Guitar-Bass-Drums-Vocals

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Why is this the 'classic' line up for a rock band?

This I just realised is the question I was really asking on the keyboards thread.

― Tom, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

mark sinker asked this once before.

― Dr. C, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

And look what happened to him.

― Tom, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

That's why I like bands which will add other elements to the Basic 'rock' lineup.

There are not many 'power trios' that actually make it work.

― Julio Desouza, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Because 'classic' refers to the early days, but not real early. When Rock & Roll started, it was an extension of the jazz/swing scene - in a dance hall that had a piano in it. But after that, the scene (the British Invasion years) was countless small bands playing in shithole after shithole - and generally, it's a pain in the ass the carry a piano around with you.

Now that there are synths, there's no excuse. But my theory is that's where guitar/bass/drums created the 'classic' lineup.

― Dave225, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You know it's strange to think that the early Who is considered to be the classic power trio (or one of 'em) and practically all their tracks have Nicky Hopkins piano on them.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Alex, whay are you awake so early?

― Dave225, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

1) Portability -- Much easier to lug guitars from gig to gig than a grand piano.
2) Physicality -- Stage movement is much easier w/ guitars.
3) Technology -- Once g/b/d became the de facto standard because of the above, guitar technology continued to advance, allowing the instrument great flexibility in terms of its tone. It had a wider range of possible sounds than a keyboard for quite a while there.

― Mark, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm awake so late. I work nights. Going home soon though.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Isn't the four-member band technically a trio when the singer doesn't play an instrument?

― Andy K, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

v,g,b,d

My good friend mattie is in a "power trio" and they do make it work, mainly because mattie's such a maniac with his keyboard. He stretches it out with distortion and phasing and other tricks to bring in the trashy keening guitar-ish high-end. And because he's got 10 fingers he gets almost double the notes a guitar would.

― Retrieval Bot RT-4, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Tradionally power trio= 3 players. One on Guitar/vocals then bass then drums.

But these are all stupid names really that are asking to be messed about.

― JUlio Desouza, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

One on Guitar/vocals then bass then drums.

Rush is not a power trio then hawhaw!

― Andy K, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Don't know who rush are.

― Julio Desouza, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The Beatles.

― Jordan, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

'The Beatles.'

Only the beatles are the beatles but I 'get it'.

― Julio Desouza, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think we should also not discount the fact that people just look much sexier playing the guitar than they do playing the piano. I think this has to do with the fact that the guitar is typically held at crotch-level, and it allows you to face the audience directly and dance around while playing.

― o. nate, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Let's not forget that Elvis was the first rock star, and he was notorious for capitalizing on this very aspect of the guitar.

― o. nate, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Guitars aren't sexy.

― DG, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I didnt really want to talk about guitars vs keyboards specifically, aswell it's - why did a four-man line-up become classic as opposed to a trio or a bigger band? Kate the Saint would have interesting things to add. I think the Beatles are probably at the root of it.

― Tom, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

'why did a four-man line-up become classic as opposed to a bigger band?'

bigger band= adds more instrumnts and therefore superficially complex. I find that people seem to be more comfortable with a more simple approach.

Is a quartet that much more popular than a trio? The beatles could be said to have been a quartet only up to a point. After they went in the studio, which effectively becomes the fifth beatle.

― Julio Desouza, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Guitars aren't sexy.

Perhaps. But 1950's teenagers didn't see it that way.

― o. nate, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

In the beginning, the alternative to the Beatles was the Dave Clark 5. They looked like a group a music teacher might have assembled, with the drummer in the middle, the singer standing up at an organ, one guy holding a saxaphone. Didn't some of those instruments require LESSONS? Nothing could have looked more more uncool at the time.

― Curt, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Curt - how many people were there in the Stones?

― Tom, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

They're the "basic" compositional bits: drums for rhythm, then two guitars (for interplay), one of which is chordal (and higher-toned) and the other of which is usually linear (and low-toned). Plus voice. It's sort of the minimum number of pieces you can have and still have a non-limited array of compositional tools at your disposal. As for the four men, well, it's just the desire for dedicated personnel at every post.

― Nitsuh, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The Stones came a few crucial months later. Everybody had formed their band by then.

― Curt, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Besides, the Stones were actually a quartet, according to Who=trio thinking.

― Curt, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Why is this the 'classic' line up for a rock band?
They tried hammers and saws but that didn't sound the same.

― einsturzende nathalie, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

g, b, d, v

― mark s, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The bass and drums are from jazz and r&b (the rhythmic element of rock). It has only recently been discovered, independently of the delta bluesmen, that you can have a rock rhythm section consisting of less than this. The guitar is from country/rockabilly/bluegrass (the harmonic/melodic element). The singer is the pop/vaudeville element. More than 4 people and you're splitting the check too many ways. Less than 4 and it's difficult to play your music properly, unless your singer is a very talented instrumentalist. Pianos are hard to move.

― Kris, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

How about the fact that they are all so easy to learn? I mean, picking up a guitar and playing a couple barre chords is so much easier than actually learning an instrument. Bass is like guitar, but instead of playing three notes at once you only play one. Drums are easy - just hit. Vocals are just like talking, but louder. Also important to note- Loudness. Plugging a guitar into an amp is for some, a religious experience. With a few twists of knobs, this guitar becomes a very loud instrument. There are few instruments as immediately rewarding. Not to mention the fact that everybodies favorite bands are guitar bands. I mean, you can get away with using synths in the background, but if you are too creative with the instrumentation you run the risk of being classified as a novelty band.

― tyler, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

It's minimalizes ego clashes, since all those intruments occupy different ground.
When you add, say, a keyboard to the mix, you have someone who's playing, probably, both higher parts and lower parts at the same time, which is likely to step on *someone's* toes.

― Keiko, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

*gratuitous opinionated comment*

― Chris, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

six months pass...

I always thought it was down to Buddy Holly and the crickets, which had this line-up. Also why the lead singer is usually regarded as the creative one in the bad, even if it's not true, and why the rhythm guitar player is usually the singer.

― Johnney B, Thursday, 26 September 2002 11:24 (twenty-three years ago)

i play in band that features only keyboards, bass and drums. we find it almost impossible to find a singer to join us, since everybody would look at him as the leader instead of a new member.
and we don't want a guitarist in the band, that's for sure.

― joan vich (joan vich), Thursday, 26 September 2002 11:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Johnny B,
Couldn't all that apply equally to Elvis?

― Burr, Thursday, 26 September 2002 17:14 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.