Creativity versus Revenue

[Cloud]

Right, here's a question inspired by several things.

Is it better for gigs to be creative and varied and "risky" - say two touring bands and a couple of supports who are very different but don't have a fanbase but are musically amazing, or is it better for gigs to get as many people through the door at the expense of variation and creativity?

I'd be interested to hear different perspectives on this.

[The Ghost Of Fudge]

you'll need a troup of russian acrobats for a balancing act like that........

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

Keith Tippet "May music never just become another way of making money!"

[Hog]

I think you can get a balance. For example I thought last night at the Malt Mill was very varied and it worked.

[ThanksAttack]

Where as the Fickle Public, Distophia, copy haho, Turning 13 gig didnt work. And before anyone starts there was flyers, posters etc out and about and posts on here so im just not sure what works.

[delboy]

it really is a lottery at times, the gigs you think will pull dont and the ones you you dont do!

[ThanksAttack]

Yeah spot on.

[Cloud]

Where as the Fickle Public' date=' Distophia, copy haho, Turning 13 gig didnt work. And before anyone starts there was flyers, posters etc out and about and posts on here so im just not sure what works.[/quote']

How many people came through the door for that?

[The Milner]

they do work if you get the right blend of good bands. Im not saying any of those bands wernt good i havent heard most of them. I kinda prefer mixed gigs it gives the audience a far more interesting nights, we had some great nights with point in drakes playing with bands that were nothing like us at all and we have had a couple with stayover that have worked well. All punk gigs can be good but only if there are the right mix the same goes with metal really i think.

[trinitynscotland]

something to ponder

I'd say the first. Its important for the music to stay creative.

The later will happen anyhow if its any good.

But if the music is not creative or jells then you've lost the plot.

Take care,

Bobbie

Right' date=' here's a question inspired by several things.

Is it better for gigs to be creative and varied and "risky" - say two touring bands and a couple of supports who are very different but don't have a fanbase but are musically amazing, or is it better for gigs to get as many people through the door at the expense of variation and creativity?

I'd be interested to hear different perspectives on this.[/quote']

[Alan Cynic]

There are 2 viewpoints here....the promoters one, which sees the event as successful if a lot of money is made (understandably), and the audience one, which might not be bothered about a big turnout, so long as the music is good (although I agree that a big audience can create a buzz, spur on bands etc).

A lot of the music I like tends never to draw massive crowds anyway, so I'm always impressed at a varied bill. I also think we're lucky to have promoters who love the music enought NOT to get overly concerned about making a big profit, and who act as a public service....eg Interesting Music, Drakes Productions, Vocoustics etc etc

[betamax]

varied line ups helps I think

the last thing Id wanna see is 4 x 45 minute sets of bands that sound a bit like each other

the second that venues and promoters start playing the numbers game, totally at the expense of quality it all becomes less interesting than karoake....they should fuck of to Butlins

tricky one cos people have to make money, but I cant see the point of shit music (which is what usually brings out the masses)

[Alan Cynic]

Agreed......if the promoters make money, they can put on more great shows. It's a fine balance getting it right.

I forgot to mention the band's viewpoint.......personally I like a varied bill (keeps the brain stimulated! )

[Guest davetherave]

Totally agree with Alan and Betamax's comments, I've been in bands where we ended up playing what the audience wanted to hear instead of what we wanted to play and it just didnt work for me. I'm much happier playing something honest and original to a small crowd, rather than covers to a full house.

Speaking of playing to small crowds, those fine gentlemen at Interesting Music have organised another synergy event at the Tunnels on April 1st, and yours truly is playing (East of Insanity). Expect much scary looping, ebowing, screeching and haunting Fripp type sounds designed to make you poo yer pants.

Couldnt play that at the Malt Mill

Dave

[HummerOfIntenseEvil]

A headliner to pull in the crowds and support acts to provide some creativity and variation. That way there's a chance of getting the more creative stuff heard by a bigger audience.

If it's got to be one or the other though, I'd go for creativity and variation. As a spectator, I couldn't care less if there's hardly anyone else there to see what turns out to be an amazing band. It just makes you think "haha, I saw them and no one else did".

[palmer_eldritch]

When we played in Birmingham's "Hard Rock Cafe" recently (during a showcase of UK bands), for around 7 hours we sat and watched all the other bands - and there were LOTS of them. All the bands played variations on metal and punk. It was really frustrating, when finally a fantastic blues act, MI4, came on and totally blew everyone away. It was so refreshing, and was just what I needed as a wake-up call.

We left shortly after them, and probably missed a lot more of the same stuff we had been listening to all day.

Although this was a showcase, and not a gig, its just an example of how i feel a varied line-up is necessary. I would find myself getting more bored at a gig dedicated to a genre, as opposed to a variety of bands.

I'm actually slightly amazed at how varied line-ups seem to attract less people...

[NARC]

As long as variation doesn't involve shred or folk in the same gig! I tend to go to see a particular band, because usually the support will be in the same vein.

[Doc Ascension]

I think the gig on Saturday at the Moorings was pretty spot on in terms of balance!!

We had a Pantera-style metal band (Weeping Jesus), a punk band (Shatterhand), a New Found Glory-esque Punkish band (Dirtbox) (thats the best thing i can come up with to describe em!) and us (Ascension) who are Power Metal.

Now that is what I call variety, and even tho Punk ain't my bag - substituting the Punk for another 2 metal bands might not have worked so well

[jester1470]

As long as variation doesn't involve shred or folk in the same gig! I tend to go to see a particular band' date=' because usually the support will be in the same vein.[/quote']

This is a difficult one, I mean I've seen Jo on some very interestinmg bills that have really worked, because of the differences, only on Sunday you had the acoustic music ofd Claire Hamilton side by side with the growl of Element 106 and it worked, a good time was had by all, and it worked, well up to a point. A lot of bigger acts are quite good at cutting the balance, prmarily because they know the money's there anyway so they can take a risk on a different type of support. I think it is eqsy to forget that certain bnds have to make a certain amount to make going , likewuise promoters cant lose money on bills, whatever bill you do have, a maximisation of style can certainly create a bigger crowd through the door, though theres no guarantee they'll stay foirthe whole night. Music is a busuiness and its a difficult balance.

Cheers

Stuart

[Doc Ascension]

Sometimes, however, it is nice to go and see a whole night of music of the same genre - it is possible for it all to be unique and not too samey aswell.