Jack Murphy7 said:I’d appreciate it if the wedding planners—and especially those potential "entertainers"—would finally clarify what they mean by a "band" versus just "two keyboardists plus a singer."
In the Midwest, the term "band" has a pretty clear definition. When you call for a band, you actually get a band.
A Band (Midwest style):A vocal and instrumental group consisting of at least four musicians—live drums, bass, rhythm/lead guitar, and keys.
Band costs: roughly 70 $0.00 for gear + van rental/transportation.
A "Band" (California style):A vocal duo or trio where the performance is only partially "live"—too much reliance on backing tracks, in my opinion.
The cost of this "band": roughly 40 $0.00 for gear + their own car (which everyone has anyway, so maybe not worth mentioning).
Just a quick observation from when I was hunting for music last year. I arranged everything over my phone to go hear a group play, and when I showed up 😲
it was just the two of them jamming.
The same logic applies to my line of work... providing accompaniment...
An acappella group is a collection of singers who create chords through harmony.
A chord requires at least four notes.
To get those four notes, you need four singers: first tenor, second tenor, baritone, and bass.
In an acappella group, the bass parts are usually bolstered to strengthen the foundation, bringing us to five singers.
Can someone explain to me how an acappella accompaniment can consist of only three people? Is putting on the uniform enough?
I don't think so.
Does it strictly have to be five singers instead of four or three? No, it doesn't.
But whatever you're selling should actually match the label you give it.
This isn't about what's better or cheaper—it's about clearly defining what you're offering, whether it's accompaniment or general entertainment.
chunky, I honestly think what you're getting at isn't really a semantics issue (😬), but more about pure amateurism and that "it'll be fine" attitude people bring to the job.
When I was hunting for a band for my son's graduation party, something else drove me absolutely insane: the way so many groups claim they play "everything" for "everyone." Like, screw your artistic identity! Look, I get that you need to be flexible if you want to stay afloat in this business, but how can someone who actually makes a living from music not care what they're playing? I'm not asking if they *could* pull off a specific song if their life depended on it; I'm asking what kind of music actually fits them, what they play most often, and what they actually enjoy performing. Or has the joy been squeezed out of the profession entirely? 😕
In the end, we went with a group that has a pretty niche repertoire, but man, they were the real deal in terms of how they played and the soul they put into it...
