How Many Songs Does your Cover Band Know?

[Doug Lewis]

I'm in a fairly typical cover band playing some of the standards from the 60's to current with a few weird songs that no one knows. We currently have 80 songs on our "learned" list. One of our members is really pushing to learn another 5 but we haven't successfully pulled off the last 5 without some blunders. They want to add 5 every 2 months but it seems as we add more songs a few of us are forgetting the details or even basics of the songs we learned earlier and still play out. These songs get passed by at rehearsal to work on the newer stuff. I love to learn new music, and would go crazy if I could only play cover band material.

We play out twice a month and one venue has us once a month. We typically play three 60 minute sets (about 45 songs).

So I'm curious what other bands are doing for new material and total songs on the play list. I realize there are professionals that can pull hundreds of songs out anytime. This is a barely making a buck for fun thing.

 

[chris]

We play out twice a month and one venue has us once a month.

this may be the reason things are forgotten.

as a cover soloist, i have 400+ songs in my song database that i can do right now. i try to learn a new song every week, or at least every 2 weeks. many times at the gig, i get a new song request that i look up lyrics and just do from memory, if i've at least heard it.

it's way easier for one person to play that many songs because i don't need to coordinate with anyone else. the more people in the band, the more rehearsal is needed to sync up. the skill level and recall ability of the individuals is a factor as well.

i play duos all the time where each person is basically responsible for whatever song he is singing, and the other guy can fill in. it's basically a solo+, as the 2nd guy isn't really doing anything fundamental for the song, unless we choose to.

i gig 2-3 times a week though, so that frequency helps me to remember and stay in shape musically. if i only gigged 2 or 3 times a month, i probably wouldn't be able to perform so many songs, as the time between gigs demotivates me to work on anything.

 

[addedc]

Similar thing, we play out a couple times a month with one regular monthly gig. We have about 70 songs and are learning 5 new ones at a time, which takes a couple rehearsals (say a month and a half). We drop songs that people don't dance to or otherwise fail to get audience reaction so we have probably tried over 100.

 

[bchulse]

My Classic Rock cover band (www.gearjunkiesband.com), currently has between 150-200 songs.
We've been at it for 10 years

Our rotating list is about 125 songs. It's tough to keep them all fresh because it takes hours to
over them if they're not on your active list. People will ask for something we haven't played in
a couple years, and it's gone from my memory! At my age (61), I have to go over this stuff
every week or two, even the ones on the active list!

We play some difficult songs (for us), and I can't just pull them out of the hat if I haven't had
it under my fingers for a long while.
Some examples: Kansas, Blue Oyster Cult, Steely Dan, Boston, etc.

Sometimes I pull one out of the archives and remember everything. Others, I have to relearn.
Lately, we've been playing 2 x 1hr45min sets with one break, or 2 long, 1 short set to fill 4 hrs.

 

[chris]

as addedc alludes to, if your band is there to make people dance, it's more about the energy you provide, rather than the specific songs. if a venue sees you once a month or less, just play the same good songs whenever you play there - they probably won't remember what you played last time.

for me, i'm at the same place weekly, so the same customers can see me, and the staff definitely appreciates me changing it up from week to week. some songs i do almost every gig though, but i try to change out as much as possible for everyone's sanity.

 

[WhiteSpace]

76 songs in the band ‘catalogue’ we’ve ever done. Usually play out once or twice a month with three 45 minute sets. Maybe 36 or so songs for a gig. Try and keep danceable only. So active list caters to this. Rehearsals every week-ish. We are 60s to now cover rock. We maybe add a new song per month, trying 2 or 3 with one that sticks. Often limited by vocal keys cause we do covers. Band active since 2012 but some of us (like me) never picked up a guitar until they were > 40 years old. We are a five piece with rhythm and lead, bass, drums, lead vocals. Drummer sings a couple and does backup vocals with bassist.

 

[WhiteSpace]

I'm in a fairly typical cover band playing some of the standards from the 60's to current with a few weird songs that no one knows. We currently have 80 songs on our "learned" list. One of our members is really pushing to learn another 5 but we haven't successfully pulled off the last 5 without some blunders. They want to add 5 every 2 months but it seems as we add more songs a few of us are forgetting the details or even basics of the songs we learned earlier and still play out. These songs get passed by at rehearsal to work on the newer stuff. I love to learn new music, and would go crazy if I could only play cover band material.

We play out twice a month and one venue has us once a month. We typically play three 60 minute sets (about 45 songs).

So I'm curious what other bands are doing for new material and total songs on the play list. I realize there are professionals that can pull hundreds of songs out anytime. This is a barely making a buck for fun thing.

I find too as our catalogue expands, going through the old ones to stay tight is required but new songs are in the way of doing that. So i try to run through stuff on my own (and the other guys) so we need less time on them as a group. If we screw one up at a gig, we do it twice the next practice! The ones from the early days are ‘burned in’ but as catalogue grows it takes longer for that !

 

[electronpirate]

Tough question.

At one point in time, when I was playing live, we had a bank of around 45 solid songs. Now SOME of the band could play many more just based on ear, and that we had been playing for years...others in the band needed to practice these things just to fake their way through it. These are just basic classic rock songs...you've heard them a million times. The more 'deep cut' songs needed loving care in the practice space before presentable.

Me and the drummer could crack out roughly 200 songs on a whim...we disbanded because we just couldn't find others that were: 1. Sane 2. Somewhat sober 3: Owned a car, He's now working with various bands to keep himself busy, and I'm, well, still looking.

My point is that the nature of the beast is that as a band, we're only as strong as our weakest link(s)...

R

 

[Doug Lewis]

Thank you for the replies. Our 5 piece band range in age from 43 to 59 and we all have full time jobs. We try to rehearse once a week but it can get difficult with everyone's schedules, and as we get older I think we retain less. As Chris and electropirate mentioned I think it's more difficult with more members. We all have different musical tastes from electronic dance to funk to grunge to metal and I'll admit that I tend to ignore the songs that I feel are snoozers or just not fun to play (for me). I can't imagine being able to retain 150 to 200 songs without some type of cheat.

 

[Muad'zin]

When I was in a Radiohead tribute band we could crank out about 40 songs of their repertoire, that was about the time that In Rainbows came out. But it took a lot of work to do so because while the early work is very straightforward, the later work gets more experimental and required additional gear that made it very demanding. Eventually we got to a point where we could convincing versions of songs like Idioteque, the Gloaming and Everything in its Right Place (bought some Kaoss pads for that ) but we had to rehearse every week for it. And that was with the keyboard player only coming in once every two weeks. Eventually the singer and drummer could no longer pull it off and we changed to a once every two weeks rehearsal routine. And that started our decline. Occasionally a rehearsal would get cancelled, everyone would have their free friday night already planned ahead full, and bam, you only rehearse once a month. Before we know it our playlist decreased to 20-25 songs. I strongly suspect our singer didn't mind because he doesn't like hauling all that additional gear along. But then you could only play really basic Radiohead songs, which wasn't what he wanted either. Really into having your cake and eating it as well.

Eventually the band bled to death. And while we're all still friends its just next to impossible to get it restarted. Everyone's agenda is so damn full these days. It's like nobody has a free night anymore and you basically need a group date planning app to plan your next rehearsal. So moral of this story, once your weekly rehearsals start to slip, that's when things are likely to slip in general.

As for the OP, how many cover songs can you do as a band, it depends on the weakest members. I could probably memorize hundreds, I still remember songs I haven't played since the 90's. I wouldn't say well, but with a little effort, who knows. But not everybody is created equallly. I reckon the perfect rehearsal should be 1 part new songs, 1 part working on somewhat new songs from like the previous songs, 1 part refreshing old songs on a rotational basis, and 1 part working on your live show. As in show elements that turn your performance into an actual live show, not just a bunch of guys who play songs on stage. Never EVER dedicate whole rehearsals to work on an upcoming performance, as that will ruin your rehearsal schedule and cause you to neglect older songs that need refreshing. You should be able to do a gig with the catalog that you know, if you don't you're probably still not ready to gig. That is why I said that that one part of your rehearsal should be dedicated to working on your live show, not rehearsing the songs you're going to perform.

 

[s0c9]

Mine is about 150 songs of which about 1/2 are active, and we add new ones on a regular basis.. I got 5 new ones for Wed night rehearsal.
That said.. as weekend warriors, we've averaged 80+ gigs a year for each of the last 5 yrs..
We keep them pretty fresh... 6-piece band.

 

[solo-act]

I try to keep my list at 150 or under, with everything memorized. In my experience and from what I've seen, it's hard to play/sing a piece the way people remember if the list exceeds that.

It's very easy to do your own version of a song. Memorizing how the legendary artist did it (phrasing, tone, expression, dynamics, etc) and pushing yourself to do similar is a whole other thing. That's performer discretion, but truth is if you're nailing it how people remember it, response is always stronger.

Taken to the extreme, a solo act could memorize 1,000 songs, but at that point you're basically playing one song because the majority of the time you're doing everything with your tone, expression, phrasing and dynamics. I've seen that before -- it's one song all night long with not much differentiation.

 

[favance]

Just saw an interview w/Sir Paul McCartney. He didn't say how many songs his band knows. But he did state that he had to go back and re-learn many of the tunes before their shows/tours.

 

[Igor Paspalj]

Around 300+, but we are playing 7 gigs a week, regularly for sveral years, with one full month break per year, making living from it. We probably know more, but how time passes by, we are abandoning some, revisiting some, learning new ones, etc.

 

[chris]

Taken to the extreme, a solo act could memorize 1,000 songs, but at that point you're basically playing one song because the majority of the time you're doing everything with your tone, expression, phrasing and dynamics. I've seen that before -- it's one song all night long with not much differentiation.

Great point. That’s why I prefer duo gigs, both being singers. I don’t like hearing my voice for 3 hours, I’m sure people don’t either.

It’s also why I choose to read all my lyrics, rather than memorize everything. This greatly expands my capacity for songs, and I feel it’s a bit less taxing on my “mental RAM.”

Memorizing/recalling vs reading uses different parts of the brain, and I noticed that when I first started with performing mostly memorized material, then had to read a few songs for special requests or similar, I really screwed up the reading part a lot. I find it takes practice to be able to read and sing smoothly, so I do it all night so it’s consistent. Overtime, I eventually memorize the songs anyway, so I find myself not looking at the lyrics often enough - I don’t just stare at my lyrics all night regardless. Thanks to BandHelper and it’s auto scroll lyrics, the font is large enough to see and I can keep my place without having to manually scroll or change things.

I know people who are adamant about not reading lyrics, but as you mentioned, they tend to make everything sound the same as our mind basically has to “compress” the data somehow. They tend to change most songs to a standard 3 or 4 chord progression and just make it fit, so they don’t have to memorize the real chords, and also change the melody to whatever. Of course the words tend to be wrong in many places too.

Personally, my approach for playing cover sessions (restaurants, hotel hallways, occasional bar area) for some reason has always been to always play the correct chords and arrangements, unless I’m purposefully changing something. I got tired of seeing people do C Am F G for a songs like “Drift Away” or “Why Georgia” - you know, songs that obviously have distinct sections and movement, but they just play the same thing all song to make it easier. If me having lyrics and chords prevents that, I’m all in. I still mess up at times, but that’s bound to happen with 400+ songs rotating and adding.

No one has ever complained about me reading (except those musicians who homogenize everything), and many audience members do comment positively on the sound and song selection and quality on their way out or during my break. For my types of gigs, the audio quality and overall feel is paramount. My sound is broadcast to speakers throughout the hotel or restaurant and many people can’t even see me while I’m playing. They finish dinner and walk out realizing I’ve been playing the whole time and go “oh wow, great job I didn’t even know it was live music!” I take every comment with a grain of salt, but it’s usually positive and that’s all I’m trying to do.

 

[electronpirate]

It's very easy to do your own version of a song. Memorizing how the legendary artist did it (phrasing, tone, expression, dynamics, etc) and pushing yourself to do similar is a whole other thing. That's performer discretion, but truth is if you're nailing it how people remember it, response is always stronger.

I've always been a fan of 'make it your own' as a band. It boosts your onstage interaction when you have a loose 'framework' of the song, but can deviate in places. Less regimentation in what you're playing and you can do much more with less.

Taken to the extreme, a solo act could memorize 1,000 songs, but at that point you're basically playing one song because the majority of the time you're doing everything with your tone, expression, phrasing and dynamics. I've seen that before -- it's one song all night long with not much differentiation.

Absolutely correct. (And I know EXACTLY who you're talking about!)

 

[Muad'zin]

Great point. That’s why I prefer duo gigs, both being singers. I don’t like hearing my voice for 3 hours, I’m sure people don’t either.

If they didn't, why would they come to your shows?

It’s also why I choose to read all my lyrics, rather than memorize everything. This greatly expands my capacity for songs, and I feel it’s a bit less taxing on my “mental RAM.”

Personally I hate it when musicians read music on stage. You're not classical musicians, you're rock musicians. Standing stationary and reading off a sheet of paper or iPad just does not look rock 'n' roll. It makes what should be an entertaining rock show a bunch of guys and girls standing on stage playing music. But that's just me. Don't mind me.

I've always been a fan of 'make it your own' as a band. It boosts your onstage interaction when you have a loose 'framework' of the song, but can deviate in places. Less regimentation in what you're playing and you can do much more with less.

It depends. A coverband can give it its own spin, a tribute act HAS to play it exactly like the original.

 

[electronpirate]

Personally I hate it when musicians read music on stage. You're not classical musicians, you're rock musicians. Standing stationary and reading off a sheet of paper or iPad just does not look rock 'n' roll. It makes what should be an entertaining rock show a bunch of guys and girls standing on stage playing music. But that's just me.

If this is a full band, I consider lyrics on the stage as bad form. Solo's/Duo's get a pass as 90% of the time they're stationary (or sitting down), and it's less about the visuals and more about the tunes.

IMO.

 

[chris]

If they didn't, why would they come to your shows?

They aren’t my shows. They come to the restaurant or hotel and I happen to be there. I think realizing this makes the gig much easier in many aspects. It’s more about being re-hired, supplying the venue with what they want, rather than producing a “rocking” show and impressing people with amazing vocals or show stopping moments.

For my current gigs, all they want is constant music from me, very little down time between songs, and a consistent sound, nothing too quiet or loud to distract them from eating. I do play with dynamics but nothing too jarring.

Personally I hate it when musicians read music on stage. You're not classical musicians, you're rock musicians. Standing stationary and reading off a sheet of paper or iPad just does not look rock 'n' roll. It makes what should be an entertaining rock show a bunch of guys and girls standing on stage playing music. But that's just me. Don't mind me.

Again for my situation, I’m NOT a rock musician. I’m there to provide constant sound and tend requests which range from the 50s to now. That’s a ton of songs and I’m not going to try to memorize thousands of songs.

When I play in a band though, I still have the iPad or phone for my set list and reference, but I tend to do songs I’ve memorized to be more in the moment. There, the band is the focus usually, so people are looking and wanting to be entertained.

Personally though, I don’t want those kind of gigs anymore. I would rather be the background music and focus on quality of the sound, rather than be a high energy attraction to make people dance. Just my preference.

 

[ChristThePhone]

...
Personally I hate it when musicians read music on stage. You're not classical musicians, you're rock musicians. Standing stationary and reading off a sheet of paper or iPad just does not look rock 'n' roll. It makes what should be an entertaining rock show a bunch of guys and girls standing on stage playing music. But that's just me. Don't mind me.
...

^ this