Does anyone actually like big finales?

It's a live show thing, for sure, & as long as they're not too drawn out, in some settings, they work well. We do a big ending occasionally, & the video example below is the longest it ever gets.

http://youtu.be/SdNH7PDwaT8?t=3m57s

.

Excellent drawn out end, Andy, and the crowd were right into it. At that point in the night it's an unstructured energy exchange between band and audience - the experts might say it's expressionist :)

My band has a couple of hams ends too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIGPb7-Lfjs#t=4m11s

Haha - we're covering some of the hoariest of hoary old standards :)
 
Excellent drawn out end, Andy, and the crowd were right into it. At that point in the night it's an unstructured energy exchange between band and audience - the experts might say it's expressionist :)

My band has a couple of hams ends too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIGPb7-Lfjs#t=4m11s

Haha - we're covering some of the hoariest of hoary old standards :)
You're not wrong there Grea - we're not exactly "cutting edge" ;) Love your version of SOYL, it's how it should be, whereas our version is specifically designed to wind up Larry & all other verbatim cover fans ;) ;) ;)
 
I believe that very artist deserves the right to perform, begin and/or end every song exactly as he/she sees fit. I also believe that if (the universal) you doesn't like it, don't listen to artists who employ it. Pretty simple.
 
Tell me a better way to work double bass fills into a country set and I'll give it a try.
 
You're not wrong there Grea - we're not exactly "cutting edge" ;) Love your version of SOYL, it's how it should be, whereas our version is specifically designed to wind up Larry & all other verbatim cover fans ;) ;) ;)

More a very rounded edge :)

My band's approach is miles from verbatim too, in fact that's the point for us. This whole faithful/nor faithful cover controversy is similar is content to this chat about finales, or trad and matched grips, big v small kits etc. Some say tomayto, some say tomarto. That's the beauty of art.

It would be wrong to say there's no formulas in music because the commercial scene is rigidly formulaic. So there are no formulas, including the rule that says there are no formulas :)
 
one of my tricks is if we do one of these big endings I tell the other rhythm section players we will end it with a hits and the number of hits will correspond to the syllables of the title of the song.

so nancy = two hits, foggy dew = 3 hits, born to run = 3 hits, etc.

It's a pretty easy trick for the band to catch on to and then you can do a big blow out ending real it in and the band looks really tight on the hits at the end. most of the times I do a pickup note on the high hat so everybody can hit it together.

I just hate the big endings that just die out or the band doesn't end it together. The sloppy endings sound like 4 pair of sneakers rolling around in the dryer.
 
I've done hundreds of them and hated most of them. They can be played tastefully, but usually they're overdone, usually because audiences eat them up.

You hit the nail on the head, "tired cliche" and "not musically impressive". To me it also comes across as lazy, tacky; almost cartoonish. Professional bands ought to orchestrate the endings of their tunes, or at least have the discipline to let the last chord ring without blowing unmusically all over it!

Excuse the highbrow....

Eric
 
The big drawn out end to a song is cool in its place. It s not "unmusical", as you are literally playing music on musical instruments. If you can find a better way to get two or three thousand people screaming their heads off, excluding terrorist activities, I'm all ears. Unless of course you don't play for that many people? It's just theatrics, I know, but isn't that part of what we do. I get that if your biggest gig is playing for your girlfriends, moms, and one "roadie" at Pirate Dan's Hotdog Stand then maybe the giant finale on every song is a bit much. But to say it has no place anywhere ever is bit much too.
 
I think that ANYTHING done purely as a formula is less pleasing that selecting something for its application and qualities.

Some bands in some situations can have a performance really enhanced with a sustained ending.

Same band different situation?...not so good....

As usual, I don't think we can formulate a formula for applying formulaic formulations.
 
The big drawn out end to a song is cool in its place. It s not "unmusical", as you are literally playing music on musical instruments. If you can find a better way to get two or three thousand people screaming their heads off, excluding terrorist activities, I'm all ears. Unless of course you don't play for that many people? It's just theatrics, I know, but isn't that part of what we do. I get that if your biggest gig is playing for your girlfriends, moms, and one "roadie" at Pirate Dan's Hotdog Stand then maybe the giant finale on every song is a bit much. But to say it has no place anywhere ever is bit much too.

Your response is so asinine, I'm just going to quote it and let it speak for itself.
 
You know, melodic instruments all sustaining, drummer playing big rolls, then one final crash etc. Think anything CBS orchestra.

To me it's a tired cliche, not musically impressive and maybe bands still do it because they don't realize the audience don't actually care.

I'm thinking we should give this tradition the flick, but I don't know if I'm alone on this.

So, are big finales a big waste of time?

Ok, this is one of those thing that really depends on context. I'm going to explain it the only way I can. Lets take a Beethoven symphony which has a coda and a ton of basically cadential chords that when looked at on paper you think "Doesnt he only need one of those?" In theory he only needs one but the whole point of the drawn out ending is to release the rhythmic tension that has been built up throughout the piece. Now there are certain songs where if you just stopped short on the last chord you give the impression that the song isnt really finished because there is too much rhythmic momentum and tension built up to simply end there. In those cases the type of ending you are describing becomes indispensable for releasing that tension and bringing the song to a satisfactory conclusion. There are of course other ways of doing that but I dont think that the type of ending you've described is a waste of time if the context is right. Doing it on every song or drawing it out too long is a bit ridiculous and should be avoided.
 
Not after every song, that would get boring very fast (although I have found it accidentally happening at some gigs in the past, without really registering it at the time!!)
 
Typically not a fan of the big blow out. It does have its time a place though.

But speaking of a big finale, to this day I have burned in my brain the one Kansas did back in their Leftoverture tour.

The finale song is Miracles Out Of Nowhere. As the song is closing, one by one, each musician stops playing, leaving Robby Steinhardt (violin) playing solo center stage. The stage is black except for a single spotlight on Robby. As he fades the solo, the spot light comes to just his face and then shuts off with echo’s of the violin playing. Suddenly the house lights come on and no Robby to be seen. It looked impossible, like a magic trick. The place went nuts.

That was more like… if you whisper, then you get their attention.
 
As long as all the endings are different.. nothing worse than the same ' train wreck' ending on every song. But used in creative ways they are definitely effective. Also better if they are worked out with the band.. When I think of over the top endings.. Kick Start my Heart by Motley Crue comes to mind.. pretty wicked and it goes on for like 5 minutes without getting dull. Short and sweet endings work equally as well.. it's all about keeping it interesting.
 
Back
Top