Drummer issues....

FarleyUK

octatonic;968268" said:

Would you like to hazard a guess at what drummers think about guitarists?

In general as a sweeping generalisation, or just those who don't learn the songs....?

thomasross20

I had similar problems a whole back. Seems to be quite common.
Now we have a great drummer!

p90fool

ICBM said:

hywelg said:

No do not do that. ^

Play it like the band who recorded it or don't bother. We had a bass player who thought it was OK to change a song to make it 'ours' when what he really meant was he didn't have the time or inclination to study it and learn what was really needed from him. Laziness makes for a poor covers band.

There are a lot of performers locally who play acoustic and sing covers. They get well paid, play popular standards, but by god they bore the pants off me because they dumb everything down to the same level. Strum, sing . Thats it. No attempt at a different feel to the strumming, no fingerpicking, everything the same. Only pissed punters will like that sort of thing, people who go to watch a performance will give it a miss next time they come along.

Covers bands who try to play just like the record bore the pants off me, so it goes both ways…

I also tend to think that sort of nit-picking "correctness" only matters to other musos. Punters want to hear the song, not the record - and they're more likely to appreciate a good performance even if it isn't exactly like the original. If you want to hear the record put some money in the jukebox and be done with it .

It's not about being lazy, it's about being interesting. Playing all the songs the same is a different issue.

In a fantasy world, yes it is about being interesting, in the real world it's almost always about being lazy.

I have played with fantastic session guys who really do make their occasional covers "their own", but in my experience they're outnumbered 100-1 by the people who use that phrase because they can't be arsed to listen to the song and work it out properly.

By all means take the bones of a song and do whatever you want with it, but don't just bash out G-C-D with a capo for a two hour set instead of learning about the tension, release and dynamics of the RIGHT BLOODY CHORDS!!!

Cirrus

I was once in a band with a guy who didn't want to play U2's Bullet the Blue sky because the entire song was "just E minor". I countered that it was all in E minor but there were still interesting things to play, the guy said he'd learned it anyway so we might as well give it a go.

He just played E minor in the open position for the entire song. No slide riffs, no feedback, no guitar solo, no funky chorus stabs. Just endless strumming of that E minor.

hotpickups

Cirrus said:

I was once in a band with a guy who didn't want to play U2's Bullet the Blue sky because the entire song was "just E minor". I countered that it was all in E minor but there were still interesting things to play, the guy said he'd learned it anyway so we might as well give it a go.

He just played E minor in the open position for the entire song. No slide riffs, no feedback, no guitar solo, no funky chorus stabs. Just endless strumming of that E minor.

I bet he didn't stay long in the band

Cirrus

You are wise.

RocknRollDave

p90fool said:

ICBM said:

hywelg said:

No do not do that. ^

Play it like the band who recorded it or don't bother. We had a bass player who thought it was OK to change a song to make it 'ours' when what he really meant was he didn't have the time or inclination to study it and learn what was really needed from him. Laziness makes for a poor covers band.

There are a lot of performers locally who play acoustic and sing covers. They get well paid, play popular standards, but by god they bore the pants off me because they dumb everything down to the same level. Strum, sing . Thats it. No attempt at a different feel to the strumming, no fingerpicking, everything the same. Only pissed punters will like that sort of thing, people who go to watch a performance will give it a miss next time they come along.

Covers bands who try to play just like the record bore the pants off me, so it goes both ways…

I also tend to think that sort of nit-picking "correctness" only matters to other musos. Punters want to hear the song, not the record - and they're more likely to appreciate a good performance even if it isn't exactly like the original. If you want to hear the record put some money in the jukebox and be done with it .

It's not about being lazy, it's about being interesting. Playing all the songs the same is a different issue.

In a fantasy world, yes it is about being interesting, in the real world it's almost always about being lazy.

I have played with fantastic session guys who really do make their occasional covers "their own", but in my experience they're outnumbered 100-1 by the people who use that phrase because they can't be arsed to listen to the song and work it out properly.

By all means take the bones of a song and do whatever you want with it, but don't just bash out G-C-D with a capo for a two hour set instead of learning about the tension, release and dynamics of the RIGHT BLOODY CHORDS!!!

Exactly this.

PolarityMan

ICBM said:

FarleyUK said:

So, I created the current band about 2 and a half years ago, and the current drummer has been with us for about 2 years now. He's a decent guy, very keen and likeable. We have done almost 100 gigs as a unit, but there's just one issue with him, and I don't think I can ignore it any longer....

The guy only has one 'beat' when he drums.

We're a covers band, so we try and get the songs as close to the original as we can; the guitars, vocals and bass all sound good, but the drummer appears to never learn any of the fills, rolls or stops properly. This has been going on for a while, but I think something needs to be done about it - we tried Back in Black the other day, and he completely shafted the drums - no groove, swagger or feel to it. It had been turned into something very different!

Now, I'm not sure how to approach it with him, as he and the bassist/singer are VERY close. The bassist/singer doesn't get involved in band stuff much (which we've all come to accept) and is very laid back so probably doesn't care about the drums.

However, from speaking to the rhythm guitarist, we both feel the same. We're tempted to not say anything until next rehearsal, and just stop every time the drums aren't right, so he has to make sure he goes and learns the correct beats, fills etc.

 Sure, I might sound like an a$$hole, but I just want the band to be moving up, not stuck at being as strong as the poor drums....!

Anyone else had to navigate a similar issue? Any advice?

Stop trying to play the songs like the records. Play them like yourselves, drummer and all. Stop thinking of him not playing the songs "properly" and start thinking of changing *your* parts to how you would play them if you had been given just the chord progression, vocal melody and basic structure.

Essentially play like an originals band which happens to only play songs someone else wrote. If that turns the songs into something different, that will make you far more interesting as a covers band. You can still be tight and professional, just more creative.

[/stuck record]

Unless you are significantly reinventing the songs outside their original genre i think this tends to sound amateursh at best.

Danny1969

I like pissing about with some things, tonight we're doing covers from Drake, Peter Andre, Walk the moon etc. I won't play those vertabin but other stuff I will do note for note. As much as I admire bands who do bend things significantly when your hired as a big bucks cover band they generally want you to sound like the band your covering. And if you do learn the exact parts on every instrument and have a capable vocalist and front of house engineer  it WILL sound like the record. Or at least as close as those fake TOTP records were with the girls in bikinis on the front that I use to stare at as a kid ......................................................................................................................................... Ah yeah drummers, Luckily enough I've been fortunate enough to work with some excellent guys and haven't really had to mention anything about what they are playing but if it wasn't good enough I would mention it from the off. It's only an issue if you let it slide to 2 years then mention it ........ if your on someone's back from the off it's normal

Cirrus

Haha @Danny1969 that's the way I am. When I first met the guys in my band I told them I was looking for people I could pull to task and have arguments with, there's no pussyfooting around in my practice room. :ar!

Plectrum

When I'm learning a song I look for footage of the band performing it live. For me that's a better reference point that the record.

ICBM

Maybe it's just me - although I don't think so - but I can't stand "like the record" covers bands.

When I see a live band I want to see a band being themselves and playing the songs with some energy and personality - I really don't care if it's because they're being creative or being "lazy", as long as what they play is good. I don't want to see musos ticking each other off for not playing that part *exactly* like the record, and I doubt if most punters care.

Why does this sort of attitude only apply to the instrument parts, too? You'll never get a singer who can convincingly ape more than one or two singers at most.

Jazz bands in the old days never played anything like the record either, they played the songs. Bands were popular because they played tightly and improvised well, not because they reproduced every nuance of someone else's recording.

Being boring and playing every song the same or unimaginatively is a different issue.

At the end of the day if you insist on having it like the record and the drummer can't or won't play like that, then you need a new drummer.

p90fool

ICBM said:

Maybe it's just me - although I don't think so - but I can't stand "like the record" covers bands.

Me neither, but that isn't my point. Most of the covers we play don't sound like the record, but that doesn't mean that I want to ignore everything that's on there.

Even simple songs like Warwick Avenue or Sweet About Me have some really interesting stuff going on in there. Sure, you can bash it out with cowboy chords but I spend an awful lot of my cover band time arranging an amalgam of brass and keyboard parts into guitar chords which hint at what I see as the stuff which makes the record a good one.

In Blame it on the Boogie for example I've put in a chord (6x6544) just before the chorus which no one person on the original plays, but it kind of summarises the tension leading into the chorus without needing a nine piece band.

Does it sound exactly like the record? No, but it doesn't sound like a crappy busker who can't be arsed to do his homework either.

FarleyUK

ICBM said:

At the end of the day if you insist on having it like the record and the drummer can't or won't play like that, then you need a new drummer.

That's just it though - we are NOT doing every song 'exactly' like the record. However, even if we were, my point still stands - the drummer only has one 'style' and beat.

When I say that I believe he should play his parts as per the record, I am referencing to the key areas of a song that provide it's signature; for example, the drum roll part in the break of Town Called Malice. Punters EXPECT to hear that part, regardless of who's 'style' it is.

Can you imagine a guitarist not playing the riff properly in Sweet Child O'Mine? Same principle. People KNOW that part, and it's a key signature mark of that song, so it needs to stay - even if you DO play it in your own way.

IMO, of course

jpfamps

FarleyUK said:

Can you imagine a guitarist not playing the riff properly in Sweet Child O'Mine? 

I don't need to; I work in a guitar shop......

p90fool

jpfamps said:

FarleyUK said:

Can you imagine a guitarist not playing the riff properly in Sweet Child O'Mine? 

I don't need to; I work in a guitar shop......

Haha, priceless!

ICBM

FarleyUK said:

ICBM said:

At the end of the day if you insist on having it like the record and the drummer can't or won't play like that, then you need a new drummer.

That's just it though - we are NOT doing every song 'exactly' like the record. However, even if we were, my point still stands - the drummer only has one 'style' and beat.

When I say that I believe he should play his parts as per the record, I am referencing to the key areas of a song that provide it's signature; for example, the drum roll part in the break of Town Called Malice. Punters EXPECT to hear that part, regardless of who's 'style' it is.

I honestly doubt it. The 'signature' of a song is in the lyrics, the vocal melody, the rough chord progression and sometimes a bit of guitar or bass if there's a distinctive riff.

I've never in my life heard a punter say "that band was crap, their drummer didn't play the xxxxx part in xxxxx just like the record". I have heard punters say the band is boring, or don't have any style of their own.

It's a muso thing to need to "nail" parts in my opinion. No-one else cares or even notices as long as they recognise the song and the band gives it some energy and doesn't make obvious mistakes.

FarleyUK said:

Can you imagine a guitarist not playing the riff properly in Sweet Child O'Mine? Same principle. People KNOW that part, and it's a key signature mark of that song, so it needs to stay - even if you DO play it in your own way.

Possibly, but close enough is fine as long as it sounds together and not fumbled. Not playing such an overplayed song in anything like the style of the original is better still though .

But if the drummer only has one style and beat you either need to work to that and choose material that you can play in a style which suits him, or get another drummer.

midiglitch

CeeBee said:

Record it, put it up on Soundcloud and share it with the band. I did this after badgering our drummer for months about his tempo being too fast.

It wasn't until he heard it back he realised - he's much better now.

This.

For what it's worth my advice to the OP would be:

-you do need to do something about it, or it will gnaw away and the band will cease to be fun.

-don't be passive aggressive about it (not saying you are, but i see that happen a lot.)

-as much as possible try to take an objective, fact based approach.  This is why you need to record yourselves and listen back to it with the drummer.  

-Don't challenge his ability, or let it get personal: when you listen back to it you can take the lead: "this feels quite different to the original to me... I've noticed i've used more distortion than the original so i'll definitely work on that for next time.... Groove's a bit different too i think... What's your take on it compared to the original Mr Drummer?....  Lets try getting closer to the original next practise and see how that sounds... Do you want to jam with me mid-week to work on those changes?..." Etc.

You can't make people more capable than they are, but you can raise their awareness, motivation and steer them in the right direction. And you can do it in a way which brings people closer together, rather than driving them a part.

Finally: remember... Change takes time

BahHumbug

I haven't read the entire thread here, so apologies if I'm repeating other people's comments. The problem doesnt just apply to drummers. Some 'musicians' do think it's adequate to turn up and wing it every time, having made barely any effort to learn the songs. I've particularly found this with singers, who have the lyrics written down and the vaguest idea of the melody and rhythm of the words........every rehearsal, such that the rest of the band is singing the song at them during the rehearsal.....no it doesn't go like that, it got like this. Unfortunately there are a lot of them around. Getting back to drummers, I work with one who isn't really very good, but he really tries to improve and he really tries to figure out the key bits of the songs, so I respect him and enjoy working with him. For the OP, it kind of depends on your relationship with the guy, but I would say it might be better to have a quiet word than risk talking to him in front of the rest of the band.

John_P

In my experience if he's been playing like that for a lot of years, then it is unlikely to change.  

Sometimes these things can seem more of an issue inside the bubble of a band but when you look at the bigger picture how much does it really matter?   

You get on ok, he's reliable, has decent gear etc so is he  good enough for the gigs you do?   If you all want to move thebans up a gear and get more and better gigs, with more of a following then his playing might be holding you back but I'd argue that having the right set lit and a great singer matter more.    

One of my bands has a pretty average drummer but we only play a gig a month and know it'll be packed with mates, he's a great bloke so we just laugh about it.  Other bands I play in that take it more seriously - he wouldn't have made it past the first rehearsal.