[Dixielandjazz] Some Thoughts on Adding More Recent Music to OKOM Bands - was Igor's Question

[John Wilder]

I wanted to voice my opinion about Igor's question regarding OKOM bands
adding some more modern music to our playlists, since I haven't seen many
responses from those that agree with Igor.  Besides, the few times I've
posted here, I've gotten a deluge of requests to post more, so here goes!

 

I think it is a shame when a band which plays OKOM absolutely refuses to
learn or play any more modern tunes, and here's why:  Many of you have
mentioned that the younger patrons really enjoy your music, but then you
turn around and lament that the younger audience doesn't follow your band.
I think it's partly because many of you absolutely refuse to play anything
that is even remotely recognizable to them.  People want to know that you're
not so different from them that you can never connect.  Even if you just
added a few tunes to your set list that they might remotely know, they would
feel closer to you.  

 

I sometimes book society dance bands.  When I book a dance band, I tell them
up front that we're not a rock band, so if they want rock music all night
(or even just the majority of the night), we're not the right band for them.
HOWEVER that said, if someone should come up and ask for Proud Mary, Mustang
Sally, Sweet Caroline, or some other rock tune we usually play one or two of
the five or six rock songs we have.  We still play 95% tunes that are the
ballroom tunes we feature, but that extra 5% that we do for them gives us
oh, so much more favor with the patrons!

 

I used to work in a band that played all 20's music - a novelty orchestra.
If someone would come up and ask, for example, for "New York, New York" or
something else that was not from the era, our leader would smirk angrily at
them and say, "Well, of course we KNOW it, but we're NOT going to play that!
We play songs from the 20's.  That's not a 20's tune!"  The person who
requested the tune would go away, not only disappointed that he didn't get
his tune, but embarrassed that he was stupid enough to ask for the wrong
kind of song.  In at least one case, he even walked away with the $20 bill
he was going to give us as a tip!  (I found out later that the song he
requested was written in the early 30's.)  Well, needless to say, although
the band was a good and well-rehearsed band, our gigs dwindled until there
were so few that the band broke up.

 

Another friend of mine plays bass, and used to play in a German band in New
York.  He said that their band got five times as many gigs as all of the
other German bands, even though they charged at least double what the others
wanted - usually even more.  When I asked why he thought that was so, he
replied that his band would play the authentic German music with lots of
energy and excitement, which is what the people who hired them wanted to go
along with the theme of their event.  However later when people wanted to
dance, they would "mix" the traditional German songs with more modern songs
which everyone recognized, and knew how to dance to.  All of the other
German bands in the area at the time would play strictly traditional German
songs all night.  Unless you grew up in Germany, a whole night of German
music is probably more than you'd like to listen to - especially if you
don't know how to dance to the music!

 

I think the above applies equally to OKOM.  Even though they may just LOVE
the music we love to play, the younger folks don't recognize any of it, and
many are at a loss as to how to dance to it.  After a good dose of OKOM, I'm
sure most audiences would like to hear at least one or two tunes they know,
or have at least heard before.

 

Think about it:  If you paid good money to see a star like Sinatra or Liza,
but they announced that they would not be singing any of their hits, but
rather all new tunes in a different style that no one has ever heard before,
would you not be disappointed?

 

That exact thing happened to us several years ago.  We bought tickets to see
Linda Ronstadt in Lake Tahoe, Nevada.  We expected to see a typical show
band with horns, but they only had a rock band on stage.  When Linda came
onstage, she announced that she had been booked to do a tour with a famous
rock band so she put together a full show of rock & roll.  She said that she
decided to use this booking as a rehearsal for her rock show, so she
wouldn't be doing any of her old hit tunes.  (After two or three tunes, we,
along with several other patrons, received a refund on our tickets, and will
never patronize any of her concerts again.  The songs we did listen to were
just poorly-done attempts to copy some old 70's & 80's rock tunes.)  Had she
done some of her hit tunes first and then added some of the rock tunes to
the show, we would have been more receptive.

 

In the PBS special, "Ken Burns' Jazz", they mentioned that because of
dwindling audiences, Miles Davis announced that Jazz music was officially
"Dead".  Of course, this comes from a man who thought so little of actually
entertaining his audiences that he played with his back to them!  My opinion
is that Jazz was never dead - there were always people out there who loved
jazz.  Miles' music just got so far out from anything the audience
recognized that he no longer could sustain an audience for his style.
Perhaps, had he played facing the audience, acknowledging patrons, making
some friendly and interesting announcements, and truly enjoying being an
entertainer (rather than only enjoying his own music) he would have retained
enough of his audience to come to a different conclusion.  I noticed that at
the time he made that comment, Louis Armstrong (who was fabulous at
entertaining his audience, not just playing for them) still had music that
was popular.   That could be because the audiences still recognized some of
the tunes he did.

 

Speaking of refusing to change, I remember playing in one particular
Dixieland band a long while back.  At rehearsal, the tuba player stopped the
song and said, 'No, that's wrong!  That's not the way they did it
originally."  I said, "It's not wrong, it's just different than YOU would
like to play it.  If what I play clashes with what you play, it's wrong.  If
it's just different, it's jazz improvisation!  After all, are we playing to
entertain the audience, or are we just playing to be historically correct?"


 

If any band leaders reading this would answer that they'd rather be
historically correct, I would remind them that there is not likely anyone
around who still PAYS for live music who REMEMBERS what is historically
correct (except for a few die-hard record collectors), and even fewer who
even CARE if it matches exactly what was originally recorded.  Entertaining
the audience is paramount, above historical accuracy in almost all cases.
(An exception would be if your band were hired by a museum or a historical
society to play as an example of the music of a bygone era.)  If you're
playing only to amuse yourself, audience be dammed then you can't expect
clients to support your selfish form of playing.  One of the marketing books
I have which details a system for successfully booking gigs says that in
order to have much of a chance at being successful, you must be playing at
least some recognizable music.  The book puts it this way:  "If your music
doesn't fill a need, then there is no need for your music!"

 

Last week I was in Mexico.  Even the Mariachi bands that come around to your
table play mostly the Mexican songs that are recognizable to Americans.
None of them has ever told me that they only want to play the less popular
songs that they personally enjoy, and are not interested in taking my
request because it's not as fun to play.  If they did, I would likely listen
(and maybe enjoy) their music, but tip on the light side - or not at all,
depending on if I enjoyed their music as much as they did.

 

We all get a chuckle at the old sign from Preservation Hall that says,
"Requests - $1, Saints - $5".  However in "real life" that kind of attitude
(I'll penalize you for making me play what you most want to hear because I
hate it!) will only get you the reputation of being a sourpuss.  In fact,
just take a look at any band who seems to have that kind of attitude toward
their fans (if they even have any fans).  Most of the band members
frequently look like they'd rather be sitting at home watching the game than
playing for you.  "Damn, that's three songs already!  Isn't it break time
yet?  Go ask if we can leave early, Bob!  Get me another Manhattan, I
spilled the last one in the piano - again!"

 

I would also point out that there needs to be a change in attitudes about
sound quality.  The world is not the same as when OKOM came out.  Back then
there were few other options to be entertained, other than attending live
performances.  Records & radio sounded even worse than bad sound in a live
venue!  Today there is television (with billions of channels), digital
radio, computer games, internet, downloadable music, etc.  Live theatres are
all using wireless headworn mic's for each actor, as well as mic'ing the
whole band.  People no longer have the patience to sit through a boring
performance with marginal sound to find the few interesting parts of the
show.  Today if you lose their attention, you're history!  IMHO, Lousy sound
will lose their attention quicker than bad playing.

 

Also I still even today hear the old guys say, "We don't use amplification
because they didn't use it when the songs were originally written and
played."  (This is a personal pet peeve of mine, as I play piano & banjo -
two of the quieter instruments.)  Another variation would be, "We're not
going to use mic's, as we're already too loud!"  I would reply that first of
all, they would have used amplification and sound mixing if it were
available back then - I know for sure - I've asked many of the old guys who
actually played back then.  Second, today's players have almost universally
forgotten how to play down to the quietest instruments in the band.  Most
horn players blast full out and completely cover up the clarinet, piano and
banjo that they refused to mic because "they didn't mic 'em in the 20's".
Horns today are built to play louder.  Drums are built to play louder.
Clarinets play at about the same volume as a century ago, as do pianos and
banjos, and they can't compete with today's loud instruments without
amplification.

 

Even if the above were not true (which it is), the audiences of a century
ago had no expectation of high fidelity when listening to live music.  It
just sounded like it sounded, and if by chance you got booked in a hall with
good acoustics, everyone was in music heaven!

 

Today most audience members listen to television, CD's, radio, and movie
soundtracks on their home theatre equipment, which is always at least in
stereo (frequently in surround sound), and usually includes a sub-woofer so
they can "feel" the music.  The music is mixed on digital equipment with
special effects to sound big and beautiful (or big and exciting).  The
different tones of the music are adjusted as to create a full, pleasing and
enveloping sound without being unpleasant or harsh.  (of course, I'm
speaking of the sound mix, not the style of music being played.)  Would you
ask today's audience to give all that up and listen to your music in such a
poor acoustic mix that most instruments sound weak, some can't be heard at
all, and others blare at you to the point of hurting your ears?  In my
humble opinion, less than 10% of OKOM bands utilize sound equipment to their
best advantage.

 

What would be the best use of sound equipment?  IMHO, the sound equipment
should create a fullness in the sound by first filling out the sound of each
instrument so that no part sounds "tinny" or "thuddy".  Next, the parts
should be mixed in such a way that each part has the correct volume in
relation to the other parts.  In other words, we want to hear the piano
chords, but they shouldn't overpower the lead horn.  Bass should be clear
and crisp and shouldn't rattle the windows.  If several horns play together,
they should make a complete chord, rather than having one overpower the
others.  A singer should be enough above the band that they can be heard and
understood without blasting the audience.  Finally, (extremely important,
and usually ignored by OKOM bands)  the sound equipment should provide a way
for the band to hear what they need to hear from the other players to play
tightly - a monitor system.

 

As a side note: From what I understand, the Beatles ultimately broke up
because the fans yelled so loud that they couldn't hear themselves playing
onstage, so it wasn't fun anymore.  You can't play well if you can't hear
the rest of the band!

 

All professional sound engineers use compression on singers.  This is a
process that minimizes the difference between the loudest and the quietest
sounds so that a singer (or any instrument which has a huge range of
volumes, such as clarinet) can be brought up in the mix to be heard when
singing or playing quietly without tearing out the audiences' ear drums when
they really hit it!

 

I'd like to mention that almost without exception every time I book a band
and I do my own sound set up someone (usually many people) come up to tell
me how great the sound is.  They comment that they can hear everything
perfectly, but it's rarely too loud.  That being said, I've worked with a
few drummers who have told me, "I don't need to be mic'ed - I'm loud enough
already."  My reply is that I'm not mic'ing them so that they will be
louder, I'm mic'ing them so that their sound will be more full and even and
it will mix better with the rest of the band.  (Then I turn the drum mix up
in the band monitor, so they'll think they're playing too loud and will play
softer.  - If that doesn't work, I ask them to play softer.  If that doesn't
work, I stop using them!)

 

While I could do a whole class on setting sound, my point is that people
today expect much higher fidelity from live performances than they did even
20-30 years ago - certainly infinitely more than a century ago.  Ignore that
fact only if you don't give a damn if your band is shown in it's best light!
If you do ignore it, my band (or another one like it with good sound) will
likely be able to get the gig away from you next time!

 

By the way, I could also do a whole seminar on marketing live music
effectively, but that's way too far off topic for this letter, and I
understand that my good friends Steve Barbone and Tom Wiggins have already
shared marketing ideas here worth pure gold to anyone who would attempt to
use them, rather than criticize them.

 

Perhaps I've given some of you something to think about.  You're not going
to convince any audience that just because you want to play the music in the
old way, they should listen to it in the old way.  You'd be much more
successful with an attitude of, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!".

 

Here's an example of just that:  Last week we were on a Mexican cruise on
Carnival Cruise Lines.  For years Carnival has anguished over the
hit-and-miss quality of the onboard talent show.  If they produced one,
sometimes it was great - sometimes it was crappy.  If they didn't do one,
passengers would complain, "What happened to the passenger talent show?"
All the while, Karaoke was getting more and more popular, but a typical
Karaoke show was not very exciting.

 

Carnival came up with a novel and effective way to solve this problem.  They
"produced" a Karaoke production show.  Each singer auditioned to portray one
of about a dozen famous stars, such as Elvis, Madonna, Cher, Sinatra, etc.
The winners were placed in a stage show (in full costume of the character)
complete with dancers behind them and a full live show band!  The band
played along with the Karaoke track by having the rhythm section listen
through headphones and play along.  That way, the featured Karaoke guests
could still see their words on the TV screen hidden on stage for them.
Between Karaoke acts were production show numbers that featured the dancers
and the regular show singers.  The show received a quick standing ovation,
which IMO, was well deserved (Certainly NOT for the mostly awful Karaoke
singers, but for the wonderful concept of the whole show.)

 

I must admit that I wouldn't have even gone to this show, thinking it was
just another boring Karaoke sing-fest, except that we had to go to see if
our raffle tickets had won a free cruise - we didn't.  However, after seeing
the way they produced the show, I would say it was a brilliant way of
featuring passengers as performers and using the growing popularity of
Karaoke (and, unfortunately, the dwindling number of quality performers for
the talent show) to best advantage.  They used the dancers, the singers, the
costumes, the lighting and the live show band to create a fabulous
production using Karaoke singers, most of which otherwise would have been
ranked by me as less-than-adequate to perform in front of an audience.

 

Carnival could have just said, "No, we'll just do a passenger talent show
because that's what we've always done.'  Yet they knew that if they don't
change with the times, they'll become a relic of times-gone-by.  If we want
to keep OKOM alive and thriving, we've all got to think about how to reach
and appeal to today's more demanding audiences, or OKOM will indeed become a
relic of times-gone-by.  

 

John Wilder

JohnWilder at Comcast.net

 

 

P.S. - A special note to pianists:  The cruise I was just on had no pianist
in the show band - he was on two week vacation, and they didn't have a sub.
The last Carnival ship I was on had one for the show band, but he was
leaving at the end of our cruise, and they hadn't found one yet to replace
him.  The last three Carnival ships I've been on have had less-than-fabulous
pianists in the piano bar - one was a sax player from the show band who
agreed to play piano in the piano bar for some extra dough.  I am told that
Carnival is extremely short of good piano players, both for the show band
and for the piano bars and other venues.  I mentioned to the cruise director
that I used to work on ships, playing piano for ballroom dancers and in the
show band, backing up the show acts.  He offered me a job on the spot!  His
exact words were, "When can you start?"  Although I didn't take the job, if
there are any pianists out there capable of handling the job, I'm sure
Carnival Cruise Lines (and maybe some of the other lines as well) would love
to hear from you!