[Dixielandjazz] A slow start to the Million Dollar Question

[GWW174@aol.com]

Thanks all...after a slow start some ideas started to flow after all... 
everyone had some good thoughts... even those who admitted that they 
could'n't figure it out.

No one mentioned an observation I have made of the "super-successfull" bands 
and  allstar-class musicians.

That's the ability to work the audience - usually by "building" the tune AND 
the set during the performance.  Usually a set starts out with a strong 
opener - during the opening ensemble phase, everyone is good.  Then come the 
solos.  The really great performers start their solos good and then manage to 
build them even stronger during their first solo... and then even stronger if 
the solo comes around to them again during the tune.  The closing ensemble is 
always stronger than the first ensemble.  Each successive solo during the set 
is usually stronger than their first solo.

The first ensemble shouldn't be a  "blow your brains out" type.  It must be 
good to grab and keep the attention of the audience - but you need to leave 
yourself some room to really JAM in the closing ensemble of the tune.. and 
have room for more JAM for the  last tune of the set.

Now this whole thing repeats again throughout the set. The first tune is 
strong... then the band will usually play a few "less strong" tunes... maybe 
even a ballad or two... then about the 1/2 way point, they bring out stronger 
tunes and stronger performances.  

By the time the end of the set comes, they have the audience in their 
hands... crying for more.  If they have worked it right they reach the apex 
of their collective and individual performing abilities right at the moment 
their time is up and they have to quit...

To quote someone famous (who I can't remember), "always leave them wanting 
more"... or sometimes re-stated as "quit while you are ahead".

Am I "all wet"  Do the really successful and great bands consciously know 
that they are doing this? - Personally, I think so.  Is it something learned 
or is it instinctvie?  

I have noticed this "set and tune building"  during several years listening 
to those "really great bands and musicians" and comparing their performances 
to the just "good" bands/musicians.

OTHER IDEAS
Someone else on the list made a great comment "seeing with your eyes" and the 
visual experience.  Yes, I think that this is VERY important.  Why else come 
to a festival when you can buy the records (I'm dating myself - should have 
said CD's).  Hearing and SEEING the band makes for a total entertainment 
impression and explains why a lot of people like OKOM at festivals but not 
just listening to CD's.  

Someone else commented that "good looks" is important.  This is not to say 
all musicians have to have good looks to be successful... But a good 
presentation (looks and/or personality and the appearnce of having fun) are 
critical.  If you are up there playing and too concentrated on having the 
most "perfect performance of your life",  the audience will see that and 
react accordingly.

Are festival goers "serious jazz fans" who know the Coltains, Dodds, 
Barbarians, etc.  Probably not - but, so what.  They are a paying audience 
who come for whatever reason and allows us all to enjoy festivals and provide 
money to the musicians.  For that, we are all grateful.  The fans come to be 
entertained - not to have a scholarly study of the music.

Another point someone made is the Venue... which I would expand to include 
the setting and environment.  Some bands are great in a small intimate venue 
and bomb in a large venue.  Most festival directors know that you don't put a 
4-piece intimate combo in an outdoor amplitheater or venue like freeway 
gardens and expect them to hold the audience.  Likewise, a high-energy 
powerful band (maybe like the old Black Dogs) might not be the best choice 
for a wedding...a wake... or other similar event.  So venue and environment 
are important.  Band directors/managers should think about this when 
accepting the gig.

Bands are different when playing to a live audience vs. a recording studio.  
My pet peeve is for bands to SKIP THE STUDIO and make MORE LIVE "ON LOCATION" 
RECORDINGS... Make enough of them at all of your performances and you will 
have ample GREAT material for a CD.  But that's a subject for a new thread.

FEELING GOOD... Yes band members have the "daily grind" like we all do. It's 
a job.  They have wifes or girlfriends, children, etc... and the challenges 
of life we all have.  But IMHO, a truly professional musician (or a 
professional in any occupation) can bury the daily or momentary problems and 
rise to the occassion of performning their job to their utmost ability.  
Sounds old-fashioned, I know - yet true.

That's all for now... a few points which hopefully will get some elaboration 
and comment from the list.

Thanks for the good thoughts on this thread.

Gordon