Supporting Pay-to-Play??? part 3
|
|
|
By:
|
evilbrowncoiler
|
|
Mood:
|
other
|
|
Date:
|
07/30/2007 08:02:26
|
|
Music:
|
Sheer Terror - Love Songs for the Unloved
|
|
|
I don't know about you, but I'm getting sick and tired of the music scene in OC.
1. Checking out local bands on MySpace and realizing that 99.8% of them suck (I mean really suck and suck hard).
2. Watching the same 5 sucky bands play show after show (only because one of their band members has a so-called "promotion" company).
3. Hearing about bands getting guaranties and never drawing more than 30 people at a show (some bands have been around for less than a year and are demanding guaranties with the same outcome).
I don't know about you but I go and look for new music all over the internet. Thank God for MySpace. I now have access to a vast majority of bands in any given location. What is also nice is that I have the ability to search and then sort my results by various criteria. It also allows me to hear other bands that are playing on the same bill as us. This brings me to my first point. What has happened to bands these days? I realize that there are far more bands than there used to be, but that doesn't mean that people aren't going to hear you at some point (especially if you play shows). I'm starting to believe that most of these bands are together for the sole purpose of getting the band members laid because it sure isn't about making music. Now, I think it's totally cool that you can play an instrument, but I also believe you should learn to play that instrument especially before trying to play a show and since good shows are getting harder and harder to come by.
This brings me to my next point... Why do the same 5 to 10 bands seem to play the decent shows? The answer... because someone in the band is either booking at a local venue or has a so-called promotion/booking company. I realize that they are providing a service for out of town bands by hooking them up with shows but what I don't think they understand is that people don't want to go see the same 5 opening acts with every out of town band that comes through, especially with ticket prices being what they are. Why would anyone want to see the same show (except for one band, the headliner) over and over again? I mean even if you liked all the bands on the bill, seeing them at every show would get a little boring. So there is no reason why you should wonder why venues are having bands pay-to-play. You either have bands that can't play their instruments or the same 5 bands playing show after show. This brings me to my final point. A guaranty is just that, a guaranty. This means that as a band, your name will draw a certain amount of people no matter when and where you play. The trouble is venues can't trust their headliners to draw enough to even cover the guaranty that the band is asking for. So now if the headliner can't seem to draw 50 people what makes you think that another band that is not even as popular as the headliner is going to draw more than 50 people yet they will ask for a guaranty as well and get it (just because you played in a band once that could get a guaranty doesn't mean that your new band deserves one). Now, don't get me wrong. If a band can get a venue to fork over a guaranty, then more power to them. But to make a small local band pay for that guaranty is WRONG. Can't you see that you (a band that doesn't draw but wants a guaranty) are the major reason venues are demanding that the opening bands must sell tickets? This makes you a major problem. I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that you are probably the same guys that scream about "helping the scene" and "how WE should be supporting the scene". Then why don't you practice what you preach. Put that money (your precious guaranty) where your mouth is.
| 
