mikeyhanson
Silver Member
He's an NFL replacement ref! Bastard can't get a call right!
playing live
- Thread starter mxracer591
- Start date
He's an NFL replacement ref! Bastard can't get a call right!
Duck Tape
Platinum Member
I've been bouncing back from an anxiety disorder (a bad one) for years.. That I can even walk on stage is a miracle but I can, and when I get up there I just think about how much I practice and play, this is what I do best and it's statistically pretty hard for me to get it wrong.
I do really feel the pressure though, I liken it to playing underwater or something, everything feels different and sluggish, and I have to force myself to look up or else I'd be staring at my drums the whole time.
I eat a nice big meal, don't touch alcohol/drugs and just do my best and don't beat myself up about mistakes. I think half of it is having the right attitude and not letting yourself develop a bad/negative attitude.
I do really feel the pressure though, I liken it to playing underwater or something, everything feels different and sluggish, and I have to force myself to look up or else I'd be staring at my drums the whole time.
I eat a nice big meal, don't touch alcohol/drugs and just do my best and don't beat myself up about mistakes. I think half of it is having the right attitude and not letting yourself develop a bad/negative attitude.
MikeM
Platinum Member
If your band is doing 30-45 minutes sets, then your doing the same types of shows that I do.
When you guys rehearse, how do you spend that time? Reason I ask is because a few bands ago, we had this thing where we'd show up and run thru the set and plow straight through, top to bottom, no stopping for mistakes or anything. But it's almost always a run-thru riddled with mistakes. The other piece of that first time thru, is not to worry about the mistakes and trainwrecks - it's the practice room; that's where that stuff is supposed to happen. Plus, mistake recovery is a massively important skill that also needs to be practiced.
Then we'd go outside for an air break (euphemism alert!), hang out and chit-chat. Then back into the room to run thru it all again. Almost without exception, that 2nd time thru is much much tighter and way more confident, so at the end everyone's all smiles, like, "Geez, if we nail it like that at the show, we'll be fine."
So we hit on the idea of showing up at the space to load out a little bit earlier than we normally would to run thru the set once (top to bottom, no stopping). Yeah, it'll probably be weak and full of mistakes, but so what? Then we'll break down, load up, and head to the venue.
I cannot overstate how well that seems to work. When it's our turn to hit the stage, everyone's way more relaxed, the songs come much easier, and there's not nearly the amount of stress over nailing the grooves or making the changes. Once you're not worried about that kind of stuff, the playing comes a lot easier, sounds more confident, and becomes so much more enjoyable. Every band I've been in since has used that same method with similar results.
YMMV, of course, but definitely worth a try. The one thing I've run up against is some musos have picked up on this superstition that it's bad luck to rehearse the night before a show, so the thought of rehearsing right before the gig is out of the question. I've managed to break through that argument by pointing out how the second run-thru at practice is invariably better than the first. If you can get their buy-in to try it once, you might make believers out of them.
When you guys rehearse, how do you spend that time? Reason I ask is because a few bands ago, we had this thing where we'd show up and run thru the set and plow straight through, top to bottom, no stopping for mistakes or anything. But it's almost always a run-thru riddled with mistakes. The other piece of that first time thru, is not to worry about the mistakes and trainwrecks - it's the practice room; that's where that stuff is supposed to happen. Plus, mistake recovery is a massively important skill that also needs to be practiced.
Then we'd go outside for an air break (euphemism alert!), hang out and chit-chat. Then back into the room to run thru it all again. Almost without exception, that 2nd time thru is much much tighter and way more confident, so at the end everyone's all smiles, like, "Geez, if we nail it like that at the show, we'll be fine."
So we hit on the idea of showing up at the space to load out a little bit earlier than we normally would to run thru the set once (top to bottom, no stopping). Yeah, it'll probably be weak and full of mistakes, but so what? Then we'll break down, load up, and head to the venue.
I cannot overstate how well that seems to work. When it's our turn to hit the stage, everyone's way more relaxed, the songs come much easier, and there's not nearly the amount of stress over nailing the grooves or making the changes. Once you're not worried about that kind of stuff, the playing comes a lot easier, sounds more confident, and becomes so much more enjoyable. Every band I've been in since has used that same method with similar results.
YMMV, of course, but definitely worth a try. The one thing I've run up against is some musos have picked up on this superstition that it's bad luck to rehearse the night before a show, so the thought of rehearsing right before the gig is out of the question. I've managed to break through that argument by pointing out how the second run-thru at practice is invariably better than the first. If you can get their buy-in to try it once, you might make believers out of them.
SquadLeader
Gold Member
This is great...
Not once in my life, across half a dozen bands, has any band I've played in agreed with me that "it would be a good idea to rehearse before the gig"...
I feel mitigated..
MJD
Silver Member
Since the piano is well-tempered that wouldn't work. If it were a violin instead (or any instrument where intonation
is up to you) and you're in a classical environment - then there is a difference between say Gb and F#, yes.
Oh god. Depends on the tuning system and function of the note in question. For the last few centuries we've been using equal temperament btw. on a well tempered instrument there is still a difference between the 2 notes mentioned. Well tempered and equal tempered are NOT the same tuning system. well tempered is closer to pure Pythagorean tuning. in equal temperament there is no actual pitch difference between Gb and F# and it is context that determines spelling. I take it you are an advocate of string players playing with so called "just intonation" where they use pythagorian 5ths and thirds where it suits the players tastes. I get that you end up with some purer consonances but i'm not sure it's worth having to deal with the harsher dissonances.
boltzmann's brain
Senior Member
i feel for you. same problem here. not fun.
Anon La Ply
Diamond Member
Putting aside euphemism-based sharpening of aural acuity, the second time through is always better ... unless you nail the first version, in which case the second one is inevitably worse
... which brings us to the "superstition". Mike, they're just trying to avoid the risk of running their race early - leaving their best performance on the "training paddock". I've always tended towards thinking that way, but it just occurs to me that the risk of mistakes is higher than the chance of first take gems - at least in my practice-once-a-week-if-we're-lucky band (last week, only the guit and I could make it and we just jammed out old 70s rockers for 3 hours
My old bands didn't pre-practice either, but we practised twice a week and usually gigged on the weekends so we were pretty match fit.
Live and learn, thanks MJ (and Matthias).
From a standpoint of garage-based ignorance, I'm wondering if it should be up to the composer to give notice that there are well tempered(?) notes in the piece and to somehow notate the unequally tempered sharps and flats? You couldn't just leave it to the musos unless it's a cadenza or you'd get dissonances that are far too much fun for the average classical piece
.Dre and Boltzmann, count me in on the anxiety thing. I'm scared of my own shadow. It's very limiting. These days I'm focusing on keeping calm, and not just behind the drums. You just have to catch yourself in the act. I now have a trigger where the very second I'm not feeling happy I know to look for some irrationally overblown anxiety operating subconsciously - and then rationalise it out of existence.
Swiss Matthias
Platinum Member
die_neckar
Junior Member
My experiences are as follows:
1. Record as many rehearsals as possible and listen(!) to them. In my band, we do that in order to (a) hear how we play together (b) how the song as such works, feels, grooves etc. (c) to capture ideas and (d) to realise what each one still has as homework to do. All that helps also getting confidence in what each one is doing. If it is not there yet, we don't play it on stage.
2. Our band-leader once said about being nervous before the gig: "You always need to keep in mind: It is us who made it to this stage and not the wise guys in the audience."
3. I for myself always (physically on paper) tick for each of our songs 4 boxes in ascending order of importance: technique, control, comfort, soul. You "just" need to be honest to yourself as you might have to realise that you'd need more time for all boxes than you actually expected.
I hope that is some food for thought for you. All the best.
1. Record as many rehearsals as possible and listen(!) to them. In my band, we do that in order to (a) hear how we play together (b) how the song as such works, feels, grooves etc. (c) to capture ideas and (d) to realise what each one still has as homework to do. All that helps also getting confidence in what each one is doing. If it is not there yet, we don't play it on stage.
2. Our band-leader once said about being nervous before the gig: "You always need to keep in mind: It is us who made it to this stage and not the wise guys in the audience."
3. I for myself always (physically on paper) tick for each of our songs 4 boxes in ascending order of importance: technique, control, comfort, soul. You "just" need to be honest to yourself as you might have to realise that you'd need more time for all boxes than you actually expected.
I hope that is some food for thought for you. All the best.
Last edited:
MikeM
Platinum Member
I knew I shoulda deleted that air-break bit out! Not just because of what it implies, but because it's not entirely accurate - the enhancements, if and when they occur, are just as likely to happen before the 1st run-thru anyway, so the 2nd-time-around-improvement has little to do with whatever recreational activities may occur between run-thrus.Putting aside euphemism-based sharpening of aural acuity, the second time through is always better ... unless you nail the first version, in which case the second one is inevitably worse
Mike, they're just trying to avoid the risk of running their race early - leaving their best performance on the "training paddock". I've always tended towards thinking that way, but it just occurs to me that the risk of mistakes is higher than the chance of first take gems - at least in my practice-once-a-week-if-we're-lucky band (last week, only the guit and I could make it and we just jammed out old 70s rockers for 3 hours
My old bands didn't pre-practice either, but we practised twice a week and usually gigged on the weekends so we were pretty match fit.
On your second point, I can totally see that and agree that it's a real concern. If this was a thread about studio performances, I would definitely lean that way and suggest taking all the time it takes during rehearsal for stopping to dissect, analyze, and fix every aspect of the material before hitting that expensive record button. If you can nail a performance 1st take in the studio, you're golden. But that takes a lot of very deliberate practice beforehand because (usually) by the 3rd or 4th take, things are starting to get tired-sounding - which isn't what anyone wants a permanent record of their efforts to sound like.
I was assuming a live performances approach that consists primarily of material has been fully worked out, and possibly already recorded. Having that once-thru before hitting the venue is sorta like loading the program into RAM, running it once, and then leaving it there with no reboots. (dumb analogy, I know, sorry
mikeyhanson
Silver Member
no no no....I think that's important as well. In another band I play with, my guitarist brings a can of beer to band practice, which he opens upon the break. The bass player brews coffee as well. We take about 15 minutes and we're back at it. The 2nd set always sounds better, and includes anything we think we may need to work on at the beginning, so we can clear it up.
Everyone takes their own transportation to practice, and we have to set up and tear down each night. So we arrive and then once everybody's setup and running, we're playing. No talk about what we need to work on or anything, really. More smalltalk and "how's it going"s. Just start the set and play it through. Then the break, everyone has the air of their choice, and we're going again.
I like the idea of running through the set the night before, and have no problem with it. But I prefer scheduling normal practices instead of bunching them up, and do any last minute touches during soundcheck. Could be anything from tightening up a tricky part to working on a transition between songs to making up a show opening on-the-fly. It's usually about 45 minutes to an hour of time that I'd spend otherwise staring vacantly at the guitarist staring vacantly at me.
And that's going at the real speed, Grea! I swear it!
Anon La Ply
Diamond Member
Of course, Mike *pat pat*
Seriously, I agree, most second versions are more settled and focused than the first.
On a related but different matter, I have this weird thing going with Chitlins Con Carne. When we started playing it I was going pretty well, a few loose bits to tidy up but generally okay. In the months since I've been playing it progressively worse. Weird. Ever had that?
How do you do that night after night, Mikey? You must be fit!