Wasted Talent By Choice Of Programme

[Alan Day]

There have been many talented artists that I have paid to watch or been part of the programme waiting for my turn and many times a very talented performer completely loses the plot by the choice of music or song they perform. Some I suppose go up on stage to do their thing,with no thought for entertaining the audience.

Sometimes technically brilliant but boring.Sometimes singing rude songs not suitable for any audience ,certainly not with young children sitting in front of them. Some of the songs I see requests for on another website,it makes me wonder where they go to perform them.

What a dissapointment when you travel miles to see somebody and driving back you wish you had not bothered.

This posting is in no way aimed at anybody who writes on this site.It is just a long term observation.

Al

[Robin Madge]

An interesting thread that has made me think and raises several points for me in particular.

There is a session that I go to once a month where I nearly always get requested to do a particular song of mine.

Firstly, I wonder if the audience in general are fed up with hearing the same song each month?

Secondly, do I just take it as a compliment and sing it anyway?

Thirdly, If I am going to sing it I'll have to make a special effort to really do it well so that it does not become boring to those who did not request it.

Fourthly, I'll have to write something better so that they start requesting that instead!

 

 

Robin Madge

[Alan Day]

Good point Robin,what you are in fact doing is entertaining,you are singing what the audience want to hear.Some may go just to hear you sing that song.Your other point about another song/s is also worth discussing as by introducing new material you are increasing the chances of a number of your songs being their favourites,which means you may not have to sing the same one every week.

I do think when some of these major artists put their programmes together that they remember that playing or singing a few of those tunes that made them famous is worth remembering.

 

A Ant. Dick ? not Adam by any chance?

Al

[Greg Jowaisas]

An interesting thread that has made me think and raises several points for me in particular.

There is a session that I go to once a month where I nearly always get requested to do a particular song of mine.

Firstly, I wonder if the audience in general are fed up with hearing the same song each month?

Secondly, do I just take it as a compliment and sing it anyway?

Thirdly, If I am going to sing it I'll have to make a special effort to really do it well so that it does not become boring to those who did not request it.

Fourthly, I'll have to write something better so that they start requesting that instead!

 

 

Robin Madge

 

I think it is a compliment Robin. Now you need to record your effort and see if their flattery will extend to a purchase of your new CD. Next time they make a request it will be the perfect segue for your promotional pitch: "I haven't really been practicing that song but it is on my new CD which I happen to have...."

 

Best of luck with your adoring fans,

 

Greg

[Greg Jowaisas]

Good point Robin,what you are in fact doing is entertaining,you are singing what the audience want to hear.Some may go just to hear you sing that song.Your other point about another song/s is also worth discussing as by introducing new material you are increasing the chances of a number of your songs being their favourites,which means you may not have to sing the same one every week.

I do think when some of these major artists put their programmes together that they remember that playing or singing a few of those tunes that made them famous is worth remembering.

 

A Ant. Dick ? not Adam by any chance?

Al

 

I grew up listening to Pete Seeger who knew how to put on a wonderful live concert.

He might start with a catchy banjo tune that got the audience tapping its feet; follow with a humorous song; get people singing with something familiar; and THEN follow with a controversial song to get people thinking. I got the feeling he might use two or three songs to set up one special song. As he got a feel for his audience Pete seemed to alternate the entertaining songs with the challenging songs. Like Shakespeare he could work an audience until they were ready to hear what they "needed" to hear.

 

 

The second half of a Pete Seeger concert following the intermission was more like a "Pete's or the Weavers' Greatest Hits show". By then the audience was in full participation and singing along with everyone of the songs he had written or helped to make popular.

 

My point, and I think Alan's, is that a performance can be a thoughtful collection of tunes, songs or entertainment that can lead an audience to where a performer would like to take them. That might include simple joy, an appreciation of an unfamiliar instrument, a greater sense of community, incitement to riot, or unbridled admiration for the performer's virtuosity.

 

Greg

[Samantha]

..... My point, and I think Alan's, is that a performance can be a thoughtful collection of tunes, songs or entertainment that can lead an audience to where a performer would like to take them. That might include simple joy, an appreciation of an unfamiliar instrument, a greater sense of community, incitement to riot, or unbridled admiration for the performer's virtuosity.

 

Greg

 

This is what I'd like to know more about - how to build a set (once you've got the tunes under your belt).

Samantha

[David Barnert]

This is what I'd like to know more about - how to build a set (once you've got the tunes under your belt).

Well, the first thing you want to think about is what's the context in which you'll be playing the set: Concert performance? Street (busking) performance? Background entertainment, for instance at a restaurant? Playing for dancers? Playing for your own enjoyment or at a session? Is your audience familiar with the genre of music you're playing? What are their expectations? The answers to all these questions will impose different stresses on your choice of program.

[PeterT]

This is what I'd like to know more about - how to build a set (once you've got the tunes under your belt).

Samantha

Hi Samantha,

 

I'm sure that your posting will get a variety of responses, and these will differ depending on whether the performer is full time profession, semi pro. etc. I'd class myself as semi pro. (i.e. in common with many performers, I have been paid for certain functions in the distant past) but I always attempt to perform with a professional attitude, and to a professional standard. Mistakes will happen, but I try to push my playing to, not beyond, my comfortable limits in public.

 

Depending on the length of performance, which could be anything from a short "floor spot" to "support artist" to 30 minute sets at clubs/festivals, you need to perform to the best of your ability, and (hopefully) make the audience want to hear you again. Note; a great performer will often go down much better than a gifted musician who is not such a great performer. You need to convey your personality as well as your playing ability to the audience.

 

To answer your specific question regarding set-building, here's how I would do it for two solo scenarios (1) a club booking, (2) a major concertina weekend, and (3) a duo scenario with the other musician on keyboard/MacCann Duet concertina.

 

 

(1) Club booking - two sets of 30 minutes, each along the lines of

 

Tune set on Anglo (a regular starter, to gauge how the venue feels)

Unaccompanied chorus song

Unacc. song

Tune set on Anglo

Tune set on MacCann Duet

Unacc. song

Unacc. chous song

"Party Piece" on Anglo

Unacc chorus song

 

Note: see notes under (3) for "mix and Match".

 

(2) Concertina weekend - concert spot of 3/4 items

 

Tune set on Anglo (dance tunes)

Tune on Anglo (maybe an air to contrast with previous set)

Tune set on Anglo (probably dance tunes in different keys from above, maybe using different Anglo)

"Party Piece" on Anglo to finish.

 

Note: with any concert spot, you'll know a time limit (obviously includes getting on / set-up / getting off, plus applause ), and you need to be flexible enough to drop an item if told that the event is running late. Of a 4 number "set", item 3 is generally the one which I would drop, so items 1,2,4 have to work well, and sound balanced.

 

(3) Club booking as a duo

 

Lively tune set using Anglo/MacCann (almost a throw-away set; settles us down)

Contrasting tune on Anglo/MacCann

Unacc. chorus song led by myself

Song by myself, accomp. on keyboard

Tune set with myself on English, accomp. by keyboard

"Part Piece" from myself on Anglo

Song from partner, self-accomp. on either keyboard or MacCann

Tune set using two MacCann Duets

"Part Piece" set to finish, using Anglo and MacCann

 

Note: I try to "mix and match" instruments, keys in which we play etc., to give the most variety possible with instruments and voices available. On English, I'm only playing single line melody, so the keyboard both "fills in" and adds interest in terms of the voice selected, volume, and style of the accompaniment. On MacCann, I've only got two or three tune sets which I would play in public (and these are now rusty!), but my partner is a really good MacCann player, so he takes the lead on any MacCann Duet duets.

 

As an aside, for one booking, we worked up a tune set which saw me starting on English and finishing on MacCann, with my partner starting on keyboard and finishing on MacCann. Interesting for the audience, and very loud!

 

Working as a duo can be easier than solo, as the audience will pick up on any banter between you. Working solo, unless you know the audience well (i.e. regular club booking, or regular floor spot), you have to build up that rapport.

 

Hope that this, plus subsequent postings, will answer your question.

 

Regards,

Peter.

[Brian Peters]

I've only ever planned my own programmes by the criteria of what I would enjoy if I were in the audience - I spent several years as a punter before doing any kind of public performance, and my memories of what I did and did not like are vivid. Big priority is simply committment to what you're doing. One guy (not a concertina player) that I used to hero-worship blew it completely in my eyes by turning in an uninterested, going-through-the-motions show, because he found the performing environment not to his liking. So lesson number one is, enjoy playing or singing however desperate the circumstances, and if that's impossible, at least try to look as though you are.

 

Peter's and Dick's ideas both revolve around the idea of variety. Personally I would be bored rigid by a whole evening of the same thing, be it reels or shanties, however well performed. If you sing as well as play, that gives you a great advantage. If you don't, then at least vary the musical style of what you play. But that doesn't mean just leaping about all over the place trying to make each piece contrast radically with the previous one. A sense of direction, of "leading an audience to where you would like to take them", as Greg said, is important too. So get a good starting piece that you know you can perform reliably (very important - you want to get off to a flying start), and that is accessible enough to grab your audience's attention, and then work towards your more demanding material ("demanding" could mean in terms of technical skill, or the concentration required of the audience, or both).

 

Alan's original point is good to keep in mind. If you're performing in front of people, you're an entertainer first and a musician second. Doesn't mean you have to tell jokes, but it does mean you don't need to disappear up your own backside with a display of empty virtuosity or a holier-than-thou attitude of: "this stuff is important so you will listen".

Brian

[Alan Day]

I think a lot can be learnt from the replies to my original posting.

It is all summed up by what Brian has just written by imagining what you would enjoy if you are in the audience and what you would like to hear.

I cannot talk with much authority on playing solo as it has been many years that I have done it, apart from recently at Lewes, I do most of my stage work as part of a band.I am a great believer even with a band of filling up those blank spaces between dances.With The Biggest Trio we filled these spaces with songs, tunes etc.It was greatly appreciated,good fun,good practice and rounded off a good evening.

I am looking forward to my solo bit at Warwick,it is in July.I have worked out a programme timed it ,it is with Audience in mind and although I shall be nervous I am determined we are all going to enjoy ourselves.

Al

[JimLucas]

There have been many talented artists that I have paid to watch or been part of the programme waiting for my turn and many times a very talented performer completely loses the plot by the choice of music or song they perform. Some I suppose go up on stage to do their thing,with no thought for entertaining the audience.

Alan, your selection of words says a lot about your personal viewpoint, but seems to assume that it's the only valid viewpoint. And while it's one I tend to share, I know that there are alternative attitudes. So I'll ask you: Are you reporting that you observed the audience in general to be dissatisfied, or is it simply your personal disappointment? In particular, if it's a paid act and they get return bookings, then why?

 

"Plot" - Many people don't require or expect a "plot", a movement toward a single goal, even if they enjoy one when it's present. A collection of individual numbers, each of which would be enjoyed by itself can be quite satisfying, just as a collection of short stories can be found as enjoyable as a novel.

 

"Entertaining" - To me that word implies adding some sort of "decoration"... patter, body movement, some sort of "show" above and beyond the content of the individual numbers. Also not necessarily a requirement for many people... e.g., they may be most satisfied by the direct story of a ballad, unadorned by commentary. And most people find singers or players who use dynamic expression more satisfying, but that also can be overdone to the point where it's worse than none at all (IMO).

 

So "no thought for entertaining the audience" might (in some cases) really reflect a different belief in what the audience finds entertaining. Of course, if the audience consists mainly of people who share your taste, then the performer won't get enthusiastic response.

 

Sometimes technically brilliant but boring.

I've experienced my share of this. And yet... how can there continue to be so much of it unless a substantial fraction of the public is pleased by it?

 

Sometimes singing rude songs not suitable for any audience ,certainly not with young children sitting in front of them. Some of the songs I see requests for on another website,it makes me wonder where they go to perform them.

Again, if all their audiences felt that way, would they be getting gigs? Different people have different standards for what's "suitable" and what's not in any particular situation. (Discussing those differences could easily overwhelm the rest of this Topic, and complete agreement would be impossible, so I won't try.) Some people even consider performances which violate outside-the-club suitability standards to be "entertaining" for that reason alone.

 

What a dissapointment when you travel miles to see somebody and driving back you wish you had not bothered.

It is disappointing, but in such an instance I don't blame the performer(s). Instead, I consider it to be a fault of my judgement (possibly my judgement of whose recommendations to follow). This doesn't mean that I won't express my opinion of the act, though.

 

I am looking forward to my solo bit at Warwick,it is in July.I have worked out a programme timed it...

Have you also practiced and timed the speaking parts in between "numbers"? That's not the only important aspect of performing, but it is the one most often neglected.

 

It's not necessary to tell long tales about each number. In fact, for a person who has difficulty either with "learning lines" or with public speaking generally, less can be "better". Also, as a rule it's better to speak less (use shorter "introductions") when the set itself is shorter. (There are exceptions. Arlo Guthrie's "Alice's Restaurant" is one. )

 

But whether long or short, it's important to know how much time is consumed by the speaking parts and to include those times in computing the length of the set.

[Alan Day]

An interesting alternative view Jim.It is of course based on my personal taste and if I am disapointed by a performers selection of material I shall think twice about going again. Some of the audience may go just for a night out, some specifically to hear an instrument played suberbly,some to hear old favourites,above all they go to be entertained.

I remember going to see two groups at Croydon Fairfield Halls.This is a big venue and an important place to play and is Folk well supported, Ralph Mc Tell for example was a sell out for the two concerts I attended.

One Group who at that time could top any bill,actually left the stage and sat in the audience watching two of them on stage doing a duet for the first time.Their reason was that they were just starting a tour and wanted to try it out. I thought that unprofessional and not the place to be practicing.

Another group decided to take the mickey out of Folk Music, although they were perfoming it.all stuck their fingers in their ears and did a close harmony Folk song, it was so good they got a standing ovation and could not repeat it as it was performed as a joke.They had completely misread the audience and split up soon after.

The Dubliners were a great dissapointment, again misreading what the audience wanted them to play and sing on that evening.

The artists who set the audience alight and get them yelling for more are not the artists doing their own thing, but doing an exciting programme which makes them a crowd puller, reading the audience like the example of Pete Seeger .The artists doing their own thing will still get a following,still get a round of applause,still get bookings,but what a waste of talent which could just be due to their attitude.Of course some are happy to plod along doing their own thing and do not want to progress any further.Good luck to them.

Al

[JimLucas]

An interesting alternative view Jim.

Well, here are some more. But my purpose in presenting them is not to dispute Alan's interpretations, rather to suggest to would-be performers the wide range of attitudes and motivations they themselves may consider adopting. What works for one may not work for another, and how you build your program should depend on your personal skills as much as on your desires. E.g., being able to make ad hoc adjustments to your set list on the basis of audience reaction is an asset, but only if you do it well.

 

One Group who at that time could top any bill,actually left the stage and sat in the audience watching two of them on stage doing a duet for the first time.Their reason was that they were just starting a tour and wanted to try it out. I thought that unprofessional and not the place to be practicing.

Sometimes admitting (or "admitting"?) that you're trying something new is a technique used to establish a rapport with an audience, in a sense including them in the act by "asking" for their reaction. But there's a big difference between "we'd like your opinion" and "we'll pay attention to you again in a few minutes".

 

Another group decided to take the mickey out of Folk Music, although they were perfoming it.all stuck their fingers in their ears and did a close harmony Folk song, it was so good they got a standing ovation and could not repeat it as it was performed as a joke.They had completely misread the audience and split up soon after.

I've seen others do that, but invariably what they're making fun of with their parodies is not what they're parodying (in this case, folk music) but the exaggerated stereotypical views some people have toward it.

 

But there's another point here, as it sounds like the audiences wanted the group to make that parody a regular part of their repertoire, and the group (at least some of them) wanted to be known for more serious things, instead. It reminds me of my own "novelty act" of playing "Banish Misfortune" on a tent pole (a hollow tube with no fingers holes or "mouthpiece", and I actually use a section of aluminum tent pole). I was appalled to discover that people were remembering me for that alone, and seemed to have lost all memory of my singing and playing on concertina and tin whistle. So I stopped doing that number, because I didn't want that to be the main basis of my reputation.

 

The Dubliners were a great dissapointment, again misreading what the audience wanted them to play and sing on that evening.

An interesting observation. The Dubliners have a large repertoire and can vary their sets considerably, but as a group they have a particular "style" which they present to the public and which they don't depart from, because it defines "The Dubliners". In public performances they don't depart from that style, not even for an audience that would like it if they did. In public they don't do Bach, or jazz, or '60's rock, though I know from backstage festival parties that they can do all of those, and superbly. (At one point they became the evening's rock band for the festival volunteers to dance to.) So I wonder if it's not more accurate to say that someone made a mistake in booking them for a non-"Dubliners" audience.

 

And I'm reminded of one Christy Moore concert, where some folks were shouting requests, and one in particular was being rather insistent. Christy's response: "I'm not a jukebox!" I'm sure some audience members were disappointed or even offended, but I think most of us were pleased. He was cheered. We were there to hear Christy the person, and to learn what was on his mind, not to have him parrot what was on ours. And if he had songs that we hadn't yet heard him do, we wanted to hear them, not just what we had on CD and could listen to when he was no longer around.

 

The artists who set the audience alight and get them yelling for more are not the artists doing their own thing, but doing an exciting programme which makes them a crowd puller, reading the audience like the example of Pete Seeger.

Pete is good at reading audiences, and more importantly, he's good at leading them. But he is also, first and foremost, "doing [his] own thing." He has succeeded not because he panders to an audience, but because he has accumulated a huge following of people who appreciate his point of view and style. There are actually quite a few people (I know some, personally) who find -- or would find -- his performances extremely boring or annoying. But they tend to avoid his performances, not attend them.

 

In my own performing, I like to incorporate both thematic sequences and sudden contrasts. For an audience that has heard me before, I always try to have at least a few new numbers. And I'll plan sets, but will often make ad hoc changes in response to a particular audience's reactions. Peter Bellamy, on the other hand, was extremely successful with very rigid performance sets. I first noticed this one summer when I saw him at two successive festivals and realized that the entire set, including his patter between the songs was identical, not just word for word, but even to the split-second pauses at various points.

 

So to all you who would perform, choose your style to suit your own talents. And not just your style of singing and playing, but your style of speaking, and even a "style" of building sets that suits you.

[JimLucas]

To Jim and Alan I might say that I have sometimes found the same performer both tedious and exhiliratingON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS AND REALISED IT WAS MY OWN PERSONAL MOOD.

And any performer can also have good days and bad days, even in terms of reading the audience.

[Brian Peters]

"Plot" - Many people don't require or expect a "plot", a movement toward a single goal, even if they enjoy one when it's present. A collection of individual numbers, each of which would be enjoyed by itself can be quite satisfying, just as a collection of short stories can be found as enjoyable as a novel.

Fair enough, but there are nonetheless items in any performer's repertoire that work well as openers, closers, encores or two-thirds-of-the-way-through-the-second-half-ers. The spooky supernatural ballad may not be heard at its best on an outdoor stage in afternoon sunshine, whereas the song about walking out on a May morning could well hit the spot. Starting off the night with a tear-jerker is not usual practice. It pays to at least consider the set order.

 

"Entertaining" - To me that word implies adding some sort of "decoration"... patter, body movement, some sort of "show" above and beyond the content of the individual numbers. Also not necessarily a requirement for many people... e.g., they may be most satisfied by the direct story of a ballad, unadorned by commentary. And most people find singers or players who use dynamic expression more satisfying, but that also can be overdone to the point where it's worse than none at all (IMO).

I agree absolutely with your last statement, and there's no single rule for this. The conventional view during my early years on the English folk scene was that traditional singers (real ones, that is) sang without any dynamic expression and let the song itself tell the story, like - for instance - Harry Cox. But then I heard recordings of Sam Larner and realised that any such generalisation was nonsense. Regarding your first point (and I don't mean to suggest you are condemning "decoration"), I wonder whether the careers of Alistair Anderson, John Kirkpatrick and Last Night's Fun would have been quite so successful if they hadn't used such devices as body movement, witty patter, and onstage banter, respectively.

 

Have you also practiced and timed the speaking parts in between "numbers"? That's not the only important aspect of performing, but it is the one most often neglected.

This is a good point. I used to play back-up for a performer who would regularly launch into lengthy preambles to the songs, but would never make allowance for them in the set list, with the result that we not infrequently ran out of time before getting to our "big finishers". In my own set I allow an average of five minutes per item including chat, but allowances need to be made for, say, a long ballad, or a piece which I know I might like to ramble on about.

Brian

[Brian Peters]

i once nearly caused a riot at Bicester folk club by telling a joke ,the audience thought it was very funnythe organiser did not , in fact he reprimanded me in front of the audience telling me he didnt pay me to tell jokes and to get on with singing songs.MAYHEM ENSUED.

Mayhem in a folk club? In Bicester?? Is nowhere safe these days?

[JimLucas]

Mayhem in a folk club?

It does seem an unlikely place for a heavy metal group.

(No link provided, because some might will find their web site offensive.)

[Brian Peters]

It does seem an unlikely place for a heavy metal group.

(No link provided, because some might will find their web site offensive.)

Ah well, I'll just have to Google it, then........... Oh dear, I don't think I'll trouble myself with the "downloads" section.

But what I really want to know is, what does the lady peering out from beneath a burka, and rejoicing in the name "ph34r", signify in your message? Sorry, I'm an Emoticon Luddite.