|
In this blog post… Famous goosers in rock history. Good goosing versus goosing gone too far. Avocado Disappointment and Victor Movlove. Bob Marley and The Wailers, starring Family Man. How to cure a bad case of goosing. In his autobiography, jazz legend Miles Davis mentions a player who ‘gooses” the rhythm. Goosing is a slang term which means pinching another person’s buttock in order to hurry them up. The gooser, in a musical sense, is a musician or a singer who plays slightly ahead of the beat, and this has the effect of accelerating the tempo of the band as a whole. A gooser can be of two kinds: a player who occasionally plays notes too impatiently (e.g., due to getting overly excited at choruses or crescendos) or a player who consistently plays every note slightly early (a.k.a. playing on top of the beat). The other players in the band can try to ignore a gooser and maintain the original tempo, but the rhythm will then seem like it is slowly deflating. The music’s vitality will start to drain away. Realistically, once a musician plays even one note slightly ahead of the beat, the other band members must react. They have to follow the gooser and step up to the new, faster tempo he or she has set. The gooser may then goose again, and the other musicians will have to step up again, and so the cycle continues, with the song getting faster and faster... Having a gooser in the band is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when playing energetic rock music. Keith Richards of The Rolling Stones is a famous gooser of the tempo. Live and on studio recordings, you can hear him dragging the rest of the band along behind him. Charlie Watts, the band’s drummer, was a master of following Keith’s every acceleration. Take a listen to the original version of Honky Tonk Woman. The cowbell and drums start off the song at a steady 111bpm. Keith’s very first guitar lick is impatiently played and this immediately gooses the tempo up to 113bpm. Then the roller coaster ride begins... The song reaches 118bpm by the end of the first verse. A lot of acceleration then happens during the first chorus. By the end of the song, the band are playing at 126bpm. Quite an increase in tempo! (A 14% increase.) The song is a classic though. It has loads of energy because of the continual acceleration and it sounds great. Other great performances that are goosed and which accelerate considerably:
Goosing becomes a problem when it is excessive and when the other musicians have a hard time keeping up. An amateur musician or singer may get overly excited when they reach a chorus or a crescendo part in the song. Their intention is to give a boost of energy to the music at this moment. They hit harder, increase their volume (often a good thing) and push the tempo too fast in too short a space of time (NOT a good thing). The effect is the opposite of the one intended: the song’s energy is lost. Another way goosing can be a problem is when there is more than one gooser in the band. In this scenario, tempos can get out of hand quickly! Victor Movlove One excessive gooser I knew was a bassist called Victor Movlove. We briefly played in the band Avocado Disappointment together. Victor was a tall, joyful guy and renowned gooser (only in the musical sense, I hasten to add). At one Avocado Disappointment concert, I began to play the guitar intro to Chuck Berry’s Johnny B Goode at the regular tempo, which is already fast, only for Victor to push the tempo so fast, it was impossible for me to play the solo I had planned in the second half of the song. Abort! Abort! I had to improvise a much simpler solo on the spot; one that was possible to play at the now ridiculous tempo. The drummer was also dragged along. He dropped beats in order to catch up and messed up drum fills which were now impossible to play at this break-neck speed. This was probably the most punk rock version of Johnny B Goode ever played. On another occasion, Avocado Disappointment were recording a demo song in a recording studio. Victor Movlove laid down his bass line on top of a pre-recorded percussion track. The producer noticed Victor playing was on top of the beat and in the DAW (recording software) was able to move the bass back by a certain number of milliseconds relative to the percussion track. The track immediately sounded groovier. How to deal with an excessive gooser The gooser may not be aware they are pushing the beat, so it’s best to tell them: “Roger, you are f***ing up the rhythm!”, or words to that effect. You should probably sugar-coat the message a little. A fellow musician once told me that I was pushing the beat. His comment stung me. It hurt my feelings. After listening back to some of our recordings though, I knew he was right. I felt deflated. I then spent a month focusing on this aspect of my playing and I largely sorted it out. So, I urge you to tell it to the gooser straight, at the risk of offending him or her. It will be better for the band and for the gooser also (although, don’t expect to be thanked for delivering this message!) And, of course, make sure YOUR playing is on point before giving them the bad news! Things an Excessive Gooser can do to improve
Ultimately, if the excessive gooser doesn’t stop excessively goosing the tempo, it may be better that you let them go and find a replacement. Another related aside… While gradually goosing the rhythm can give a lot of energy to a song such as Honky Tonk Woman, other classic performances slow down during the song and sound great nonetheless. For example, Stir it up (live at The Old Grey Whistle Test, 1973) by Bob Marley and The Wailers. Family Man Barrett, the bassist, pulls on the rhythm (plays very slightly behind the beat of the drums) and this gradually decelerates the tempo of the band during the song. It is interesting to listen to the start of the song and then skip to the end, to hear just how much of a reduction in tempo has occurred. The effect of Family Man playing slightly behind the beat is a very grooving, relaxed rhythm; the opposite of the ‘rocking’, goosed rhythms of the songs mentioned earlier. And certainly the opposite of Victor Movlove. (Some musician and band names in this article have been changed to protect identities.) Mark Baxter (c) 2024
0 Comments
A Dadolescent Rocker is a guy who, after a Saturday afternoon spent choosing cushion covers with his wife, finally says enough is enough and decides to rekindle a teenage dream. He goes online and orders a brand new, cherry red Fender Stratocaster guitar from Andertons.co.uk. It’s an American-made one. A good one. Expensive. One like the pros play. The Dadolescent Rocker’s goal is to recreate the muscular guitar style of certain famous players in the Classic Rock/Blues Rock genre. In rank order, the most-admired and emulated players are:
More than simply emulating these guitarists, Dadolescent Rockers (DRs) aim to recreate, precisely and in fine detail, the original versions of their famous guitar songs. The “tone” must, of course, be spot on: being a DR often goes hand-in-hand with a degree of gear-nerdery. The original guitar solos must be replicated note-for-note. Transcriptions of the solos are bought from online teachers. DRs often go as far as to recreate small mistakes the famous guitarist made on the original recording. This insistence on attempting an exact replication of the original guitar parts always seemed odd to me for a couple of reasons:
Other typical DR behaviour when first playing in a band:
Summary DRs are new to the game. They may have played a little in their youth, but have only picked up the guitar again recently, within the last couple of years. Some DRs will advance to a good level quickly and some will not. If you meet a DR who is exhibiting the traits mentioned above, then perhaps you should avoid them in a band context, at least for the time being. A novice DR would rate around 8/10 on the musician toxicity scale. You’ll end up wasting a lot of time trying to correct certain aspects of their band playing and you’ll also waste a lot of time continually asking them to be quiet between songs at rehearsals, so that some discussion of those songs can take place. Those DRs who have already been in a band or two are a much better bet.
Mark Baxter (c) 2024 Most amateur bands copy the original versions of songs they cover note-for-note. Their aim is to perfectly recreate the studio versions of the songs live on stage. Even guitar solos, the obvious place in a rock song where a musician could go wild and do his own thing, will often be an exact copy of the original recorded solo. Or, at least, an attempt to be an exact copy of the original recorded solo. However, there is one main reason why you should consider breaking away from the blueprint of an original version when covering a song. This is to change key to help the singer sound the best they can with their particular voice: Transposing songs to different keys Once you have considered your singer’s vocal style and approximate vocal range when selecting songs for the band (see blog post #5: Choosing which songs your band will play), you should now work with the singer to figure out precisely the key that will be best for them to sing each song in. Have the singer sing through each song in different keys. Are low notes or high notes difficult for him/her in the different keys? Hone in on the best key through trial and error. You don’t need to do this as a band. You can accompany the singer alone on your acoustic guitar or keyboard in order to decide on a key for each song. On the guitar, this is easy: just use a capo on different frets and play the same chord shapes. Obviously, you shouldn’t put the capo on fret 11 to play when on stage at a gig (your guitar will sound like an out-of-tune mandolin), but you can do this when settling on the best key for the singer. If it so happens that the best key is when your capo is on fret 11, you can figure out afterwards how to play the same chords in a more comfortable position further down the neck. In some cases, transposing a song to another key will not be possible. For example, when a song has an iconic electric guitar part using open strings, such as is the case with some Jimi Hendrix songs. Changing keys means the iconic guitar part cannot now be played. So, a choice has to be made: totally rearrange the guitar part (many amateur guitar players will resist this idea!) or drop the song and choose another. For the most part though, you will be able to change the key of an original song to better suit your singer. This is the sensible thing to do. As mentioned previously, the singing IS the song, literally. So, how the singer sounds should be the first consideration and the rest of the band should fit in around the singing. Lengthening a song Another reason you may want to break away from an original version of a song you are covering is to lengthen it. Studio recordings of the past were often limited to three minutes due to the constraints of vinyl singles and radio airplay. These constraints don’t apply to live gigs. And, often, if the band is grooving and members of the audience have started to get off their seats to dance, three minutes is a bit short. It will be disappointing for the dancers when the song ends so soon. Here are some examples of how you might consider altering original versions to lengthen them for live performance:
Ending a song Even if you are planning to cover original songs note-for-note, some creativity will often be required at the end of a song. This is because many studio-recorded songs fade out to silence, something that is not easy for a live band to coordinate. Instead, it’s better that you invent some snappy, synchronised endings. Check out other live bands to hear how they end their songs. This will give you some ideas if you are struggling to come up with good endings of your own. Avoid too many uncoordinated ‘drizzle out’ endings. A drizzle out is when the band reduces intensity and slows down slightly over the final chords, perhaps playing these chords as single strums on guitar and single hits on the cymbals, before playing a final sustained tonic chord. The band holds this last chord for a while and then band members go silent at different times in an uncoordinated way. Perhaps the guitar player will have a last little inconclusive tinkle after everyone else has stopped. The audience is confused. Is it over? They don’t know when to clap. They may not even clap at all, due to the sad and uninspiring demise of the song. Drizzle outs are not big applause getters. Crash! Bang! Wallop! endings are better applause getters. A Crash! Bang! Wallop! ending is a coordinated and snappy ending where all the players stop dead at precisely the same moment. The abrupt silence that follows shocks audience members and has the effect of an electric cattle prod spurring them into spontaneous applause, for some reason. This technique rarely fails. If you will be performing your own compositions or radically different arrangements of other artists’ songs, here are some things to keep in mind: Avoid too much predictability and repetition in your arrangements Years ago, I played in a violin/guitar duet. We played background music in restaurants. One of our songs was Elenor Rigby by the Beatles. There are two different sections in the song: an A and a B section. Our arrangement of the song was a very unimaginative A B A B A B A B format. It was easy for us to remember this way. One evening, when we were in the middle of the song and had just started playing the third A section, I distinctly heard one diner seated close to me groan and say “Oh no! Not again!” Little did he know we were only a little past the halfway point of the song! It’s best to break up a Verse/Chorus or A/B format. For example, you could play Verse Verse Chorus Verse Chorus Middle 8 Verse Chorus Chorus. (A ‘Middle 8’ is a contrasting section.) Alternatively, you could play Verse Chorus Verse Chorus Instrumental Verse Chorus. To avoid being too repetitive it’s best not to play a third verse after having played Verse Chorus Verse Chorus. The same applies to playing a third A section after having played A B A B. This is the curse of the third verse. Something different should occur after the second chorus/B section for the sake of variety. Add dynamics Many guitarists start playing at one dynamic level and maintain it throughout the entire song. There is no light and shade in their playing. No variation in intensity nor energy. When arranging songs, aim for all instruments in the band to have varying dynamics throughout each song. Have some instruments drop out for sections. Or have them play less notes or less heavily at certain moments. Make verses dynamically low and build to crescendo for the choruses (without increasing the tempo too much at the same time, which is a common issue when crescendoing). The band sound will then burst into the musical equivalent of glorious 3D technicolour. Think frequencies When arranging songs, think frequencies. Especially in regard to the vocals. If the musicians learn how to play the vocal melody of the song on their guitar or keyboard, in the same octave as the singer, they can then better make decisions about which notes they should play to stay out of the way of the singer. If the singer is having a hard time being heard clearly you can arrange the other instruments to give him or her some space. For example, the guitar player could play chords with reduced notes in them, rather than full-on barre chords. A related point: if the singer is finding it hard to pitch their voice at a moment in a song, another player may be playing a note that conflicts with the note the singer is trying to sing. For example, somewhere within a guitarist’s chord, there may be a note one semitone away from the note the singer is trying to sing. Have the guitarist replace or get rid of the offending note in his chord in this instance. Fills I have played the song Hey Joe by Jimi Hendrix a lot in bands and at a lot of jam sessions over the years. The format of the song is two bars of singing (over the chords C G D A) then two bars of no singing (over an E5 chord). When there is no singing, the musicians can get creative and fill this gap, i.e., play a fill. In some renditions of this song that I have been involved in, ALL the musicians in the band pile in and start going crazy during the E5 part: they all play different fills at the same time. Some of them highlight the minor third (a G note). Some highlight a major third (a G# note). It can be pretty chaotic. When arranging and rehearsing songs, it’s best to figure out who will fill where. What sounds good in your bedroom may not sound good in a band setting For example, in a student band I was recently involved with, Censorious John and the J-Pegs, the guitar players started playing Rock Around the Clock using full barre chords strummed like a thrashy punk song. It had a lot of punk energy. You couldn’t hear the singer nor the walking bass line clearly. At home, when practising, the guitar players had probably gotten the most satisfying sound playing this way. Their chords included bass notes and their many strums produced a lot of energy and rhythm. They created a full sound all by themselves. However, when with the other instruments at rehearsal, this maximal way of playing was overkill. In the original Bill Haley version of Rock Around the Clock, the guitar chords use only the higher notes and relatively few strums every bar. It’s a sparse guitar part and it sounds great. The bassist and the drummer provide all the other stuff to fill the sound out. And there is space for the singer to be heard clearly too. Be aware of what the other musicians are doing in your band. It’s okay to do a Phil Spector* and double up parts for a fuller sound. Often though, you’ll want to reduce the amount of notes you play for the band to have a clearer, less cluttered sound. Especially if you are playing chords on guitar or keyboards. You can reduce the notes you play both vertically (i.e., reduce the number of notes you play in a chord) and horizontally (e.g., reduce how many times you hit the chord over, say, two bars). * Phil Spector was a producer in the 1960s, famous for his ‘Wall of Sound’. This was a technique of recording many musicians in a room, all playing at the same time. Often there would be a doubling or trebling of certain instruments. For example, two or three guitars. Phil Spector produced records had a dense, orchestral texture that sounded good through the speakers of the radios and record players of the time. Summary Even if planning to copy original songs faithfully, consider changing their keys to better suit your singer’s range. Consider lengthening each song. You don’t need to be constrained by the three-minute format when performing a song live. You will have to create your own endings to some songs. For your own compositions and also unique interpretations of originals, consider these aspects of song arrangement: variety (avoid the curse of the third verse), dynamics, frequencies, fills and restricting individual parts so they fit better with the rest of the band.
(Some names of individuals and bands mentioned in this blog post were changed to protect identities.) Mark Baxter (c) 2024 In this blog post… Graham Stove fails to tame HAL 9000. Blazing guitar solos vs. plink-plonk guitar solos. A sleek, red Ferrari vs. Charlie Chaplin’s car. Careless Santana and his tiny 5-inch speaker. Tambana’s gig at the yacht club. Dave Perry does an amusing impression of a microphone. In blog post #4, we looked at a common character who you can expect to meet when playing in rock bands and at open-mics and jam sessions. Namely, the Gear Nerd. The Gear Nerd is obsessive about equipment. He must have the optimal guitars, amps and pedals. The gear aspect of making music is more important to him (invariably the Gear Nerd is a guy) than other aspects, such as learning how to play the chord G or how to play a C major scale. The exact opposite of the Gear Nerd also exists: The Gearophobe. A classic example of the gear-phobic guitar player was a former guitar student of mine who played in one of the student bands I organized. The band was called Philosoraptor. The guitar player was called Graham Stove. Graham Stove Graham Stove owned a large guitar amplifier. It was a so-called modelling amp, with an LCD screen, lots of small buttons and many options in terms of guitar sounds. Unlike the typical Gear Nerd, who would probably spend upwards of 10 hours researching an amp before purchasing, Graham, being a gearophobe, had not researched this amp at all. He had simply popped into his local guitar shop on a Saturday afternoon and bought it on the recommendation of the salesperson. Graham’s amp turned out to be a liability. It behaved in totally unpredictable ways and seemed to have a mind of its own. Sometimes, one of us would try to make a simple adjustment to the amp, for example lowering it’s volume slightly. The amp would then inexplicably switch to a different preset (sound). What had been a nice clean sound was all of a sudden transformed into full-on Scandinavian death metal. And then we would spend ages trying to find the clean preset again. I christened the amp “HAL 9000” after the disobedient computer from the film 2001: A Space Odyssey. After wasting time at several rehearsals, I concluded that Graham would never get around to reading the amp’s manual and we could not rely on him to gain control over HAL 9000 any time soon. So, I suggested he borrow a more ‘normal’ amp from a fellow Philosoraptor band member for future rehearsals and gigs. When borrowing this other amp though, Graham’s approach was similarly non-interventionist: he would simply plug his guitar into the amp and switch it on. Job done! Whatever sound happened to come out of the amp at that moment was Graham’s sound for the rest of the evening. No attempt was made to improve the sound to better suit the music we were trying to play. Even the simple controls (especially compared to those of HAL 9000) were too much for Graham to be bothered with. His “hands-off” approach caused two main problems…
Careless Santana My old band, Tambana, once had a gig at a yacht club in Cornwall in the U.K. The guitarist, Careless Santana, considered his small practice amplifier to be sufficient to play this gig. His thinking was that amp size doesn’t matter: the sound engineer can position a microphone in front of the amp and run the sound it captures though the big speakers of the P.A. system. This is true to an extent, but perhaps not when the amp is a very cheap one with a speaker measuring an unimpressive five inches, as was the case with Careless Santana’s amp. Despite the band’s reservations about his little amp, Careless assured us that all would be fine at the gig. At the gig, Careless positioned his tiny amp on the floor beside himself. The top of the amp was at a level just slightly higher than the tops of my Dr. Marten’s boots. Dave Perry was the sound guy that evening. At Careless’s request, Dave positioned a mic in front of the tiny five-inch speaker of the amp. When Careless was out of earshot, Dave did a funny impression of the microphone, looking left and right as if searching for something and saying “What am I supposed to do?” That evening, Careless Santana’s guitar sound had all the warmth and charm of a handbag rape alarm. Summary As I mentioned in blog post #4 (Gear Nerds), musicians need to have some okay gear and know how to use it. See the end of blog post #4 for my advice on basic gear for guitarists to play local rock gigs.
(Some names of individuals and bands mentioned in this blog post were changed to protect identities.) Mark Baxter (c) 2024 |
Blog: How to form a rock band. Also, how NOT to form a rock band.About this blog
These blog posts contain info I would like to pass on to my music students when they form their first bands and start to play live gigs. I explain more here in my first blog post.
Author
Mark Baxter, musician, music teacher, guitarist, bassist, drummer. English expat living in Belgium.
Archives
February 2025
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed