A Pro Musician Answers Your Questions About Professional Music

[smoothmoniker]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Do professional musicians get laid a lot?


I mean hot groupies, not your wife.

No, you're thinking of rock stars. I'm more like an accountant, who just happens to play keyboards instead of do taxes.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

I think that's overstated. Radiohead, Beyonce, Fleet Foxes, and Lil Wayne are all bands that have been singed and promoted by "the evil music industry". That's a pretty wide spread to call "homogenized".

I'll give you Radiohead. And I didn't say the industry was evil. It employed me for several years, with very interesting jobs. I just believe there are a lot of people making records that are mediocre when it comes to talent, and there are plenty of very talented people not making records. That's all. The executives are going to market certain things that they know will sell, regardless of how good it actually is.

[Gravdigr]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

So, ask away.

Does the back of Ted Nugent's guitar smell like sweaty dick?

[smoothmoniker]

Undoubtedly.

And herpes.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Is there danger of being too good? Many people say they didn't like Steely Dan because it was too precise, for example, or that slick highly produced works are unauthentic or even worse, sterile.
...

Disclaimer, this is a drummer's perspective. In short, this is a question of "micro-timing" which is what makes or breaks a groove. In the thread about syncopation I talked about subdivisions of the beat but never got back to what made Motown/John Bohnam "behind the beat" backbeats sound so great. I mentioned that Neil Peart is called the Professor because everything he does is cold, calculated math. But I never defined the difference as existing outside "the grid" of standard subdivisions. The difference in what creates a "groove" are in tiny "micro" timings. Milliseconds of variation that create a push and pull within a series of simple notes. That make Charlie Watts somehow sound different from Ringo Starr, playing "the same" beat. And the reason that 10 year old kids can "learn to play" a Vinnie Colaiuta beat off YouTube, but it doesn't quite sound right.

The micro-variations can be intentional, or more often the result of poor mechanics (unintentional). Learning the physics of how a stick rebounds, or when to play heel-up or heel-down, can allow you to control the feel of your beat rather than having it dictated by stiff, limited motions. You can also adopt a physical "attitude" on the kit in order to emulate a historical sound, i.e. sitting goofy like a big band dude in a suit.

Can you be too precise? Dave Weckl claims that people complained about his time feel for years, because he was too perfect. He had to learn how to relax and play looser. A tiny, almost unmeasurable amount looser. Afterwards he seemed better able to deliver what people wanted. Steely Dan did this too, buy the way, with every song. They created the perfect song in the studio, and then deconstructed it intentionally in order to get a human feel back in there. This "humanized" version was released to the album. I would say that they were successful, but I guess some people prefer... looser standards.

In answer to the very first iteration of your question, can you be "too good"? I would say, no. If you are sufficiantly good, you will know what is needed in a situation. Playing what is not needed or wanted cannot ever be classified as good.

[smoothmoniker]

Thanks, Flint. That's an excellent breakdown of the concept.

In time, as in pitch, perfect is not always the same thing as "right".

[ZenGum]

very well put, I thought; that tiny "imperfection" that makes it perfect, is what makes it art not science or engineering.

[Undertoad]

But this is the strange thing -- how far "micro off" you "need to be" is a matter of learned fashion, culture, trends.

Somebody told me that Neil Young, on one song, told everybody to switch instruments to something they didn't normally play.

In retaliation for all the highly auto-tuned pop, in which almost nothing is micro off, we have a new trend: jam bands, who are macro off.

[smoothmoniker]

That's why I only listen to Ornette Coleman.

[Undertoad]

10 years ago, anytime I talked to a younger artist, they all asked the same thing, "How do I get signed?"

Now, none of them ask that. They don't care. They all ask, "How can I make a living doing this"?

What do you tell them?

[smoothmoniker]

The biggest thing is to quit thinking like a tortured, pampered artist, and to start thinking like an entrepreneur. You are now a small business owner, and your music is your product. You face all of the same questions that all small business owner's face.

How do I make customers aware of my product?

How do I distribute it efficiently?

What are potential streams of revenue (merch, song licensing, albums sales, live shows, etc.)?

Where do people congregate who might be interested in my product? How do I reach them there?

How do I turn customers into evangelists, so that they sell my product for me? How do I make them feel included in the culture of my product?

I ask them if they think anybody ever launched a successful business by working at it 5 hours a week, then spending the rest of the time on the couch waiting for people to magically discover how awesome their product is? If they want to be a professional musician, I tell them to treat it like a profession. Spend 40+ hours per week on it, just like a real job. Put your money at risk, like you would with a real business.

The specifics of how to do all that are different for every artist, but the biggest thing that has to change is the mindset. Nothing is owed you, but everything is in reach for you.

[ZenGum]

So, how many of them look awfully disappointed when you explain all that to them?

What, work at it? Shrug, look away, slouch, wander off....

[smoothmoniker]

No, they all nod and agree vigorously.

But it's what they do when they get home that matters, and too many of them never bother to follow through.

[Gravdigr]

Originally Posted by Flint

Disclaimer, this is a drummer's perspective. In short, this is a question of "micro-timing" which is what makes or breaks a groove. In the thread about syncopation I talked about subdivisions of the beat but never got back to what made Motown/John Bohnam "behind the beat" backbeats sound so great. I mentioned that Neil Peart is called the Professor because everything he does is cold, calculated math. But I never defined the difference as existing outside "the grid" of standard subdivisions. The difference in what creates a "groove" are in tiny "micro" timings. Milliseconds of variation that create a push and pull within a series of simple notes. That make Charlie Watts somehow sound different from Ringo Starr, playing "the same" beat. And the reason that 10 year old kids can "learn to play" a Vinnie Colaiuta beat off YouTube, but it doesn't quite sound right.

The micro-variations can be intentional, or more often the result of poor mechanics (unintentional). Learning the physics of how a stick rebounds, or when to play heel-up or heel-down, can allow you to control the feel of your beat rather than having it dictated by stiff, limited motions. You can also adopt a physical "attitude" on the kit in order to emulate a historical sound, i.e. sitting goofy like a big band dude in a suit.

Can you be too precise? Dave Weckl claims that people complained about his time feel for years, because he was too perfect. He had to learn how to relax and play looser. A tiny, almost unmeasurable amount looser. Afterwards he seemed better able to deliver what people wanted. Steely Dan did this too, buy the way, with every song. They created the perfect song in the studio, and then deconstructed it intentionally in order to get a human feel back in there. This "humanized" version was released to the album. I would say that they were successful, but I guess some people prefer... looser standards.

In answer to the very first iteration of your question, can you be "too good"? I would say, no. If you are sufficiantly good, you will know what is needed in a situation. Playing what is not needed or wanted cannot ever be classified as good.

Heheh...He said beat off...

related link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhxnHVgL9PA

[smoothmoniker]

I was part of a panel discussion yesterday on how to make a living in the music industry. The best comment of the evening came from one of the other panelists:

"There is a world of difference between what people say they want, and what they are willing to work their asses off to get."