"YouTube" Stars

General Music Discussion
#1

"Today, when I watch young players on YouTube I see an overabundance of players not only playing a cover song rather than something that came from their own mind, but the even have “backing tracks” they play along with instead of playing the song with a band. Why don’t these guys have bands and why aren’t they playing original songs with their bands, or at least playing the cover songs with their bands instead of with “backing tracks” which are often turned up so loud it’s uncertain if you’re mostly hearing them, or the guitarists who original played on the songs?

We now have a category of players that have earned the somewhat dubious distinction of being known as “YouTube Stars.” The players in this category with the most views are usually borderline novelty acts - their novelties being they are either extremely young boys or they are attractive young ladies. These
stars" of YouTube will almost without exception only play music somebody else has written and recorded decades ago, they may have bands but it’s doubtful since instead of performing the cover song with their band, they perform it by playing along to a backing track.

While reasonably technically proficient in most cases, their playing in their renditions of these cover songs tends to be rater mechanical sounding, almost robotic in nature. They seem to have been playing for a good number of years based on their technical proficiency alone, although I don’t know if they could write a song to save their lives. If they were writing songs that are even somewhat on par with their technical abilities, it would be natural for them to have bands so that they could perform their original songs in front of live audiences.

Maybe some of them do, but I’d bet most of them don’t have bands or they’d rather promote their bands instead of just promoting themselves using backing tracks instead of a band for their YouTube videos. That they don’t have bands or at the very least seem more interested in getting their names known instead of the names of their bands, is a fairly good indication that they either can’t write their own songs, don’t even any original songs they are proud of enough to want other people to hear them, and/or lack the confidence to play their own songs in front of a live audience so they instead perform in empty rooms while being filmed so they can have an audience of people they don’t know and can’t see since this is cyberspace, after all, and getting high numbers of views probably bolsters their egos, the egos that would likely be hurt badly if they found out just how small their audiences would be if they were playing at a venue where paying cover charge is necessary for anyone wanting to see them perform live on stage.

Guitar Karaoke? Why?
#2

I dunno, if you can get hundreds of thousands of people to see your music one way, and no one to see your music the other way, I can see why you might pick the one over the other.

3 Likes
#3

Leaving aside the “band” part (though I agree that the band is cooler than a backing track):

I think there is nothing intrinsically wrong with performing covers, and there is definitely no obligation for all musicians to be good composers. If someone enjoys reinterpreting someone else’s song, why not?

Going semi-off-topic: in classical music you wouldn’t look down on someone for playing J. S. Bach’s covers would you? :wink:

3 Likes
#4

Tommo, I’m glad you agree that a band is cooler that a backing track.

I don’t see anything intrinsically wrong with performing covers. Playing covers is how we learn to play! There’s a huge difference between playing covers to help learn how to play, or even performing the occasional cover on an album - something a band as cool and as legendary as Van Halen did.

What Van Halen did is a far cry, however, from being in a cover band. Henry Rollins once said “Being in a cover band is the lowest aspiration a musician can have.” While I don’t agree with every single statement Henry Rollins makes, I agree, in essence, with that he is saying there.

I certainly wouldn’t look down on someone for playing covers of pieces by J.S. Bach but in the cases where the pieces aren’t solo pieces but stead require more musicians, I wouldn’t pay a dime to see one musician play one of the parts to a particular piece by J.S. Bach while having a backing track play the parts of the other instruments.

#5

I understand the sentiment. We live in a society where we have been taught (brainwashed would be a better term) that competition is a “good thing” and that we should embrace and participate in competition.

I remember, when I first started playing I made progress fast, and suddenly I was “better” than all my guitar playing friends. This was often emphasized. In a competitive culture we are comparing and judging constantly. Same thing when guitar players talk about other players: “he’s a good player”, “he sucks”, “he is phenomenal”, “EVH/Yngwie/Petrucci/Clapton is the best” etc.

But growing up I noticed that “the best” is a pretty subjective term, unless it is quantified what “the best is”. Marty Friedman is way faster than Eric Clapton. Does that make him a “better” player? James Hetfield writes more popular songs than Gutrie Govan. Does that make him “better”?

My opinion is this:

Music is not a competition. We MADE it into a competition. Playing and making music always feels good to the person doing it, regardless of proficiency level.

When I look at these Youtubers, I can see that they are “lacking” in terms of tone, or technique or songwriting skills compared to a “guitar legend” or even a gigginf “semi-pro”with his own band. Does this matter?

For me it doesn’t, because they are having fun doing it, promote the guitar as being cool instrument to their viewers, make playing attainable, have a direct communication with their audience, and make some money on the side, so in my eyes it is a positive thing.

Now, if you want to be “the best”, whatever that means, do what it is necessary to reach that level that symbolizes being “the best” for you.

But realize that all people making music, as long as the message of the music is not detrimental (it often is, but that’s a whole other subject) is a positive thing.

1 Like
#6

I love playing in bands and performing music live and arranging riffs into songs and all the pageantry of the whole thing but christ on a bike, it feels like herding kittens into a never-ending financial hole sometimes. I’m basically the band leader in my group and we’ve got our debut album plus a music video and tour dates coming out over the next handful of months and the amount of money spent, the lack of sleep I get and the crushing fear of failure makes me envy the YouTube heroes of today a little bit. It sucks relying on 20+ other people to make the machine function sometimes.

That being said, I don’t think I could do what Jared Dines, Rick Graham and Stevie T etc do. I prefer working as a team player.

#7

They’re not really ‘covers’, it’s a different mindset entirely. People read novels to appreciate great ideas. Classical musicians read music to appreciate the ideas of composers who are among the best that have ever lived. There is a popular misconception that they don’t understand harmony or couldn’t write a song on their own. This is completely false of course. The best classical musicians are supremely well-rounded in most respects and would run circles around your average rock player.

The inverse is also true. Sure manyrock musicians can’t read for shit and are essentially illiterate when it comes to being able to interpret anything that’s not pre-recorded for them. I’m in this category. Calling it like it is. But they have strong harmony and songwriting skills for creating their own music. And even your basic garage band dummy has some concept of harmony. So that’s cool. But the best rock musicians? Yeah Jimmy Page could sightread pretty well - he had to. And he has spoken at length about how much better it made him as a composer, improviser, and so on.

If you only have one skill, and not the other, you’re not really getting all you can get from music. As they say on the internet, why can’t we have both? We can.

5 Likes
#8

Hey Troy, This is something I’ve been curious about for a while: Do you enjoy writing music? If so, what style/genre would you classify your music as? Finally, do you have any aspirations to get a band together and record an album?

#9

I write tons of stuff all the time, you hear it in all the stuff we’ve done. That’s about all we have time for these days. I’m not really a band guy and never was, so that’s fine with me.

3 Likes
#10

We live in a society where we have been taught (brainwashed would be a better term) that competition is a “good thing” and that we should embrace and participate in competition.

Competition is the primary driving force behind evolution. Competition is of fundamental importance to the development of life as we know it.

Beyond simple biology, competition is a driving force behind technological innovation.

I think it’s important to understand the value of competition. I think it’s important to understand that we are, always have been, and always will be in competition in most aspects of our lives. I think its important to realize that by refusing to compete, you will lose.

It’s not that competition is good or bad. It is.

Music is not a competition.

If you want to be a professional (or semi-professional) musician, then music is a competition.

If you want to be a professional musician, you will be in direct competition with other musicians for work. If you’re an instrumentalist, you’ll be competing with others who play your instrument for performance and recording work. If you do make it into a performing band, you’ll be competing with other bands (and DJs) for gigs.

In any context, you’ll be competing for audience attention, as this will be the source of your revenue. You’ll be competing against other musical acts, but from other forms of entertainment media, including film, television and video games also.

Even these YouTube players are all competing for views, and thus advertisement revenue.

I strongly believe that the “music isn’t a competition” mantra is not only unhelpful for those who aim to make some portion of their income from music, it’s actively harmful for them to believe it.

For example, suppose I aim to be a studio guitarist. Why should I get the job instead of the other guy? Do I read music better? Is my technique sharper? Am I more competent in a wider variety of styles? Am I just more personable?

Much of music is a popularity contest, and success is never guaranteed, and is often unpredictable. In some roles however, merit (professionalism, knowledge, technical skill, etc) is a predictor of success.

1 Like
#11

I understand where you’re coming from. To explain myself here would take too long.

Let’s just say that I don’t agree with the competition spin that is put on evolution, since all organisms on our planet benefit greatly from being in a harmonious ecosystem, where balance is key and not “competition”. Many more organisms cooperate with each other than compete. Nor do I agree with the fact that we have been made slaves of chasing money in order to survive, but that is a different topic.

What I mean by “music is not a competition” is the same as I would say that physical exercise is not a competition.

Both music as well as physical exercise are healthy for us, regardless if there is monetary value attached to these activities.

If you want to compete for something that is deliberately made scarce in our society for survival (the possession of money) you enter our man-made competition and that goes for the music industry as well.

So yes, if you want to be at the top of the pyramid as a musician in order to make money, you will have to compete for that spot with all of the others that want the same spot.

If you just want to make music to the best of your abilities regardless of if you get money in exchange for it or not, competition is a pretty meaningless term for something so enjoyable and natural.

But again, of you want to be “the best”, whatever that may mean for you, do what is necessary in your mind to achieve it.

#12

What I admire about “youtube stars” who play music is that as far as I can see, most of them focus their time and energy on doing stuff they love instead of complaining about what other people are doing.

6 Likes
#13

I think your positions on the role of competition in biology and it’s origins and importance in society are both debatable, but I agree that this is a different topic, and I don’t feel we need to address these issues further in this thread.

My primary concern was that the statement “music is not a competition” has become a common mantra on forums and is often espoused as some kind of guru wisdom or advice. While I agree with your clarified position, I think the statement without that clarification is not helpful, and harmful to those who are trying to make a living out of music.

1 Like
#14

Exactly. Welcome to the internet, where new methods of devouring and delivering content are not only possible, but perfectly fine… Unless you’re some old guy that counts writing letters to the editor as a hobby.

#15

Some of the YouTube Stars, as you call them, don’t even have to leave the house to make money playing their music. Let’s take Stevie T as an example, he is undoubtedly a novelty act, but he can really play.

Here is his estimated earnings per year:

Some of these guys have it really good, even if they are doing more talking than playing. Still, they are playing music and making money.

If someone wants to play covers to a backing track on YouTube then that’s great I think! One of my favourite guitarists on YouTube, Satsuma3042, plays covers and has his own band playing covers with some originals thrown in, the best of both worlds.

1 Like
#16

That professional music is a competition doesn’t make music a competition.

Plenty of us want to make music but not as a profession.

#17

Ugh, putting a band together suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks.

I don’t know how it is nowadays but my experience from the 80s is that finding people that

  1. can play their instrument
  2. are not flakes
  3. are not insane/alcoholic/junkie
  4. are not already in several bands

is hard frickin’ work. Everything else is easy peasy lemon squeezie compared to putting a band together. People that are great players fall into category 3 with a side of prima donna issues more often than not. That’s why you see the same backup players getting all the gigs.

Now let’s say you’re lucky and find some good musicians, form a band, and don’t kill each other within 3 weeks. Now what? I don’t know about elsewhere but in the San Francisco/Bay Area it’s still “pay to play” until you can prove that you draw a crowd. And there ain’t that many places anymore. Hell, there weren’t that many places in the 80s and that was the heyday.

The “YouTube Stars” have it figured out. They don’t have to deal with flakes or psychos. They can build an audience without getting ripped off by bar owners, club owners, or promoters. They don’t get their equipment stolen at the show or rehearsal space. If you want stories, I gots stories.

P.s. If the crowd paid a cover they really don’t care about your originals except for your family and friends. They want to get drunk and hear “Don’t Stop Believing” and “Free Falling”. Do a bossa nova version of a current hit song and you’ll be getting some action that night :slight_smile:

4 Likes
#18

Amen. The only way I’d be in a band again is if I had the $ to pay them. I don’t wanna hear no BS. Play what I want to play, or your fired. :joy:

I’d have to really love the bands material otherwise.

1 Like
#20

Just to clarify I have nothing against bands and people who like being in them, I just have no experience in that area so it’s not a thing I think about. Many props to people who get out there and play for the people - that’s work. It can’t be easy. Hell I can’t even play to a camera half the time.

#22

It’s still pretty similar out there. Thankfully, Pay To Play is seriously frowned upon in a Canada and most promoters pulling that stunt don’t last long.

I’ve played in all kinds of cover and original bands and I think there’s a pretty good balance to strike between playing covers and original music. One of my older bands would play half and half. The covers would get people into party mode and after some time it eventually led to people actually paying more attention to our original music. You have to give people a reason to care. And you gotta have a great live show, that’s paramount.