Why so many "copyists"?

Quote from londonjeepster

"Hendrix didnt strive to be outside the box"? no comment.

I think u misunderstood him. Read on!

I was going to say many things about that subject but i think ill say that whatever makes you wanna play, inspires u and makes u enjoy music cant be that bad. People play for different reasons and hear music differently so it is only natural that their approach and their needs are different.
Less importantly: I also beleive that people copying tones are learning about tones in general and how everything works together. Maybe along the way they start learning about themselves, their preferences and what it is about an artists tone that made them attracted to it in the first place and then perhaps they dont need to have the same tone because they just realise they need this or that characteristic.
Sometimes while trying to recreate people stumble upon.
Others just do their own thing from the beggining.
Different people different ways, id be surprised if things were any different right?

But most importantly refer to my first paragraph

Cheers!

Something I forgot to mention in my prior post:
These greatest guitarists of all times can easily get their hands on the rarest and most expensive amps to try, buy, record, gig. It's way more difficult if not impossible for us regular mortals. But now with the Kemper we have a chance to try all these phantasic amps for free or for a small amount of money. I think this kind of "copying" is one of the most important achievements of the KPA. Personally, I'm not a big fan of copying the 100% exact sound of famous guitarists on specific songs/recordings including all effects and rig settings. But if I could get my hands on a set of profiles from a Van Weelden Twinkleland (inspired by Joe Bonamassa), how could I say no just to try and experience on my own?

Quote from londonjeepster

"Hendrix didnt strive to be outside the box"? no comment.

We've deified him, but I firmly believe he wasn't actively trying to be different but simply get the music inside him out. Some Hendrix quotes you might appreciate:

Quote

"The music I might hear I can't get on the guitar. It's a thing of just laying around daydreaming or something. You're hearing all this music, and you just can't get it on the guitar. As a matter of fact, if you pick up your guitar and just try to play, it spoils the whole thing. I can't play the guitar that well to get all this music together, so I just lay around. I wish I could have learned how to write for instruments. I'm going to get into that next, I guess."

Quote

I don't want to be a clown anymore. I don't want to be a 'rock and roll star.

specifically referring to wanting to play with jazz musicians, he thought they didn't see him as a serious enough player.

Quote

[Performing]...was very hard for me. At first I was so scared. I wouldn’t dare go on stage. Like, I joined this band, and I knew about three songs, and when it was time for us to play on stage… I had to play behind the curtains. I couldn’t get up in front. Plus you get so very discouraged. You hear different bands playing around you, and the guitar player seems like he’s always so much better than you are. Most people give up at this point because they get very discouraged. But just keep on, keep on, [and] you can make it. That’s the only way I tried to make it, is being very persistent.

But all that's besides the point. Some folks like to look down on cover bands or folks who aspire to sound like other musicians but then hold up examples of their "art" which are so inspired by their influences that they might as well be reworkings of known songs. It's not for you or me to define how others enjoy their instruments. But I'll leave you with this question. One guitarist focuses his free time writing originals working a day job to pay the bills while another guitarist makes his living playing 5 nights a week in a cover/wedding band. Who is the sell out?

Quote from londonjeepster

Well its not the Sixties any more and "selling out"isnt really relevant these days,everyone just does what they have to do to get by.and personally i dont look down on covers bands,but there do seem to be a hell of a lot of them around ,i suppose its just what the market dictates.

I know quite a few guys who've devoted their lives to music at any cost. When your starving, you don't turn down gigs. Doing what you have to do to get by is relative to one's priorities. There are indeed a great many cover bands around, but can't blame them. In my area, a good cover band can easily earn a couple thousand a night while an original band is lucky to get $100.

Jeepster, I've been playing in cover bands ,of some sort for nearly 50 years, And I don't think there are more cover bands, Just fewer places to play. There has allways been a dance medium in popular music, but the difference was that it could allways be played/covered by a band, not a just a DJ. And we all try to at least approximate the sound and tone of our Heroes and Favorites.

Quote from londonjeepster

Could be its more prevelant in the UK,lots of venues that once had original bands now have mainly tributes/covers

kind of agree !!! when I first started playing in bands most venues put on original artists and cover bands were resigned to play the working mens clubs (then deemed the lesser circuit)... public demand has changed along with the music industry.. there are far far less original artists selling today (thanks cowel, I hold you and your lesser known cronies entirely responsible).!!!!! nothing wrong with a good cover band though !

a good musician is a good musician no matter what he or she plays !

Quote from londonjeepster

I have noticed that a lot of fellow Kemperists seem to be obsessed with "nailing" the tone of other usually famous guitarists rather than creating their own sound,is that fair comment? is this due to the (in my view unwelcome) proliferation of covers bands these days? or is it just for the fun of sounding like their heroes?
i do realise that the economic reality these days is that sometimes playing covers is the only way to get gigs so maybe that explains it?
personally i have always used my own sound,for better or worse!

What is the attraction for some players to any device to play through if it's not nailing a tone you seek? Whether the tone is in one's head or already "out there" as a live or recorded work? I believe that folks "style" is a contributing factor to originality and "tone". How the combo fits the songs and genre of musical style matters too.

I would think most players are curious when they hear something that impresses and maybe inspires them. That sort of thing has sold a lot of gear over the years.

Some might be looking to sound exactly like < fill in the blank> -------- and if their choice allows that, then there's some level of success to at least acknowledge.

I sound like myself whether I was playing through Hiwatt, Vox, Trainwreck, Marshalls, etc, etc. etc. The fact Kemper allows me to have those amps and more conveniently, < meaning specific favorite examples of those amps > is what got me to buy it, and use it. I think an "amp" is more interesting if it can allow you to get exactly what you need out of it. Be that a "copy" or "never heard in the universe", or something in between..

A great amp is one that allows you to do what you want and "nail it".

A band being cover or original is dictated by their choices of venues and commercial realities. If you audience loves what they are hearing, it's a moot point.

Artists doing their own material with commercial success became more of a norm post the British invasion in rock and pop. Even the Beatles did covers on their albums early on.. Places like Nashvegas still make room for writers that rely on artists to cover their compositions.

Jeepster-

Ouch! I'm sorry to hear your tooth is bothering you. hope you are feeling better soon.

For a lot of players, I think the answer to "why do they want to try to sound like a recording" is as simple as "because they consider it to be fun".

The Kemper is a device that is marketed as being able to do that specific thing. So, it is ideal for that application, too. It does much more than that, including the ability to make sounds no one has ever heard from a guitar. So, it is ideal for that application, too.

And, it is also a way for people to learn how to use effects to get their own sound.

Here are some gleefully cynical devil's advocate general thoughts on your other observations:

A lot of people embrace the familiar - especially the audience.

Pop music is as entrenched in modern culture as Shakespeare and Beethoven. For that matter, in most age groups it is more entrenched.

That's why classical theatre, classical music, tribute bands, and cover bands are commercially viable.

Here's a giggle: Bluegrass versions of AC/DC songs are analogous to a performance of King Lear set in Punk Era London.

Just about every live theatre in the world is doing "covers" of plays written by someone else.

Movies are often "covers" of books, or of previous movies.

Closer to the subject, bands like Kiss and Pink Floyd even have "official" tribute band versions of themselves.

I did a gig a few years ago with The Drifters and The Coasters. I was surprised to see they were in their twenties. The promoter explained to me there were three regional versions of both bands, simultaneously touring the US that summer.

Quote from paults

Jeepster-

Closer to the subject, bands like Kiss and Pink Floyd even have "official" tribute band versions of themselves.

I did a gig a few years ago with The Drifters and The Coasters. I was surprised to see they were in their twenties. The promoter explained to me there were three regional versions of both bands, simultaneously touring the US that summer.

Display More

I do recall when there was more than one touring version of Fleetwood Mac...

Quote from paults

Pop music is as entrenched in modern culture as Shakespeare and Beethoven. For that matter, in most age groups it is more entrenched. That's why classical theatre, classical music, tribute bands, and cover bands are commercially viable.

In Germany neither classical music nor classical theatre would be commercially viable without massive support from state culture departments. Beethoven, Shakespeare yes, but nobody here would remember Gluck or Sternheim if the government would not push every year many millions of culture support into state run theatres and opera houses. Also Pop music has massive support from state-run broadcasting stations. A lot of other musical styles just don't get any airplay.

Maybe the discussion gets an interesting twist if we invert the question: "why so few individualists?". I guess/hope many would oppose here: there are a lot of individualists. At least that's my impression - but: problem is they play in the backyard clubs and avantgarde festivals and get 10% or 1% of a regular fee. And, more important, they don't even have the perspective to make it into the higher market, because there is no higher market for excentric music.

The wonderful (and certainly individualist) guitar player John Russell has coined a nice image for that: some play tennis and some play ping-pong. Both are serious sports, but in ping-pong there is no Wimbledon, no millionaires, no mansions, no Rolls-Royce to be won.

Maybe Mark Knopfler is a good example for an extremley individualistic guitar style that yet made it to the upper market. But that is already many decades ago. Any modern examples?

Cool!

Groovy!

Quote from londonjeepster

i dont know,how bout Steve Vai,although he doesnt really have mass appeal like Knopfler.mind you its definitely mainly catering for the older audience isnt it? cant think of a young "guitar hero"with mass appeal at the moment.

How young do you want them?
Tosin Abasi is 30. Was about 28 when the whole shebang with him started.