Time is money

Midnite Zephyr

Platinum Member
This quote came from Jim in the Random Thoughts thread, but it got me to thinking...

Maybe you all have some thoughts to share on this subject on why you are all so anxious to gig?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimFiore View Post
Today's random thought:

Very often musicians will inidicate that they carefully and continuously practice their instrument so that they will have the skill to "say something" with it. I think that's a lovely sentiment. My question is, how many of us "say something" other than "Look at me!"?
I can relate to this. We are trying to develop our music to really "say something", other than what is normal, in our approach to songwriting, but there is always this constant need and desire by the bassist and one guitar player to play on a stage and tell the world "look at me". Rather than just focusing on the music, serving the music and trying make it more awesome, their main motivation lies in playing on a stage and "sharing" it and trying to make money, and network, and blah blah blah.

That stuff is necessary, but it has its time and place. Now we're talking about bringing in another drummer again, maybe. We still don't have a permanant keys player yet, and all these guys want to do is play a gig no matter what we will sound like.

It's really starting to tick me off, and I'm not sure I want to play with guys like that. They seem incompatible with what we are trying to accomplish musically because they don't see the importance of putting in the time it takes to develop our music properly.

I can see their point in a way. Time is not something we give up so easily to others, I would even go so far as to say that it is even more precious to people than money. But, then again, time is money.
 
To me, playing live is a strong contributing element to honing the song & the band as a coherent unit. It has value as a maturing/development tool outside of just the buzz from playing out.
 
Nice post MZ. In my observations, only a small percentage of musicians move beyond the "ego stage" to a higher plane where ego is a detriment.

The thing is, if people allowed themselves to release their ego to get to that plane, they will accomplish everything they were trying to accomplish in the "ego stage", which is to have people think they are awesome. So by letting go of what they want, it comes back to them.

Some ego is good for the front guy, it plays well. But for the support musicians, IMO, I want to see people who transcend themselves and play selflessly. The music is always better that way. Hiromi is my template for selfless playing. She is definitely on one of those higher planes.
 
Hiromi is my template for selfless playing. She is definitely on one of those higher planes.
Ooooo, you got that right my blues grooving friend. She can "out-chop" just about anyone, & can solo almost endlessly, yet plays spaces as intensely as notes, & leaves a ton of room for her support musicians to shine. Stunning!

In another thread, I made a fairly bold & overtly sexist statement, but I'm sticking to it. In my experience , female players make better musicians, & I think keeping ego's in check is a big part of that. Flame me if you will, but I can only reference my personal experiences with any credibility.
 
Yes, what Larry said.

And :
Practicing as a group to get the music right is important.
If a group of musicians enjoy playing together and they play only for each other, that’s OK.
Sometimes I think that is what playing jazz is all about.

However, playing in front of an audience is a wonderful feeling and is very addictive.

.
 
Time is not something we give up so easily to others, I would even go so far as to say that it is even more precious to people than money. But, then again, time is money.

I agree with the first sentence but not the second. Time is not money. Capitalists of limited thought like to say this but it's simply not true. You can lose a fortune but through hard work and luck you can get it back. You can never get time back. Time is worth far more than money. The people who say otherwise are simply trying to get you to trade some of your non-replaceable time for their replaceable money. As a co-worker of mine likes to say, in spite of all of our technology we have still not been able to manufacture even a nanosecond of time.


And on to the topic at hand...

Not that there's anything inherently wrong with "look at me" but I tend to see it as self-limiting, kind of where Larry was going with it. The LAM approach is what gives us awful and sometimes downright embarrassing solos. Of course, as social animals LAM is a natural thing for humans. I think the problem is when that's all you have to say. I think that's the crux of reality TV: The only thing it really says is "Look at me" and I think that's why many people find it boring and vapid.

I don't think an entertainer necessarily needs to go much beyond LAM (although they certainly could). An artist, OTOH, pretty much has to get past that.

One way of looking at this is whether you can be entirely happy not playing to an audience. That is, can you be happy composing, recording and playing tunes alone in your basement or with bandmates and feel contented and satisfied with a tune even though you never play it in front of a crowd? Personally, I tend to say yes. Not that I wouldn't like a little public interaction but I do what I do because I like it, not because I'm seeking approval. In some respects it's as if I don't have a choice, it's what I have to do, what I'm compelled to do.
 
One way of looking at this is whether you can be entirely happy not playing to an audience. That is, can you be happy composing, recording and playing tunes alone in your basement or with bandmates and feel contented and satisfied with a tune even though you never play it in front of a crowd? Personally, I tend to say yes.

Contentedness to a certain degree. I don't play for people for any accolades as much as I just want to see beautiful women dancing.

Short story, last night I played a new venue in Cape may NJ, right on the beach, and we were lucky to have had some wedding party-ers there. Well at one point we had nothing but young beautiful women on the floor for about 20 minutes. These women wanted to dance and get on down. Right at the height of it, the leader called break. In unison, they all shouted NO! Well, he took the break anyway. 5 minutes later, they were all gone.

That's my whole goal, getting people going crazy on the dance floor. I want them in a frenzy. You don't want to stop that train, you're lucky enough it's rolling in the first place. That's how NOT to read the crowd. He kicked himself for the rest of the night for doing that. You want to keep them dancing all night, playing right through the breaks if necessary. He gave me permission to tell him if in the future, he is making a wrong call. You never break up the dance floor on purpose, cardinal sin right there.

Bottom line is I don't play for me, I play for everyone else. That satisfies me so I'm not lacking anything.
 
Well at one point we had nothing but young beautiful women on the floor for about 20 minutes. These women wanted to dance and get on down. Right at the height of it, the leader called break. In unison, they all shouted NO! Well, he took the break anyway. 5 minutes later, they were all gone.
I know how much you respect your band leader as a musician, but Larry, he's a f***ing idiot for doing that.

Not pulling any punches tonight,
8Mile
 
Yea Lar, socially, he definitely is a bit lacking, and that carries over as a front person. A great musician he is. An intuitive front person...yea, no. When a group of women say NO! in unison....you do as you're told. If not you shall pay the price. He did learn though.
 
I know how much you respect your band leader as a musician, but Larry, he's a f***ing idiot for doing that.
Agreed. You expend all that energy into getting that floor full, then cut the vibe? He needs to remember you're there to entertain, not posture. That's like getting to the vinegar strokes & stopping to answer the phone. Priorities dear boy, priorities. Seize the moment & relish it, they're few & far between ;)
 
I won't let him make THAT mistake again. "Remember Cape May" will be my battle cry!
 
Contentedness to a certain degree. I don't play for people for any accolades as much as I just want to see beautiful women dancing.

Short story, last night I played a new venue in Cape may NJ, right on the beach, and we were lucky to have had some wedding party-ers there. Well at one point we had nothing but young beautiful women on the floor for about 20 minutes. These women wanted to dance and get on down. Right at the height of it, the leader called break. In unison, they all shouted NO! Well, he took the break anyway. 5 minutes later, they were all gone.

That's my whole goal, getting people going crazy on the dance floor. I want them in a frenzy. You don't want to stop that train, you're lucky enough it's rolling in the first place. That's how NOT to read the crowd. He kicked himself for the rest of the night for doing that. You want to keep them dancing all night, playing right through the breaks if necessary. He gave me permission to tell him if in the future, he is making a wrong call. You never break up the dance floor on purpose, cardinal sin right there.

Bottom line is I don't play for me, I play for everyone else. That satisfies me so I'm not lacking anything.


Very good post. Never stop women from shaking their parts in front of you!
 
I agree that seeing the women out there dancing is one of the best parts about playing live. Since I never get paid, I work for that alone, and maybe a free beer. People are tightwads these days. They want so much for so very little. I've played my share of these types of no paying gigs. So, if we can get some some people out there dancing, then it has been a good night.

I'm playing next Saturday (for free) with my garage band. It's a different place this time in Long Beach, so there might be more dance floor. I'll have to be tight and play it right. The only guys making any money are the guys who do our sound and move all the sound equipment. So the bar does pay us; I just don't get to see any of it.

But, all in all, it is time well spent. It is an expense for me money-wise because I always end up spending twenty more dollars than I should be spending because lately, since I started gigging again, people aren't handing out the free beer tickets anymore to the bands. Times have changed.

Yeah, as far as the other band is concerned. There's just no clear direction yet, but these guys are eager to gig to help pay for the studio. Heck, I can't barely afford it either. That's why I'm on such a tight budget. My music doesn't pay for itself. I haven't quite reached that level yet so it's all very expensive for me.

OK....rant over. Happy drumming.
 
Last edited:
Nice post MZ. In my observations, only a small percentage of musicians move beyond the "ego stage" to a higher plane where ego is a detriment.

I agree but just to throw you a curve ball - do you think playing dull robotic parts to "serve the song" could be another drummers pursuit of ego? To me, this is always going to be a grey area because art is subjective.

I appreciate playing for the song more than ever but I wonder how many drummers play like drum machines because someone once told them off for being too busy or expressive. If I wasn't allowed to play a ghost note, hi-hat accent, oddly placed note or unusual fill, I think I'd put the sticks down for good.
 
I appreciate playing for the song more than ever but I wonder how many drummers play like drum machines because someone once told them off for being too busy or expressive. If I wasn't allowed to play a ghost note, hi-hat accent, oddly placed note or unusual fill, I think I'd put the sticks down for good.

"Playing for the song" opens up some thoughts. First, I think the basic idea is paramount, that is, the drum part needs to fit the tune, and ultimately, that decision needs to be made by the composer(s) of said tune (which might include the drummer). Second, if a player finds that they are often at odds with the requested part, then they're playing the wrong kind of music for their own artistic sensibilities and should probably find another band. If it's not about the art but rather is about entertainment and making money (e.g., a cover band), the player needs to play what is requested and be done with it (again, if it's that distasteful they should get another gig). Of course, there are variables with the composer. Some want every note written out and played perfectly, others not so much. Personally, some things I want perfect but for other things I'd prefer to give the player a sketch and let them mutate it into something with their name on it.
 
"Playing for the song" opens up some thoughts. First, I think the basic idea is paramount, that is, the drum part needs to fit the tune, and ultimately, that decision needs to be made by the composer(s) of said tune (which might include the drummer). Second, if a player finds that they are often at odds with the requested part, then they're playing the wrong kind of music for their own artistic sensibilities and should probably find another band. If it's not about the art but rather is about entertainment and making money (e.g., a cover band), the player needs to play what is requested and be done with it (again, if it's that distasteful they should get another gig). Of course, there are variables with the composer. Some want every note written out and played perfectly, others not so much. Personally, some things I want perfect but for other things I'd prefer to give the player a sketch and let them mutate it into something with their name on it.

I spent the last 6 to 8 months helping a guitar player mold his songs and playing what the song called for, this and that, you know. Then recently he has taken a few of these songs and started recording them with studio musicians.

I'm in two bands with this guy. I know it's just business, but I'm a little put-off by that decision. He doesn't know it, but in the other band, we are interested in checking out and auditioning other guitarists. We've played with this guy for a year and a half and, though he's a great player, we decided that he doesn't gel well in many aspects. So it won't hurt my feelings if we have to let him go. He can have his studio musicians and his songs. His songs are more honky-tonk type old rock feel, which is great for that other band, but in the improve band, he just doesn't have the psychedelic soul to keep up with what the bass and lead guitarist are doing. We'll see.
 
Back
Top