The DNJ thread morphed into an interesting subject that deserves its own thread. Ian eloquently stated a change in his passion of playing arrangers. Others referred to quitting or retiring. Then I ran across a local article featuring an interview with Frank Sinatra Jr.

This is what he had to say about his father working right up to his death:
It�s obvious that Frank Sinatra Jr. takes seriously his role as the keeper of his famous father�s flame. But he also believes that he, and the music, helped extend not only that legacy, but the life of the man himself.
�That working environment he put himself in is what kept him alive,� says the 65-year-old singer, who was his father�s band leader for the last seven years of his life and encouraged him to keep performing as long as he could.
�That was the most important thing � Now that I�m approaching that age, I know that the dirtiest word in the English language is �retirement.� You get old, you get sick and you die. I am firmly convinced that means death. He was working, and it kept him alive.�

The entire article can be found here: http://www.pbpulse.com/events/2009/12/29/sinatra-jr-happily-picks-up-the-torch/
Eddie

One of the things working at the retirement communities, nursing homes and assisted living facilities does, is provide you a window into the future. You can readily see what happens to those that decide to retire and do nothing for the rest of their lives--they quickly fall apart and die.

The flip side of the coin is also readily seen when you encounter those that remain very active. Some continue to work well into their late 80s and beyond, and a significant number of individuals pursue other activities that may be somewhat demanding physically and mentally, but still within their capabilities. You'll see them on the walking trails, riding bikes, fishing, boating, and dancing. I know many folks in this category, and nearly all will tell you that they'll continue to do what they do until someone pulls the sheets over their face--it's what keeps them alive.

My passion for performing has waned somewhat over the years, but I still have fun being an entertainer. The physical demands have decreased to some degree by the advent of lightweight keyboards and amps. If I was still lugging 50-plus-pound keyboards and 100-pound speakers around, especially after experiencing a heart attack, the demands would be beyond my current, physical capabilities. Fortunately, advancements in technology have made it possible for old codgers such as myself to continue our favorite avocation.

Good topic Eddie,

Gary

[This message has been edited by travlin'easy (edited 01-01-2010).]

I made my living as a State Farm agent for years, supporting my family. During this time, I taught myself the organ and keyboard. Eventhough I was somewhat successful and retired in 2000 at age 59, I always wondered what kind of musician I could have been if I had devoted fulltime to music, instead of moonlighting at nights in retaurants and bars. After retirement I have endeavored to carry on with that quest.
I have no regrets as I needed steady income for my family and I venture to say, financially, I made the right decision.

At 69, I play out 3 or 4 times a week and can't wait to get started early in the morning to improve my acts. I have a studio full of TOTL keyboards,computers, Receptor, controllers, etc to keep me busy with many projects(some call them toys).

This is what keeps me going at 69, and I will never quit trying to be just a little better. I was told by an old pro, many years ago, that one should keep on performing until it becomes a job, then quit. Many have had no choice, as this is how they have fed the family. I may never be as good as they, but I love every minute of it and spend about 10 hrs a day doing it.

At 64 years old, I have had 9 weeks off from playing since right after my 11th birthday.

Every once in a while, I get down in the dumps. Right now, for instance, I'm not recovering very well from damage to my left hand...nerve damage...not good for a "walking left hand bass" B-3 player.

But, every time I get to the point where I'm considering throwing in the towel, I run into a player or tune that inspires me.

The "deal breaker" would be when you stop learning/improving.

I stopped playing a very lucrative 14 year patio job because of the nature of the snobs who frequented the place, rather than just be miserable. Then, I took a job at a little buffet place...$8.95, all you can eat. Everyone warned me that I would ruin my reputation, but, I stayed 3 1/2 years and am now going to the owner's 2nd restaurant-a well-known Chinese place.

Music is what you make of it. For me, if I stop playing or working, I have failed and ceased to do something that has been a major part of my life for 80% of my life.

After all, that's the only way I ever got laid (LOL)!


Sorry, folks...priorities (in the past), you know.


Russ

I'm in sync with everything said so far with the exception of the above comment. I'm sure Gary might agree that some of those people in NHs are not there because they gave up or even gave up because they were there. Each case is personal. I just wanted to clarify that I do not accept, nor do I think Gary purposely set out to create such a stereotype.

Is this why you don't do NHs, Russ?

Happy New Year, my friend.

Taike



------------------
Bo pen nyang.

Bernie, I love your story.

You did make the right decision. It's a lot of fun for me doing music full time, but as my wife is a financial underachiever (with enough beauty to compensate), it is tough for me to make enough $$. I make more than the average US individual, but a little less than the average US family.

I'm hoping that by sprucing up my website with video and a CD for sale and targeting some of the higher paying gigs available for arranger keyboardists - that I can bump our family up income-wise.

At 47, I'm no spring chicken either. I'd love to be performing at 77, but not hauling equipment to two shows a day driving 23,000 miles a year. It's tiring for me now - but unless I build up more of a nest egg, I might have to be hustling when I'm older instead of kicking back.

I recall the saying, "It's better to live burgeois and think bohemian than to live bohemian and think burgeois" meaning it's better to live well materially and have artistic thoughts than to live like an artist and to be thinking of material comforts.

Beakybird

Cass,

Most of the folks I meet in the Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Centers are not there by choice--they're there because of some sort of physical problem them could not overcome. That's not the point I was trying to make. I have, however, seen people, including my own father, retire at age 62, sit down in front of a TV set and rapidly deteriorate. After 45 years of driving big rigs, he retired and said "I'm never going to work another day of my life." And, he meant just that. In less than 10 years he was dead. I meet folks in retirement communities that feel the same way. They figured that once they retired, the best thing they could do was nothing. Doing nothing will quickly bring about their untimely demise. As for me, on the other hand, I hope to be shot by a jealous husband at age 108 while climbing out of a second story window with my trousers down around my ankles, and a 19-year-old lady screaming "Don't Leave Me! (Gotta' think ahead. )

Cheers,

Gary

Gotcha, Gary. I assumed as much, but I just had to point out the stereotype you may have created. I didn't think you meant your original coment literally. Thanks for that further clarification. You are 110% correct.

For me,. music has always been a conversation. You talk to the guitarist, he talks back. The sax player picks up on the conversation, adds something new, all of a sudden the conversation goes somewhere you didn't expect, and your ears and attention pricks up.

You don't get that with an arranger...

Don't get me wrong, it is an amazing tool to make music with, you all know how much I love mine! But I don't look to it for inspiration, or to give me musical purpose. It looks to ME to make the inspiration, to work it so that it doesn't do the same damn thing every time you call up the same damn style...

Many of us here are retired from playing fulltime, or amateurs. But are still playing with a tool designed to assist you make something that SOUNDS like real music... but it isn't. There's no conversation. Just a monologue.

If you are looking to find a purpose in playing, I suspect you are going to find it getting out and playing music with real people again. You probably started music like that, and if you have the time for it now, seems a good thing to end up doing it that way, too... Rediscover what made making music the obsession that it became.

This last year has found me primarily playing in bands, rather than doing duos or solos, which has been my main thing for, on and off, the last decade or so. And my playing and my commitment to making the best music I can has never been more firm. I was starting to treat playing as a job. But now I'm back to treating it like a calling.

If your arranger is starting to pale a bit, don't spend $5000 trying to simply get a more elaborate arranger. It won't solve the problem other than temporarily (you can get used to anything!) because it STILL, despite sounding better, is still NOT a conversation. It's a one way street, musically. You do all the talking, it just listens.

Find some musicians to play with that have something to say to YOU... Bet you you'll come up with something new to say back.

What she meant was, "Don't leave me without paying".

chas

I now want to pursue the things I set aside while I pursued music for 45 years.
I don't feel I've retired to do nothing just different priorities.
But at 60 I consider myself young enough to still change. I may decide to move the music back into the forefront. But for right now I enjoy the freedom of choice, I don't have to work.

[This message has been edited by mikeathome1 (edited 01-02-2010).]

You always bring something decent to the party, Diki...

I tend to disagree in that I think you can have a conversation as a Solo.

My first thought is that I converse with the audience. I see first hand the effect of my interacting with them musically. I intentionally have no set lists to work from because I think that's a bit limiting. How do I know what to play? Its a feel. I'll read the room and get a sense what's going to work well on a given day and go that direction.

I also feel like I have a conversation directly with my KB. Different styles, instruments, tempos, etc. are also done a lot on the fly depending on what mood they're/I'm in that day.

Where I think we're on common ground is that there's a lot of arranger players who don't sound very inspired. That may be due to several factors. Talent, attitude, work ethic, personality, etc.




------------------
Bill in Dayton

Diki, your reference to the "conversation" between musicians is beautiful. At it's best, it is an unspoken dialogue that results in something much greater than the sum of it's parts.

It takes players of similar abilities and commitments, but when it happens, there's nothing like it.


A very clear, elegant way of putting things that really "nailed" a great aspect of being a musician.


And my old friend, Taike! I just realized that old Kentucky ham is old wrinkled andd smells bad, but people really dig it.


Now, WHERE'S THAT LIST OF NURSING HOMES? (LOL).


Be well, all!


Russ

Diki.....a great post.....a really great post. It's got me thinking now about "direction" rather than giving up music altogether. I can see now why subconsciously I've been dragging on buying a new arranger. There is no real pot of gold at the end of that path anymore.

Yesterday, I was at a party with friends. There is an all-lady singing group that also attends, and we get together and have fun...me playing piano for their sing-a-long.
That was MY "conversation!" Much more satisfying that my OMB!

Bill.....I think you missed Diki's point if you don't mind me saying so.

I don't mind at all, Lucky...

Maybe I worded it poorly but Diki clearly says the spontaneous interaction doesn't happen with arranger players because all you interact with is the arranger, which is a one way deal.

I interact daily with my audience and that effects - in real time - what and how I play.

As the leader of my own quartet for the last 11 years, I do understand what Diki's line of thinking is. I interact differently with them than I do when I'm flying solo of course.

Ironically, sometimes I feel like I'm more creative by myself than when I'm with the band, lol...

------------------
Bill in Dayton

I remember the bad gigs. Members drunk. Some one not showing up. Arguments over what song to play. Arugments over which one in the band does the extra hot chick like and it goes on and on. Probably now with the drugs like meth it's even worst in some cases.

Just a while back I got a call for a Thursday nite show in the park for the City that I live in. They said a local scheduled band couldn't play because the drummer was sick.

Now I know there are many drummers in this town that aren't working every Thursday nite. Couldn't they get a replacement for one night?

I couldn't stand working with a group like that.

Is it absoulutely necessary for the drummer to hit every accent for every note perfectly for a 2 hr gig in a park. Now if this was for an Ed Sullivan show that might be different. Is he still on TV?

People love hearing my sax playing with sequences. Soul Seranade, Harlem Nocturn even Yakety Sax and many standards like "Darn That Dream." I get great compliments on my vocals also. No one yet has said I love your keyboard and the way you play it. And I don't have to fight over a woman. I get the pick of the litter. Ha! Ha!

No need to get up-set, this is just something I know that went on with many bands in New Orleans. I worked with 4 musicians that went on to work with Al Hirt and One with Pete Fountain.

Not bragging, just didn't want folks here to think I played with some band in a garage and was making comments like this. Been there Bought the T-Shirt!

I'll stick with my OMB. I sit-in with several groups on my trips back to New Orleans. If you're ever around N.O. look up my old sax friend Jerry Jumonville. He still plays with bands around the French Quarter.

Now don't get me wrong, PLEASE, but I do seem to sense some kind of elitism going on here, namely in the sense that arranger players see themselves as being IT while other musicians (drummers, guitar players, etc.) are of a much lesser caliber.

Brickboo, perhaps you haven't found the perfect drummer yet but, believe me, they're out there. Even on Thursday nights. Perhaps sax players never get sick.

I think the attitude of "I lead, you follow" seems to stick its head out here. Correct me if I'm wrong but I always thought that one follows the drummer, not the keyboard player, as the drummer is the anchor of the band.

On numerous threads there've been people berating the drummer, guitar player but never themselves. Yet there are more guitar players out there playing with others than there are arranger players. Why would that be?

I think -and this is strictly my opinion- that way too many OMB arranger players actually believe that they're leading an entire orchestra just because an arranger comes with a lot of voices thus they see no need to play along with others. Doesn't that sound like egotism? Could it be that drummers and guitar players just don't wish to put up with such?

Diki's post has a lot of truth in it. I, for instance, have never met a musician that wouldn't want to or wish he/she could jam with others. Except here on SZ.

Regards

Taike

------------------
Bo pen nyang.

I know there are much, much better keyboard players than me out there. Ask Cassp, I've been negative with him about my own kb skills, but he says I'm wrong. No elitism here, lol...

I've played in bands a long, long time and I've never seen one where everyone followed the drummer. That's NOT to say we're not all keenly aware of the tempo, but as the kb player/lead vocalist...if I decide to push the tempo a tad, my guy knows how to follow me. In my quartet, we've worked together for 11 years or so and me, the drummer and bass player all move as one. The sax player does his thing...

That said...

I don't think its elitist if someone decides for whatever reason to play with only an arranger, as opposed to other instruments. Its just different.

I've played in bands since I was 17. That's 32+ years of working in that format. I've done that and continue to a few times every month. Working with an arranger the last five years has been awesome as it is at least as cool but in a different way.

My band won't/can't rehearse. That limits what we can do detail wise on our tunes. We've come up with an approach where we're able to work in tunes in a way that the audience enjoys and dances to. Not all the ideas I have for material can work in the band, but almost anything I think would work CAN work in the solo mode. The learning curve for me with a new tune is much shorter than it is for my band. The band will get through it, the guests will dance, but its very simplistic. As a Solo, I can produce a much more polished tune much faster. That's one advantage of working by myself. Typically, I think my solo work is more polished and complete sounding. Can't say that for the band, especially with new material. However, it is 4 actual musicians interacting on stage. The interactions are different

One's not better or worse, just different...


------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-02-2010).]

???????? I think this would be a good time to throw this in the mix. I thought you did a great job with these two songs which I downloaded a while back:

Personality.wma
Petir Fleur.wma

Lucky

------------------
Bill in Dayton

Spot on, Bill.

Your main problem with an arranger is, unless you use different styles for the same song every time you play it, no matter what sounds YOU use, the backup band are going to play it IDENTICALLY each time (assuming you don't hit the wrong chords or use an inappropriate Variation)...

No matter what disadvantages you think might exist working with other players (and it would be an eye-opener to hear what some of these dissed other players think of the poster! ), at least they are going to throw something fresh at you from time to time. The price you pay for a night that leaves you high on music is a night that isn't so good. But your arranger will never surprise you, never challenge you, never outplay you (well, I guess that depends on the player!), never make you reach down for something you wouldn't have come up with by yourself...

If consistency and repeatability are your gold standard, it's the tool of choice, second only to the SMF WS's in always doing the song the same way each and every time. But, if I'm playing with a bunch of live players, hearing the song played identically each time they do it bores the hell out of me. Might as well use a CD...

An arranger IMITATES what real musicians do. You think those styles were made by musicians that play something identically each time? But the style does, once it is made. Same fills, same guitar patterns, same bassline, same horn licks. Live music just doesn't do that... And, I'm sorry to say, the general public knows the difference. Or there wouldn't BE any live bands.

This incessant repeatability is what I have been going on for a long time about arrangers. It just isn't REAL. To be honest, I don't think that sound by itself is what makes a great arranger, it's how much variation and spontaneity the style section can throw at you. Why just four Variations? Why only six or so fills? Why just the one break/fill? (And yes, I know the Audya is one of the first to address the B/F issue).

It's kind of strange, because the Audya has addressed a couple of my pet peeves about arrangers... more breaks, and some way to introduce extra phrases in a quasi random manner to add more variation to the Variations, but on the other hand, it also relies quite heavily on audio loops, which by their very nature can't be changed much at all. Some of the Audya features are a generation ahead of the rest of the TOTL pack.

But for arrangers to start to give us the same experience that playing with a GOOD live band gives you (I'm afraid I tend to think that most of the live band naysayers never had the opportunity to play with the best - especially, sorry to say it, but from listening to some demos, it's easy to see THEIR playing skills aren't up there, either... hard to get the best to play with you if you aren't at their level), it is going to need a LOT more features designed to impart variation depending on how YOU are playing. Features that make the arranger follow your dynamics are a good start, although I'd like to see more than just getting louder or softer, and see different parts entirely switch in and out, and then features that look at whether you are playing 'busily' or not, and respond to that, features that look at your 'pocket', and impose that on the rest of the style, features that look at the inversions you are playing, and make musical decisions that mirror what real players would do...

There's a LOT that arrangers could do to mimic the live band experience, but other than Audya, I don't see a lot of innovation going on in that area. Tons of work getting the sounds that YOU play more realistic, but little to make the parts that the style section parts more realistic, and I mean realistic with respect to note choices, not just the sound, which at this point, I think is as realistic as it needs to be - were it tied to more realistic playing it would fool anyone. Right now, little of it fools me, and I know it ain't the 'sound'.

Don't get me wrong, you all know how much I love using arrangers... but I am a LONG way away from admitting they are an adequate substitute for playing with really good players. They make a great choice for economic gigging, they are the easiest way to put something together to do a solo OMB act or duo, and they never gripe at YOU for your playing shortcomings or personal habits (we might be better people if we followed their example )... If you took this forum seriously, you would think that only paragons of virtue played arrangers, and that ALL other players are nothing but lazy slackers with poor hygiene and bad timing. Me, I think it's a more even distribution of flaws and faults than we wold care to admit!

This isn't meant to be 'elitist' (the word that always gets trotted out when we start talking about REALLY good players, unless they are already stars, of course! You never hear Paul McCartney being accused of being 'elitist' just because HE prefers real players over automatic backing ), but I am afraid to say, if you think that playing with an arranger is as satisfying musically as playing with real players, you simply haven't played with any really good ones...

Sorry...!

It is satisfying to your bank account, and maybe your ego (I can't count the number of times I've heard demos here by their proud posters that had timing on them so bad, no decent musician would ever tolerate it!) and it is convenient, but arrangers have a LONG way to go before you can walk off stage with the same high you get from interacting with great players. Interacting with the audience is a TOTALLY different type of experience to 'talking' with a skilled player that understands music, understands his axe, and understands how to make a meaningful musical 'conversation' that lifts you higher than you thought you could go. You can 'interact' with your audience just the same from a band or an OMB, but you can't interact the same way with real players and an arranger.

JMO...

Bill said:
"I have to say, I despise Petit Fluer, but we get requests for it all the time. It's our stock Tango...I just don't like it."

I was never crazy about the song either, but I like the way YOU guys did it!

Lucky

Lucky-

The funniest thing is that while 50+ people dance to every time, there's one cute old couple that always requests "their tango" every night. How is that so funny? While everyone else is out their doing Tango steps-they fox trot.

The couple that requests the tango, doesn't tango, lol...

Thanks again for the kind words-you should sign my guest book...

------------------
Bill in Dayton

You make several good points, but I'm going to suggest that in some cases, the kind of music you perform and for whom, can dictate what kind of conversation occurs.

There's some great jazz players on the SZ. Dave M., Russ, etc. The kind of music you do Diki, I also thinks lends itself to a lot of quality and spontaneous creativity. Of course there's a lot of nuance stuff going on that differs from night to night. As much as I love my T2, and think I'm pretty proficient at playing it, there's NO WAY I can pull that off. The water's way too deep for me and I'd drown quickly.

With regard to my personal situation, my band is not a jazz band. We are a dance band playing for a crowd of dancers typically 70 years old and up on most nights. My goal and our job isn't to be fundamentally "creative and spontaneous" for the kind of jobs we're hired to play at. Our job is to provide well played, consistent, traditional dance beats to the kind of tunes these folks like.

I suppose I could insert some exotic twists and turns into our songs but by and large, its not appropriate. They get twitchy if we even modulate, you know?

They want predictable, straightforward music. My rhythm section provides a very solid foundation for them to dance to and for my sax player to play off of. There's another dance band in the area who have been criticized because they hired a great jazz bass player. Are they more interesting now? Maybe. More spontaneous? Perhaps. But they're losing gigs because the dancers who followed them claim the beats all wrong now and its too hard to follow. If they're heading in a jazz direction then they may be prepared to replace some old clients with new ones, but I don't think that's their plan, lol...

My point is that just because you play with live musicians, its not always desired to have a lot of spontaneous creativity in the context of a traditional dance band. In other musical styles, yes...

Bringing this back full circle to arrangers. I have found that the vast majority of my clients that have switched from the quartet to my duo or solo work are no less happy with the quality of my music. Neither are the dancers. I play very differently when in arranger mode than I do when with the guys, but my goals and the end results are just as good.

Good conversation!

------------------
Bill in Dayton

I think you are reading too much into what I say... I am as happy playing dumb dance music, or country, or reggae, or just about anything, as I am playing jazz. In fact, I don't play much jazz professionally, there's little market for it round here, and I prefer to play as well as possible, and sorry, but the bar is just too high with jazz for me to compare myself with the greats! I can cut it in Nashville or New York as a session guy doing R&B or country, and keep up with most of the top players (or close enough to work, anyway!) but jazz is a medium for virtuosos. I'm just a hack, really... I'd rather not play it than play it poorly

But even a dance band, or a country band, or basically ANY live band will put in more variation on any given night (AND make it work musically if they are good players) than any arranger ever will. Now, of course, that's not REALLY necessary for the audience (unless you have a LOT of repeat customers every night, and you can deal with then simply by playing different tunes every night), but, as this thread kind of pointed out, it may be more important for your own interest than you think.

There seem to be a LOT of players on this forum that don't EVER play much with others. And I can't think of anything that would send me screaming to the loony bin faster than HAVING to make music every night with something that NEVER deviates, never gets even a LITTLE creative (even dance music can be spiced up with a little creativity... it doesn't have to be much - a little goes a long way!), never makes you smile, never helps you overcome your ennui...

If your arranger's monotony doesn't bother you, then all is well. But this thread got started by some well known members here voicing a problem with ennui of the musical kind.

And I still say that playing with others is the cure, NOT getting a different arranger

I think players that are feeling stagnated or a little bored with their situation really need to do some quality reflection on what the cure might be.

If you feel like you're wanting to express things but can't to such a degree that it discourages you from playing, then it may be time to look at a different kb. If its not that, then its probably more of a internal/personal issue that needs examined.

Personally I haven't really looked at changing boards recently. Hopefully the next edition of the Tyros line will be significantly different from #3 and I may buy one. I've been very satisfied with the T2...

Thinking on this, I'm having a ball playing full time as I head into my 15th year of performing for a living. Ironically, I feel more creative/liberated when playing my arranger than I do when with my band. Weird, eh?

Different strokes, I guess...

------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-04-2010).]

I guess I must fall into the weird category as well, then. As I mentioned in another thread, I haven't run into this falling off of interest or ennui either.

As structured as arrangers are in the rhythm and accompaniment departments, it doesn't stop your right hand from doing the business. Arrangers are, after all, a compromise and can never replace the live band experience we were in for all those years. But, as the old saying goes, you cut your cloth to suit your needs. For some it's a matter of economics, for others it may be a case of not having other people available to form a group, and for still others it may be, given the general demographic of arranger players, a matter of health issues that prevent a person from going out and playing gigs. In short, it takes all sorts.

Diki has a certain amount of freedom in that he usually has an able guitarist to work along with for his audience, while Bill, in his solo OMB work, plays what his audience requires, the modern day equivalent of a strict tempo dance band. Though it may be just a wee bit looser than that, eh Bill?

Strict tempo dance bands, in their day, played the same arrangements every night, even down to the same notated solos. I never played in one - it would have driven me nuts, but to all practical purposes, apart from instrumental timbres and nuances, there's little difference in the end product between a strict tempo dance band and a present day arranger.

Fortunately, there are markets for everything and fitting comfortably into the market of your choosing probably goes a long way toward your satisfaction/interest level.

Good stuff, 124...

Your comments on the old dance bands really stood out to me in that it sounded like you were describing my dance band. Tempos, Solos, etc. really don't vary gig to gig at all. That jives nicely with my comment in my last post where I said, "Ironically, I feel more creative/liberated when playing my arranger than I do when with my band."

Solos, arrangements and mostly material change when I'm either by myself or working as a duo-with the arranger. In the dance idiom, I do stay within certain restraints as I try to always filter decisions with regard to its "danceability." My book for the Duo when working with the arranger is much bigger, by several hundred tunes. I've played weekends where I used the band for one dance, then the Duo for another the next night and haven't needed to repeat anything. Six sets of dance music with no repeating anything is fun...

The most creative environment for me is my work in Retirement Communities and Nursing Homes. The audiences are changing quickly in these facilities and the material I can perform in some is almost limitless. In some I play Big band, Classic Country, hymns, etc. while in other that want almost nothing but rock from the 60's and 70's. That includes the Stones, Beatles, and so on...

I really have a great situation where throughout a typical month I get to perform a lot of really cool music, in very different ways. My schedule has a significant amount of variety built into it.

------------------
Bill in Dayton


[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-04-2010).]

Good imput, 124. Playing sessions or section work where all parts are charted is easy for me, and BORING!

"Creativity" is one of the most misunderstood concepts in the communications business.

The loose interplay...that unspoken communicaton that results in a unique, fulfilling performance Diki describes is, to me, the ultimate.

And, while I understand his humble placement of himself in the array of top jazz players and the difficulty/competitiveness, I'd jump on the bandstand with him in a heartbeat.

Thing is, many players don't really need to be creative to feel fulfilled or to get the job done. Playing a variety of types of music is not always creative. Same thing with some of the top rated photographers and artists I've worked with in my time. Some are good at the mechanics of drawing a perfect picture or setting the lights and camera settings to get EXACTLY what is required. And these "linear thinking" photographers, artists and musicians fill a real need in the world.

But that's not what the folks like Miles Davis of the world do (or did).

To me, the exact tempo big band work of the past would have been like working on an assembly line.

Different strokes, for sure.


Good imput on a subject with no "right" answers, all.


Russ

And I still say that playing with others is the cure, NOT getting a different arranger.

I'm not sure, Diki, but for the most part I believe the vast majority of the Synthzone's active participants have been in a band at one time or another. I've been in a couple really good bands, one for more than five years, and yes, we had fun. And, like many here, for one reason(s) or another, all of which have been posted in the past, we opted to go the OMB route.

The players that play ballroom dance gigs every week, often a couple times a week, do a job that I could never do. To me, playing the exact, same songs, week after week, after week would drive me nuts.

For those that need to be reinvigorated with their arranger keyboards I suggest try learning new songs every week. If that doesn't work, learning how to create voices, styles, and learning the inner workings of your keyboard can be quite challenging.

Cheers,

Gary

OMBs are much more convient for everything including practice learning new tunes dependability ect.That's all Im saying. Some musicians are good some very good some like Dexter, Coltrane, Rollins, Tyner, Petersen, Jones, Zoot etc. are great. Most will never reach their calibre.

I still like my OMB.

I'll say one thing, Brickboo, you certainly do have good taste in musicians.

chas

124 ... I find some contradiction in your statements ... First you say you can let your right hand 'do the business' and then you say there is little difference between the 'regimentation' of a chart playing dance band and an arranger ...
I realize that we may have certain limitations depending on the clientele we are playing for, but I find that the arranger allows me a great deal of flexibility in what style/rhythm I use for a song, and I can always vary my 'right hand solo' ...
BUT... as I have said in the past, I would give 'almost' anything to be playing with the band we had 'back in the day' ...

t.

For me to be as satisfied with arranger playing as being in a GOOD band (I still think that, if you are satisfied with an arranger musically, you haven't been in a band where just a look from one player to the next can elicit something magical), it has GOT to be more than JUST about me and my right hand

I expect input from my players, as they expect input from me. And you get NONE from an arranger. Sure, you can make music that SOUNDS like the band is cooking, but it ain't. It's reheated cooking. The cooking was all done in advance (usually by the style makers, not you), and all you are doing is dish it out. Your not a cook, you are a server in a soup kitchen, dishing out soup to those too poor to afford a real meal. Let's face it, how many of your audience would rather listen to a REAL bigband if they could afford to?

Most, I would imagine.

I am sorry, but one other thing springs to my dirty mind when I hear the expression 'your right hand doing the business' And I feel there's a lot of truth to that comparison. Yes, your right hand can get the job done, but don't you feel that it's SOOOO much better if there's a cute girl involved?

That's music. Better if you are not alone...

I�ve only had the time to read this thread loosely, so pardon my error if I�m �reading� it incorrectly.

Bill, I DID notice the interchange between you and Diki. IMO, you�re too intelligent NOT to see what Diki is saying. Or maybe you DO see it, but prefer your own views still? But even I have to agree with him at this point in my own career. It�s not about are you comfortable with your OMB keyboard, or are you satisfying your audience, or are you creative enough for what you�re doing now, etc If I read Diki correctly, he�s saying that, if you make the choice to play with other musician s, they�re going to wake up more creativity inside of you. You�ll be getting ideas that you can�t get from a static keyboard that knocks out the same rhythms day in and day out. He�s NOT dissing OMB keyboards, just pointing out the advantages of working with others, feeling different rhythms and backing.

I�m really emphasizing this because he hit the nail on the head as to why I�m probably burning out and feel like quitting music. I�m thinking about the whole month of October, when I do mostly Oktoberfests with different throw-together trios and quartets every gig. What a difference in my playing and my attitude. I can work off of them, get new ideas for riffs, learn different songs, interact both musically and personally on the bandstand. In short, it �wakes me up� and causes me to see things I don�t see when I�m doing a solo. Even when I backed up that all-girl singing group at the party last week. I found myself doing things on the piano I don�t normally think of when I�m playing by myself!

Now I�ve been doing a one-man-band all my life so you won�t find more of a crusader for these keyboards than me. That is, until Diki started talking his stuff here. He really covered the topic effectively. I forgot all about how alive you feel when playing with other musicians with the benefit of increased interest and musical growth.

I produce good music as a OMB or as a pianist. The audience is pleased, the boss is pleased, and I�m somewhat pleased myself. But, if I were to move on to playing with other musicians, I can see me expanding musically again and losing that awful disease: �boring-itis� (as in You�ve Lost That �Boring� Feeling by the Righteous Brothers).

Lucky

No contradiction there, Tony. I'm simply pointing out the facility that arrangers allow and how it is up to the individual player to play the way he chooses, whether to stick to charts or to freely improvise.

We all know improvisation involves two hands, but within the context of arrangers we also know that the right hand is always going to do the bulk of it.

Lucky-

Go back and review my post where I said how fast I'd sink trying to do the omb in the jazz style. I concede completely that playing with other musicians allows for a great deal of spontaneity and creativity using an arranger doesn't.

However...

Looking only at my situation, comparing my quartet that plays "blue-hair" ballroom dances and my arranger based stuff (Solos and Duos). You commented that you liked Petit Fluer. The way you heard it from my website is the exact way you'll here it any night that we've played it over the last 10 years. Exactly the same...

Remember my situation: The band can't/won't rehearse, so there's no real opportunity to refine things very much. Also, we get a lot of praise for being the most danceable band in this area that also doesn't sound dead. In essence, its not broke, so we're loath to fix it. Perhaps back in the earlier days when we were first putting our act together we were benefiting from the spontaneous interplay between each other, but we had rehearsals then. We haven't had a rehearsal in 5+ years.

I think the kind of music my band is working in combined with our circumstances explains a lot. I don't feel very creative when working with the band. Its more about getting the tempo, groove, feel right in the room, etc. All those things, we excel at. Moreover, they (Dancers/Clients) don't WANT something different.

Gary D, & I were talking on the phone last night about this and I told him that I actually had a client complain a few months ago about a particular song. She came up to the bandstand right after the set was over and said she didn't like whatever we did to such and such a tune. The dance floor was packed, nothing had gone obviously wrong on our end. The only thing we different was we modulated for the last verse!

If I think of other bands I've played in that played different styles of music, then again, Diki is 10000% correct. They were, for the most part, more fun to be in, than what I'm in right now. But I'm not playing for college kids or rich yuppies, etc. My crowd adores us for our consistency and that's the bottom line for us.



------------------
Bill in Dayton

Bill, just like an arranger that no longer inspires you, you CAN change players. There's no more excuse for playing with people that don't inspire you than playing with a keyboard that does the same.

They won't rehearse? Get other players. They play it the same way every time? Get different players. 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' is fine, until it IS broke...

Then fix it.

What's more important... keeping gigs you don't even enjoy, or your musical soul? Me, I can turn the thermostat down, eat a cheaper cut, go out less often, whatever it takes. But I can't stand playing with people that don't want to be there, don't want to keep growing, and just want to show up for the paycheck. That's not making music...

That's just making money

All valid comments that I have, in fact, pondered through the years. I'll apologize in advance for the length, but you've hit upon some things I've really weighed over the last few years.

*Remember, the kind of clients that use us are ballroom dance groups. They hire us for our consistency, variety and quality. The other bands on this circuit are mostly comprised of players 70+ and up. (The oldest guy in my band is 57, then we have a 52 yr. old, a 49 yr. old (moi)and a 47 yr. old.)We are, by far I'm told, the most energetic band playing this kind of music.

*Part of the frustration through the years has been difficulty in finding quality subs/potential replacements. Drummers I can find, but bass players? No luck in 11+ years of looking. Rock, jazz, country players struggle mightily playing the way we need to for these dancers. They seem not to "get it." The best sideman I've EVER used was a terrific pedal steel player who is a monster. Played on the road with Marty Robbins, did Hee Haw, was in Barbara Mandrells TV band, etc. Unreal player. His main love is Gospel and bluegrass-so he's not interest whatsoever coming on board full time. It also colors almost everything in a Country fashion, which I don't really want.

*Our audiences / clients are thrilled with the band. We draw the best crowds, keep the dance floor filled more than others, and are almost always the first band to get dates for the new year. By that measure-it is clearly not broken. Further, one of the things that's always impressed me was how each member of this band has connected with several members of our crowd. Everyone seems to know us on a first name basis. The affection that we're each shown is genuine and to mess with that, could be counter-productive.

*To your final paragraph. The guys do want to be there. They are professional, rarely cause any trouble, and are generally compliant. They will play new stuff, but as I described in previous posts/threads, with no rehearsals-its a pretty limited approach we can take. Very straightforward. Playing the tune 1-2 a month means that it won't really start to sound good to my ears until 4-6 months of playing it. The crowd, it seems has such a high level of confidence in us that no matter what we play, they'll dance to it.

*Again per my previous posts, that doesn't mean I'm not terribly frustrated when working with the band. (They know this.) Back in the the early 2000's, the band gigged about 100 times a year, which is phenomenal for this kind of band in this area. We're down to about two dozen jobs. Why? Economics explain a lot of it, most clubs aren't as packed as they were ten years ago and most have cut way back on their entertainment budgets. The State has severely changed the way they allow these Clubs to handle their receipts from gambling/pull tickets/etc. which also cut their expendable cash. Several major Clubs have in fact, closed up shop.

*One by one, I have converted most of the old band accounts into Duo jobs where I use arranger mode and my sax player. The dance floor is just as packed, I make more money, the clients pay less overall and I like them a lot more musically. Some of the accounts were ones where 2 of the guys said they didn't want to drive that far (about an hour) anymore. I told them if I switched to my Duo, I wouldn't turn back...and I haven't...and won't.

*I gave great consideration to ending the band this year and only doing solo/duo work. In the end, two major factors convinced me to do another year.

1) One of the other players and myself mostly resolved an issue a few months ago that was very important to me. He had to swallow some pride or leave the band. He decided his one axe wasn't worth over $5,000 a year in income.

2) (The main reason...) I talked to several long term clients and fans who I trust to be honest with me. I laid it out for them, shared my frustrations and ideas on fixing my problems with the quartet. (Changing to a Duo) To a person they all said that dancing wise, the Duo would be absolutely fine-no issues there at all, but that for over a decade, they and their partners so looked forward to a night with the Bill Corfield Band. They feel a bond with us and I respect that. For years I have been sincerely touched by watching these nice people get dressed up and go out to the club and dance with each other like they have for several decades. I see the glances, the embraces, etc. and it deserves respect. We've seen many couples stop coming because of illness and death, which has been a shame regardless of how inevitable I know it is.

*So...switch to the Duo and feel much better musically but lose something in the room because I've left half my guys at home? Not sure I'm prepared to explain why to these dancers I needed to make a change. Also, in spite of the musical limitations I hate, the guys have been very loyal. They have represented me very well over the years and I'm just not ready to kick them to the curb.

*To close, for me-its about everything EXCEPT money, Diki. I make less money when working with the band than on any kind of gig I do. $100 in my pocket after a 3 -4 hour job is by far my worst payday anywhere on my schedule. Ironically, this Saturday, I WILL use my Duo for the first time at our main account. (Bass player has to be out of State.) I'm very interested in seeing how this goes because at some point, I will drop the band and convert to a Duo. I'm sure I will be asked a dozen times or more where the other guys are.

If it sounds a bit sappy, well, then it does.



[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-06-2010).]

Good post, Bill. Not a bit 'sappy.' As I mentioned earlier, we have to cut our cloth to suit our needs and each and every one of us has our own realities that we operate under. Good luck with your duo, Bill.

Lucky says.....I didn't know there was any other kind! (not talking about THIS group, of course)

Follow up on the gig from Saturday night.

Background: Using the Duo for the first time in this club I've used the band at for over ten years. Looking forward to the liberated music possibilities but leery of the push back for not having all the guys with me. How would this turn out?

Arrived at the club at 7:00pm for an 8:00pm start. Weather conditions were something like 8 degrees, which is NOT conducive to seeing a large turnout. At 7:45, one couple came up and asked where the other guys were. I explained and they seemed fine, said they were looking forward to how it sounded.

By 8:00pm, the Club was filling up and we started. Filled up the first set with several of the stock requests we have and as expected, dance floor filled up rather quickly. Played several "non band" tunes throughout the set, all of which they dance to. About 40 minutes into the set, a long time couple approached the band stand and commented, "You sound amazing tonight...whatever you've done-its fabulous!"

On the break, talked to the door staff and bartenders-all were hearing good comments. By the start of the 2nd set, place was at a normal crowd level.

Did several newer tunes through the rest of the night, plus many of their favorites...I saw several people more physically responding to the music. One guy, in his 90's was playing piano on his table, lol. More dancers came up during the set and said, in effect..."We love your band, Bill-but this is really, really good."

Made one screw up during the last set. I have 2 versions of Sway I perform. One slow Bossa and an upbeat, balls out mambo. I thought let's try the fast one for a change and while we got a big round of applause after we finished it, no one danced to it. Lesson learned, lol...This is not a hot, latin crowd, lol...

We were done at 11:00pm. Typically, the crowds head for the doors en masse at 10:30pm and we wrap things to about 25 people. Tonight, no one seemed to leave. I can't remember the last time there were so many people staying to the end. One of the Women's Auxiliary ladies came up and said she'd never seen this many people here, this late on any Saturday night. The circle for God Bless America at 11:00pm was so large it barely fit on this very large dance floor.

Afterwards, several couples stopped by and were very generous with their praise. When checking out at the bar after everyone left, the feedback was it sounded fantastic, the crowd loved the different tunes, etc. Repeated that everyone loves your band, but wow...people really had a great time tonight.

In all, I was asked a total of two times where the other guys were. (I did make a quick announcement early in the night.) AS luck would have it, one of the other bands that plays here regularly decided to leave Dayton and head for the South. If I'm reading the lay of the land right, My Duo is a strong candidate to take some of those dates. So, in effect, I'll get to have my cake and eat it too.

To be as frank as possible, I can't remember feeling that great driving home from this account...ever. I wasn't restricted by a lack of rehearsal and could play anything I wanted to. It felt fantastic...

Was I more or less "musical" that night. More because I wasn't restricted by the band or less because I utilized the arranger mode so much more? (No midi files at all-worked with styles all night.) I'm not sure and I'm not sure its important, either. I lost a little here/gained a little-maybe a lot-there. Dancers danced just as much, if not more, I felt great, client was very happy, etc. The only possible downer was my sideman, who is a traditionalist who would always chose a full quartet over what I do. On the other hand, I thought he played better than usual, so...

One night doesn't change much. I'd be a jerk to throw the guys off the account at this point for the rest of the year. We'll see what the future holds...

------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-11-2010).]

.

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-11-2010).]

Shame you didn't try substituting different players instead of the arranger... It would be interesting to hear how your enjoyment of the gig changed with some fresh players and a new attitude. Your arranger doesn't really add or subtract anything HUMAN to the equation.

Plus, I'd not get to worked up about a crowd enjoying themselves 'just as much' with just automatic backing rather than the real deal... Quite honestly, were you to do a complete DJ act and pick your recorded material as carefully, you might get close to the same reception..!

Which might beg the question... Why are we playing at all? For them, or for US..? Most of them don't care much one way or the other, as long as they have a good time. But US? Maybe you feel differently, but I got into music to PLAY music (not play a CD player!), and with as many great musicians as I could. Be careful about being so happy that the arranger 'entertained' the crowd. Because the next logical step is a CD 'entertaining' the crowd. And that opens you up to people with no skills whatsoever other than the ability to play a songlist that the audience wants (and anyone can copy yours just by attending one show) being able to come in and undercut you...

As I said in an earlier post, I don't know of any qualified bass players who would've been able to handle the gig. I've seen several different guys come in...rock guys / jazz guys, etc. the feel wasn't right, drummer wasn't happy...Try as I might, we couldn't get the right dance feel for this crowd. Remember, this is people 60+. They're pretty firm on what they'll dance to and what they won't.



You make it sound it like I punched a button and then sat back and had a smoke, lol. They also, have tried DJ's for these dances and none have worked out. These people want...in some fashion...musicians. In their minds, DJ's aren't musicians.

I sang every song...I played every song and the facility with which I play my arranger proved highly effective. I was really playing and really singing and really working the crowd and really picking the songs, etc. Certainly I played differently than I do with my band, no doubt about it.



Your comments based on my last post are almost funny. My recollection of Saturday night is that I entertained the crowd, while using an arranger kb and my sax player. What's better? A highly skilled kb player using an arranger and getting quite a bit out of it or a very predictable band that while very effective, isn't scoring real high on the freshness scale?

I played my ass off Saturday...and for a change, I could present these tunes as I prefer them, for the most part. The difference between what I do and turning on a CD player is profound.


------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-11-2010).]

Bill
Maybe you should invite Diki and his communicating, interacting musicians to fill in for you some night and see what happens with your regular dance crowd.

Look it seems that others are as determined to miss MY points as they think I miss theirs...

Next logical step is the sax player playing to tracks, and singing (got a few that do that, here), then the next step is a singer using tracks including a sax track, and then the NEXT step is a DJ.... I kind of assumed you might see the progression.

Of course, it's OK for YOU to get indignant that your contribution to their evening's enjoyment might have got downplayed a bit, but try looking at it from your drummer's, or your guitarist's or your bass player's perspective... Their contribution got nixed in its' entirety. But, of course, what YOU play is the ONLY important part, isn't it..? Those other parts can get replaced, no problem, eh? No musical value in it, at all.

You see, it's all fun and games until someone suggests that YOU are as replaceable as your other musicians. Then all hell breaks loose! But, instead of looking for every specious argument to justify your own contribution (no attempt to acknowledge that I DID say that a DJ to do the gig would have to be as good as you at selecting material for your crowd), and a hare brained attempt to put ME down by suggesting that I couldn't do the gig, which I'll admit, unless you had charts, I couldn't, as I don't play that kind of music (but I did, at many ballrooms in England in my youth in ten piece bands... OTOH, you'd fall as flat on your face as me were you to try to do a gig doing the music I do - I doubt you've even HEARD or Sly and Robbie, or Black Uhuru ), perhaps a serious attempt to talk about the issues could have occurred...

But, I guess, to suggest that a keyboard player is as replaceable as a drummer is some kind of blasphemy, here at the bastion of replacing everyone else! Trouble is, we are... Heck, half of us are only too happy to DJ a gig, mp3 players being the hot, must have items in our arrangers these days. And there was I, thinking arrangers are actually a musical instrument! Silly me...

My basic premise wasn't intended to YOU personally, Bill. I am sure you put on a hell of a show, everyone leaves happy, yada yada yada... But, on a thread that started out as a reflection by some that arranger playing no longer gets their juices flowing, and a discussion about whether playing live can get some of that back, to basically crow about how well your gig went WITHOUT your regular players kind of begs the extrapolation, IMO.

You say that no DJ has succeeded with your crowd so far... all well and good, Apparently, no other live band has, either. But do your show with an arranger and a sax player, all is well. Strikes me that material, familiarity with exactly what the crowd wants is what is scoring, here. Which, I'm afraid, definitely brings up the possibility that, should a DJ appear that DOES do the job, or a singer with tracks (let's face it, are you saying that, if push comes to shove and you can't play any more, you WOULDN'T do the gig just with tracks if they asked you?) came in and knew your crowd, what is there but simply a change of DEGREE in going down from a full band to a duo, then a solo, then a DJ?

I'm NOT singling you out here, Bill. This is an issue that has long worried me, watching full bands gradually get squeezed out, now watching even duos get squeezed out, even soloists getting replaced by DJ's and cheap karaoke acts. Once a venue realizes it CAN make money by cutting the entertainment budget, few choose not to...

Imagine what you would have to say to your regular guys, that have stuck by you for years (as much as you think you are carrying THEM!), if the venue turns round and says they would prefer to just have the duo from now on, due to cost. Now imagine it being said to YOU, were a DJ to succeed with your crowd...

You see the slippery slope, here?

Where your theory breaks down in this instance is that I'm not suggesting alternate types of entertainment couldn't work. I'm just saying from playing at this club for 11 years, I can say that it hasn't worked, at least not yet.

Several years ago my drummer pulled me aside and said "Look, if you're not here, this doesn't work. You're the thing...your voice, the way you play, your ways onstage, etc. You can plug in other guys around you and you can still pull it off but you're the reason these people are here."

I've been playing arrangers for 5-6 years. It was 2 years, I think, before I began to use the arranger based duo as a replacement for the 4 piece. I did so only when the 2 guys (Bass/Drummer) informed me they didn't want to drive an hour or didn't want to play on certain nights of the week. Rather than lose the account myself as I'm the only one who does this for a living, I switched to the Duo. I didn't initiate that-they did. This is my business, so it only made sense...



Assumptions...You had no way of knowing this but I've actually opened up for Black Uhuru, Steel Pulse, the Clash, and several other very different type bands back in the early 80's. The band I was in back then was the "go to" band in Pittsburgh when someone wanted a local act to open up for a big act like them. We were an original based ska/funk/rock band that toured through PA, OH, MI, IN, WV, MIN, IL...I've also done Commercials work (jingles) as well as several professional productions of various Musicals back in the 80's. I also played bass and sang lead in a Trio I formed in the late 80's, that also played originals. (Think REM meets English Beat)I've been really lucky that I've got to do a lot of very different things musically. Point being, while I wouldn't excel at it like you do...I don't think I'd fall flat on my face...

It isn't just what songs I played...what DJ in the world will sing as their main thing? None...they have karaoke a few Fridays a month, and an entirely different crowd shows up. A DJ/KJ can't do what I do and I surely don't want to do what they do...

I said I knew of no other bass players that could do the gig. Is there a player in Dayton I don't know about that might do great? Sure, but with the poor results from previous attempts to use a sub, I'm not dying to go down that road.



Not trying to put anyone down here but I've never taken a DJ job since I started this full time. I'm not set up for it and don't really want to do that.



You seem to be minimizing the experience the audience had. You base most of your comments on a players perspective. That's fine, but it needs to be pointed out.

Why is an instance where a arranger player becomes liberated from dropping other live musicians any less applicable to the original thread? I've chronicled my frustrations with the band being unable/unwilling to rehearse, etc. If it works one way, can't it also work in this other way as well?



Of the various other acts that rotate through the schedule over recent years, there is another band that is very well regarded. A 5 pc., where the youngest guy is in his mid 70's...

Familiarity isn't what's scoring...I played 12-16 songs they've never heard me perform and they danced to all of them. In general, yes, I stayed within a certain parameter...Its not like I threw some Lady Gaga at them, lol...

Would I do the gig just singing over backing tracks? Seriously, no I wouldn't. I had major, major reservation about even buying an arranger because of how it might look. I never wanted to be one who would kick in a midi file and basically become irrelevant to the tune. My crowds respect people who can play. So, as I learned how to perform with an arranger, I made sure I stayed away from midis. I want them to know that I'm playing every chord change, lead, etc. Do I have a helluva lot of help? No question about it.

The biggest difference to me would be found going from a Solo to a DJ...



You're right to be concerned. The band and I had a client about an hour from here where we played every month for years to big crowds and packed dance floors. Trouble is, this crowd doesn't drink much at all. So, the Clubs get next to no bar business. After an annual election, the Trustees decided that there wouldn't be any more Senior dances on Fridays. They would bring in younger rock bands to beef up the bar business. Funny thing is, though-they couldn't match the competition in their city on Friday nights and the turnout was way less than expected. They then tried to put all the old acts back on the schedule and get the old people to return. They pissed off so many people, that it was never as good as it was originally. The only complain they had was that the bar sales weren't good enough. What was I to do about that?



I've thought about that a lot. I've been getting advice here at the SZ from some friends to drop the band and don't look back. You don't seem impressed that I've put up with a less than thrilling musical situation just so the band can stay together. I could've switched to a Duo a few years ago, very likely succeeded, but I didn't. In the big picture, that deserves to be at least mentioned.

If the client said they needed to go to a duo for financial reasons, I'd argue that the band should get to finish out the year. Possibly negotiate a lower price within reason. I'd also ask the guys what they wanted to do. They know its coming...its just a matter of how long do I continue to use the band. When it does, there will be several factors why its come to an end after 11-12 years or so. Economics will be a large part of it as this dwindling, non bar spending crowd shrinks. There will be creative reasons, that I've cited as well.

With no disrespect meant towards DJ's, they can't do what I do. They may get the gig someday, but that doesn't change anything except I'll either find a different room to play for or I'll enjoy my family.

------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-12-2010).]

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 01-12-2010).]