remains The
>Same" over "Taking Care of Business". I guess it comes down to whether you
>consider yourself a musician or an entertainer (most of us are somewhere
>in between, but where???).

    I don't see how these two sentences relate to each other.  I was not
    speaking as a musician that would prefer to PLAY one over the other,
    but as someone that likes to see live music. The fact that I play music
    has nothing to do with the fact that I would prefer to hear a cool song
    that I like over one that I absolutely despise because I've heard it
    WAY too many times.  In fact, since both these songs are so old, I
    could have told you my preference for hearing a band cover "The Song
    Remains The Same" long before I ever played the guitar!  I thought
    "Taking Care Of Business" was lame back in 1973-74, when it was first
    overplayed on the radio (before I played an instrument), and I
    expressed my distaste for it even then by immediately changing the
    station when it came on.  I still express my distaste for music I've
    been overexposed to this way.  

    The effect this does have is that I don't go see many bands anymore
    because I can't stand hearing old moldy songs I hate.  I have to wonder
    if there aren't a lot of other people like myself who have quit going
    to shows because of this.  If it's true, then it's a vicious circle
    that will never end because the only people that will go see shows are
    the ones that only enjoy stale rehash music.  I think that's pretty
    damn sad myself.  If my conjecture is correct, then the overwhelming
    number of bands that play rehash stuff has ruined the club scene for
    the rest of us that don't, both as musicians and as listeners.

    re: the rest of this topic

    Like Rick C., I also hesitate to make the comparison between being an
    entertainer and a musician as though those are mutually exclusive.  I
    think you can be both.  

    I also believe that there is a huge amount of great danceable music
    that is familiar, but rarely played by cover bands.  It just rubs me
    the wrong way to have to hear "Takin Care of Business" for the umpteen
    millionth time because the band isn't creative enough to find a good
    dance song that people know and like that hasn't been grossly
    overplayed.
        
    Greg

    Oh yeah, in reading Jeff's note in .9 (after I wrote my reply that
    ended up in .10) there's something I should probably add.  I do not
    consider myself to be much of a musician and I have absolutely no goals
    whatsoever of targeting musicians as being my audience.  I simply do
    not have the skill to do that and I've found that musicians are
    absolutely the harshest critics of music anywhere.  They are almost
    invariably the hardest to please and the most difficult to relate to
    while you're playing.
    
    I've never had a non-musician come up to me after a song and tell me
    how bad I blew my guitar solo, or turn up their nose and leave because
    I hit a sour note or two, but that's happened a few times with people
    that called themselves musicians.  Why would I want to target someone
    who's absolutely the most critical of me as my audience (expecially
    when my skill level doesn't stack up).
    
    If I'm playing for people I want to entertain them, but I don't think
    that means I have to play songs I hate and I don't think that they all
    want to hear the same songs they hear from other bands in 9 out of 10
    bars down the street.
    
    I guess it doesn't really matter since I don't play in a band right
    now, but all I'm trying to say is that there is a very large middle
    ground in the topics in this discussion.  The situation is not like
    "Play 'Takin Care of Business' or not have anyone enjoy themselves and
    dance".  
    
    Greg
        

	It all depends on your audience. When I was the house band (8 months
	was way too long for me to - I don't care to do that sort of gig again),
	we had nights where we played predominately country, then others
	where we played Steely Dan and Jazz influenced music. Most of the
	time we played Oldies (50's/60's/70's/80's) dance standards - the
	goal was to party. Right now, that is what makes my band a paying
	proposition - And I don't often move my equipment unless there
	is money is involved. If you can't adapt to your audience, you'll
	have a problem playing live. If you can't improvise something on the
	spot, ytou'll also limit your audience. 

	I think that I'm a fairly sloppy guitar soloist, but I've had people
	tell me otherwise (probably because they enjoyed the party & I was
	a part of it). Of the bands (type A versus type B), I'd rather
	play in a type A band, because I don't care for the stress, I'd
	rather be entertainment (I made a deal with my keyboard player
	about 8 years ago - If I don't count his mistakes, he won't count
	mine). We have gotten progressivley better and more versatile over
	time, but never lost the connection with the audience. As much as
	I hate 'Proud Mary' and 'Old Time Rock & Roll', I still play them,
	I don't want to lose the energy in the audience.

	I usually play for private parties (I really prefer them over
	clubs - People come to party at one, and not always at the other).

								Jens

But Greg, you PLAYED Takin' Care Of Business on bass one night, remember ?
Guido was outta town and you  were filling in !!

Guido probably woulda been pissed if you walked out wih his guitar...

:)

    re: .-1
    
    Did we play that one that night?  At least it wasn't in front of
    people!
    
    But hey, I did notice you didn't invite me back...
    
    Greg
    
    PS, Guido would have been better off if I'd walked out with his
    guitar!  Ararar!

    Things must be different in America,`cos in England (in my area
    at least),hardly any of the bands do all covers. They may do 1 or
    2 in a set for the fun of it,but that`s about it. Most bands do 
    their own stuff. I certainly wouldn`t want to watch some band doing
    second rate rock n roll medley from the 50`s.Boring.
    
    Joe Strummer.
    

    I be curious - Is there any geographic factor involved? 
    
    Though I very rarely venture out into the club scene as part of the
    audience, it seems (correct me if I'm wrong) that, at least in 
    Massachusetts, the Boston area supports original music much more
    enthusuastically than Worcester does just 50 miles west.
    
    Is my observation correct? Is it duplicated in other parts of the
    country?
    
    Edd

    I believe there is to some degree a geographic factor involved.
    Most of the suburban club/bar bands play 90% cover material, where as
    in for instance, the Boston club scene is mostly originals... at least
    this was true when I was a clubber. I myself prefer to listen and dance
    to good rythmic/melodic original than to that "same old song" beaten beneath
    the ground by yet another cover band...which remind me of my "play in
    the garage only" days.
    
    Dave'
     

    ...'nuther question. Why is it that out of all the bazillions of 
    songs written you can take any two cover band's song lists and find
    that 90% (or some high figure) of the songs will match?
    
    It seems bizarre that given some of the more popular "dance music"
    artists (Abdul, J. Jackson, Madonna. (The artistic merits of these
    examples isn't my point)), a band can fill up the dance floor in
    4 beats with the intro to Mony Mony...
    
    "danceable music" seems to the draw, but only certain tunes???
    
    I'm not trying to bash the "standards", even though they aren't my cup
    of tea, but the tendency for audiences to respond to an absurdly small 
    sample of music kind of fascinates me...
    
    Edd (Always amazed at the number of people who will wet their pants in
    musical bliss at the first chord of "Freebird")

    Let's not lose sight of the fact that there are other reasons that
    people will put on their duds, get in their cars, go to a club, and
    plunk down their money than simply what the band is playing.
    
    On the other hand, clubs get defined by what kind of music they have in
    there... C&W bars, punker bars, coffeehouses, discos, fifties bars,
    etc., etc.  So people will make the first cut based on what they like.
    
    But, once inside, they have many other reasons for staying or returning
    than the repertoire or skill level of the band.  Not that that's not an
    important factor.
    \Gary

	I've gotten to the point where I really hate going to bars to
hear bands. The atmosphere just doesn't appeal to me,but I also find 95%
of the music I hear on the radio to be boring and not very appealing,
not to mention a rehash of something older. Since alot of bands try
to replicate what's on the radio, "bar bands" are really just an 
extension of the radio and in most case's a poor attempt. I'd rather
go hear a tight band which plays covers,but has a little more to offer.
than a human phonograph. Keep in mind that when bands played in the 
50's,60's,70's that they were playing for more than money or to cover
the latest or greatest hit on the radio. I don't hear this in bands 
these days. I believe the biggest problem with "Bar bands" GB Bands
and the like is they do typical lifeless renditions of most tunes. No 
showmanship,nothing extra. Then again I believe that they are there to fill
the "void of need" for all these functions whether a wedding or a bar.

	Having played in these types of situations for years(alot more
than I care to mention) I really don't miss the smoky bar rooms,the drunks,
and late hours,but I enjoy playing sessions with other players of similiar 
musical likes. I don't play covers and I play what I want,when I want. I get 
more enjoyment out of creating music and playing,than cloning music and 
playing it.


							Rick
	

         
    
           It definitly depends on the type of club & audience.
    Anyone who's gone to see Alan's band at "Bob's country bunker" would
    know that if you want to be asked back, You WILL play "Stand by your
    man". Or anything else they might request that you know. Most of these
    people are "Regulars" and we're there to entertain them.
           
    Besides, Those Bikers are big boys and we don't get no chicken wire -8)
    
    -dave-
    

>    ...'nuther question. Why is it that out of all the bazillions of 
>    songs written you can take any two cover band's song lists and find
>    that 90% (or some high figure) of the songs will match?

Becuase any band with experience knows which songs will go over well in
the clubs. There are a half-dozen songs that will fill the dance floor in
almost any rock club I've been to - "Mony Mony", "Taking Care of Business",
"What I Like About You", "Old Time Rock And Roll", "Roadhouse Blues", maybe
one or two more ("Hard To Handle" seems to be approaching that status).

Yeah, we try and offer different things - in the early sets we do everything
from "Mack The Knife" to "Losing My Religion", and pull out a couple forgotten
rockers like "867-5309" (Tommy Tutone) and "The Breakup Song" (Greg Kihn).

But when we want to insure that everyone is dancing and partying for the
third set, we pull out the good old rock standards - AND IT WORKS EVERY 
TIME!!! For the most part, these are songs that people WANT to hear and dance 
to! And if we're playing to the lowest common denominator, so be it.

alan
_constantly_on_the_search_for_more_"sure fire"_dance_songs_

	Speaking as an audience member, I personally prefer a mix of danceable
	and "sit back and listen".  Nothing like a killer "break" tune after 2
	or 3 Watusi jams on the floor.  I need a chance to catch my breath and
	I really appreciate something which gives the band a chance to show 
	their stuff.   

      Hey - we're booked steady so we *must* be a A band. I agree with the 
    comments of being sick of the standards to a degree, but like it was
    mentioned -  They work! I've done the band thing where we played
    obscure music (i.e. "Passage to Bangkok) and more intricate music. 
    Those bands absolutely did more for the musicians in the crowd, but
    then again most working musicians are out working the same nights you
    are! 
      So there, I'll say it. My band does "Taking Care of Business", Mony
    Mony, and "What I like About You" but we're not limited to that. 
    We manage to throw in some some more interesting stuff as well.
      FWIW - We've got two new songs lined up for this weekend's gig.
    Both current and danceable:
      
      Eddie Money -  "Heaven in the Back Seat"  (major backup vocals)
      Bryan Adams -  "Can't Stop this Thing we Started"
    
      I enjoy playing new material with very few exceptions. It's keeping
    our playing schedule pretty full. We just booked New Years for a 
    $1000. That should get me $200 no problem. The only overhead we have is
    the gas for the van and road crew.
    
    							-B()()M-
    						    (dance music slut)

    >							-B()()M-
    >						    (dance music slut)
    
    
    You know B()()M, admitting your problem is the first step to recovery!
    8^)

    ...and he knows what he's talking about! ;-)

I think geography has a lot to do with it.  There ain't dick for a originals
market here in the Springs.  It's either stictly dance/blues stuff, metal or
alternative stuff.  The band I'm in started out doin' half dance/half metal.
We played "Can't Get Enough" by Bad Co and ZZ Tops LaGrange at a metal bar 
and the place emptied like it was on fire !  That was a lesson learned.
I mean, how did the crowd know that we were gonna finish the set with Priest 
and Dokken ??  :)

Anyway, we learned quickly that the half-half stuff wasn't cutting it here,
so we chose to dump the classics (or "B list" them anyway), and perform all
pop metal.  I suppose we could've gone the other way, but we're all kinda
metal nuts anyway, so...

But, if you were to take a C/W classic like 'Your Cheating Heart', and
metalize it, you'd get a good reaction, because it fits the crowd, and
the probably have heard the original and feel that it needs a bit of
change anyway.

Some nights you'll need to pull the older dance tunes out of your set lists
and play them (there are songs that I play that only get played once or
twice a year, but I need to be able to play them), most of the time you'll
try to read the audience and play to fit thier needs (otherwise they'll
leave). I'd suspect that your standard sets are what keeps the audience
there - they are the barometer that the club manager uses to determine
if you'll be back or not. Most clubs have established patron expectations;
you need to meet those expectations no matter what your style is.

							Jens

Interesting discussion, and good topic too..

After reading all these replies, and knowing what I've finally come
to realize after all the years I played out there's a few things that come 
to mind.

    If you're out there trying to make every body in that club
    HAPPY you're there, and loving you to death,,, forget it..

    Most people in a crowd don't care if you play like Edddie Van Halen,
    or Neil Young.. they aren't there to marvell at our chops, nor our 
    $30,000 sound system.  

    They WILL pick up on good vocals, Very important to have good vocals.
	
    A band with a good female front person will attract a better crowd, 
    quite simply because I believe those bands can cover a wider variety 
    of material, (plus the obvious visual factor..  )

    If you don't play DANCEABLE, RECOGNIZABLE, material, you could have the
    greatest palyers the tightest sound, the premier equipment ----
    it's not gonna make you an instant hit with the club crowds ESPECAILLY
    in the "Mr. & Mrs. Front Porch" clubs.
    Truth be known, if I never hear, Twist-n-shout, Old Time Rock-n-Roll, 
    Long Cool Woman, Gimme 3 Steps, (to name a few) again, it'll be much too 
    soon,,,, BUT if you ever want to get a crowd up, play one of these,, if 
    you want to keep em up, play more of these.  They're defintely not the 
    most musically challanging tunes you'll ever play, but they are the
    tunes just about everyone in the house will dance too.

    and Finally,,,, 'gang', there not gonna sit their while we play Bohemian 
    Rhapsodhy !  If a Band insists on playing to appease their own desires, 
    (by playing  very progressive, highly technical material) then they'd had 
    better resign to the fact that the only people they are most likey to 
    please are themselves, and small percentage of the crowd, who most likely
    are musicians as well.  If this is the type of Band you're in, PLEASE let
    me know, I'd love to come hear you,,,  but I'd bet some change you spend
    alot of nights playing to light crowds.  It's not your fault, more likely
    your choice in material.


So, what this all leads to,,, (and this is all my humble opinion, but I've 
been around the bar stool enough to say it's a seasoned opinion at that) 
Given em good danceable tunes,  and **PACK** your set lists them,  
Chances are, you wont have an empty dance floor 80% of the night.  Add to 
that, a tight band, with good musicians and a great sound system, THEN you 
can even please the 10 to 20% of the crowd who are also musicians..   And
what the heck, throw in a few of those tunes you really ITCH to play.. 

>But, if you were to take a C/W classic like 'Your Cheating Heart', and
>metalize it, you'd get a good reaction, because it fits the crowd, and
>the probably have heard the original and feel that it needs a bit of
>change anyway.

YIKES!

    I could see "metalizing" a newer C&W tune, like "When the right one
    comes along" or "deeper than the holler", but I donno about those
    older, classic tunes...you'd probably have a Linch Mob head over
    to the Mine from Cowboys!!  8^)

I've been known to "re-due" (poor choice of words ;) Hanks "Tear In My Beer".
I kinda changed the words around a bit, cranked up the ole Mp1, and let
fly with the pick slides and down-stroking.  I'd post the changes to the
lyrics, excpet I'm sure everyone would take offense...  :)  Skip is 
real lgood at double-bassin' the country stuff too.  :)
jc

Hey, the Toxic Donutz did a metal/punk version of "Your Cheatin' Heart" at
the Heavy Metal Halloween Bash a couple years back! 

alan

>Hey, the Toxic Donutz did a metal/punk version of "Your Cheatin' Heart" at
>the Heavy Metal Halloween Bash a couple years back! 

    But it was a joke, right? (God, I hope.) Often when you take something
    from one idiom and force-feed it into another radically different idiom,
    you end up with a dog's head on a man's body sort-of-creation. It's
    rarely worthwhile. Not that it should never be tried but it's up to the
    person doing it to decide whether or not it works and is therefore
    worthy of public display.

    There's "interpretation" and then there's "mutilation". Big difference.

Well, my father-in-law saw the Donutz do it, and he loved it.
He's a country musician...Wagagagagaaa- I thought it was pretty good
too !!

jc (who's got it on vid!)

    RE:  Reconfiguring country ...
    My old band did `Rocky Top', with a speed metal drummer - you'll be
    able to hear on Guitarnoter's Vol.IV ...  8^)
    
    VOCALS will make or break most bar bands.  My last 2 bands were pretty
    strong in that department, and club goers/owners loved us.  Yeah, we
    played radio ga-ga, old rock standards, typical stuff, but the dance
    floor stayed packed - the cash register kept ringin', and there were a
    LOT of sad club goers/owners that were bummin' when we split.
    
    The bar scene isn't for everybody - for me, it *WAS* definitely my
    niche.  I really enjoyed seeing people enjoy the music, be it by
    dancing, buying us drink after drink (yes, fireballs were the drink of
    choice in both bands ...), or by standing ovations after `Rocky
    Mountain Way'.  Cheap thrills, sure, so what ?  8^)
    
    We didn't attract too many musicians to our gigs - so ?  My chops
    aren't good enough to dazzle that crowd anyway, like I said, I liked
    that environment.
    
    Scary (defending the workin' bar bands ...)

    
    
    I went in to Band B's bar at lunch time to talk to the manager, who is
    a friend of mine.
    
    It seems that Band B *did* make some reasonable $drink$ money for the
    bar. The manager was surprised, too, because the women patrons were
    clearly leaving.  But when the receipts were tallied, the $$ was there. 
    
    So, Band B will get booked again!
    
    Kevin

    -1
    
    Must have been "musicians night out"  8^)

>    bar. The manager was surprised, too, because the women patrons were
>    clearly leaving.  But when the receipts were tallied, the $$ was there. 

    Watch out! Danger! Danger!

    I might have missed something in an earlier reply but reading the
    previous reply I can't help but react. As most of you probably know,
    guys gnerally don't GO to a given bar because of the band that's
    playing. They go for the scenary(sp?). If there isn't a sufficient
    number of female bodies in the joint you won't have to worry about
    keeping a crowd 'cuz you won't have one to begin with.

    I used to wonder why certain bars become hot-spots only to later become
    cool spots. I finally figured the cycle out.

    First some givens: (a) women like to dance, and (b) women don't like
    creeps. OK?

    After a place becomes popular, the creeps start hanging out. These are
    the people that the babes were trying to get away from when they started
    showing up to begin with. At some point, they'll move along to a fresh
    pasture that is void of creeps. It doesn't take the rest of the
    population to realize that the place isn't happening anymore. So you
    then have a large population of young males wandering the streets trying
    to figure out where the females have started hanging out.

    And it's been my experience that they're hanging out at a place where
    there's dancing.
    
    But I could be wrong.

    --rjb

    I'll also say something here.  People don't/can't drink while they're
    dancing.  In fact, I'd say I usually drink substantially less on a
    night I'm dancing a lot for several reasons, primarily because I'm
    never available when the wait person comes around asking for orders and
    because if I'm moving that much I don't feel physically comfortable
    drinking very much (feeling really full of liquid is not conducive to
    enjoying dancing for me).

    If I'm just sitting around enjoying watching and listening to a band
    I'll probably have a few more then I would if I were hopping around! 

    I don't know if I'm typical, but I've noticed other people who'll go in
    a club, have a couple of brews and dance all night.  Probably makes the
    band feel great, but doesn't net a lot of loot for the owner.

>    As most of you probably know, guys gnerally don't GO to a given bar
>    because of the band that's playing. They go for the scenary(sp?). 

    I have to respond to this.  I hate to break it to ya, but I'm a male
    and it's very rare when I *don't* go to a club because of the band.  I
    could generally care less whether there are any members of the opposite
    sex there or not.  Surely I'm not the only one.  Not everyone that goes
    to clubs is on the pickup scene.

    Greg

    Greg knows what he's saying too!

    Sorry for stereo-typing, but the average American male as I know him
    doesn't play guitar and doesn't have a very highly refined sense of
    music appreciation. I'm not talking about the people in this conference.
    They're not typical. I've known plenty of bands that other musicians
    loved to catch and they ALL starve to death on the local club scene.

    The average American male whos out looking to get his comeuppance
    is certainly not going to go where a band is and pay a cover charge,
    etc.  He's going to go to Bennigan's or Chilis or any of those
    'meat market' type non-cover drinking establishments...

    Maybe I'm reflecting on a time gone by. Like I said, I could be wrong.
    Anyway, I still maintain, you want to keep a crowd? Make sure you keep
    the women.

   >> Anyway, I still maintain, you want to keep a crowd? Make sure you keep
   >> the women.
    
    
    That's always been my feeling about it.  Guys come in the door and take
    a look around.  If there are multiple groups of 2 or more women in the
    club, the guys usually stay.  If not, the guys have one drink and
    they're gone.  And as a generalization, women want to hear good dance
    music and don't care about "music for musicians."
    
    If I'm playing a gig and a large group of rowdy women come in together
    (all work together, softball team, etc.) it *absolutely* puts an edge on
    the night.  The women will dance, guys see the dance floor filled with
    women, and we're off and running.
    
    That's what makes Band B's gig strange.  Maybe over time the men *will*
    stop going to see them if them women stop coming.  Then again, maybe
    the women will catch on that every time Band B plays, the place is full
    of available guys?
    
    Beats me.  I do know that the club manager has two goals.  She (yes,
    the club manager is a woman) wants to make money.  Lots of it.
    
    Secondly, she wants the place to look like a good time when someone
    peeks in the door.  Lots of smiling, dancing people look like a good
    time.  
    
    She said that she would rehire Band B because the greenbacks were
    there.  But after the next gig who knows?
    
    Kevin
    
    

    re: .46
       You hit it right on the head Kevin! 
    
       The bottom line is that if the bar owner doesn't make enough money...
       he, or she will look elsewhere. It could be a great band, but no
       money in that register and these guys will be looking for a new gig.
    
    
    				Rock on,
    					Fred

    I feel like I'm extraordinarily fortunate right now.
    
    I'm definitely in a "band B" and while my other band doesn't quite
    match the description of "band A" it IS definitely more oriented
    towards entertaining than band B.
    
    I greatly and equally enjoy both.  Band A really kicked out at a gig
    this weekend and people were up dancing and I had a great time.
    
    No one will ever dance to band B (we do some REALLY obscure stuff) but
    I love it every bit as much.  It's extremely satisfying to be doing
    this kind of music, and frankly, I don't give a shit if not everyone
    else out there appreciates it, or if the bar owner makes enough dough.
    
    Band B knows that there ARE people who crave this stuff, and that we
    will always be able to get a gig here and there and we aren't looking
    for much other than that - an excuse to be doing this music.
    
    Bottom line:  I enjoy playing for the audience, it is SELF-REWARDING,
    but as much as I enjoy a hooting crowd, I can get equal enjoyment by
    doing music "for me".
    
    But I know JUST how fortunate I am to be able to have both kinds of
    musical outlets.

    To add another UK comment to this very interesting discussion I have to
    say that I support the 'Band A' type of approach if only cos I ain't
    that good to be in a 'BAnd B'. However, we played last Sunday night at
    a local pub for the first time (first time for any live band, they
    usually just have records on), to a mostly under 30's audience. I guess
    a lot of our material appeals more to an over 30's audience so the
    audience turnover was fairly regular, i.e. people came and went during
    the evening, some more than once. Anyway the landlady re-booked us
    straight away for 4 weeks time cos the place was busy. Those people
    who have commented on our choice of material generally like the fact
    that we play stuff that people know, it may not all be dance stuff, in
    fact in UK pubs there is usually no room to dance anyway, they go to
    the pub to meet their friends, have a few drinks and talk. A band being
    on is just something else happening. A major factor then is how load
    you play, but that's another topic.
    
    Richard Bell (Trainee Lead Guitarist)