Band Master Chart List Management

SOTSDO

Old King Log
Staff member
CE/Moderator
For our primary set lists, I use a Microsoft Word® document laid out in landscape form. The slots list Tune Number (in the set), Book Number, Title, Tempo, Count Off, Assigned Vocals (if a vocal number; almost all of ours are), and a space for stuff like auxiliary percussion assignments, solo prompts, special start instructions, and other information.

Every other slot (it's a table, actually) is shaded with light grey fill, and the three "roll slots" (tunes that I want to have on hand but may not use) are filled with a darker grey. These "codes" help the user to read the list and keep focused on a particular line.

At the bottom of the page are general notes concerning the break following the set, meal arrangements and stuff "like that there".

My vocalist have a different set list, one we are working on right now to put it in final form. There, it's Tune Number (in the set), Book Number, Title, Count Off, Assigned Vocals, and a series of one word prompts for the "inter-tune" narration/comments, all with the same shading). Thus, Almost Like Being In Love (which we frequently use as a second set opener) would read:

1.| 7A | Almost Like Being In Love | 2/4 | Sarah | 1947 Brigadoon Cole Ella Dean Frank

The brief notes on the tune would translate out as something like "Good evening! I'm Sarah XXXXX" (if this is the first time she's up) "and that was a tune from the 1947 musical Brigadoon, recorded by just about everyone on the planet from Nat Cole to Frank Sinatra. Next, we're going to do another Rat Pack favorite...", with this last phrase leading into the intro for the next tune.

(This would be after the tune in this instance, as we usually use it as an opener.)

Under normal circumstances, I try to have the next tune set and ready to go within thirty seconds. (We try to program the vocalists' tunes in blocks as well to ease the on and off the stand problem.) All of my vocalists save one can vamp for that long with these sorts of prompts without any problems. I've found that if you wait longer than that, the mood starts to shift and you lose the audience - in my experience at least.

Starting a tune while the vocalist is still speaking is risky, but you can pull it off if everyone is on their toes. The vocalist has to be completely comfortable with their starting mark, and the music has to be written so that the intro is suitable for background use (rather than a big flashy Sinatra opening, for example). If you have everything right, it's magic - if not, you learn to move on to the next challenge.

We also try to program "mini-sets" of the same style of music. For the third and fourth sets (almost always dance sets with our clientele), I'll often program three or four rock or R & B tunes, or two or three pop or country tunes in a block. This is often where I use my "dark grey" tunes, the ones that are in reserve. If the dance floor is cooking by the time we get to the last "normal" tune in the grouping, I can sub in the "dark grey" tune that follows to keep the mood going.

One little bit of stagecraft that I worked on for years is to use "Hit The Road Jack" as a set breaker in the middle of the third dance set. The whole thing goes something like this:

• We open with three high energy Blues Brothers male vocals, all with the same vocalist.

• Then, while he is doing some verbal vamping after the last tune, we start the rhythm-only vamp at the beginning of "Hit The Road Jack". At that point, the girls all parade out from behind the band (where I keep the vocalists stashed when not performing), done up in their 1960's "girl group" dresses into which they changed during the break. They each wave to the audience as they do a pivot and turn (to flare the opt art, short A line dresses out as they spin), then move on to their marks on the stand.

• The male vocalist keeps rattling on with his line of bull until he "notices" them, at which point they break into the opening chorus of the tune. He then does the male response part as it comes up in the song.

• At the end of the tune (which ends with repeated "Don'tcha come back no more" sung call lines from the girls and a set of matching spoken begging responses from the male vocalist), he retreats off the stage (with his metaphoric tail between his legs) and to the rear of the group. The tune ends with a "sting", on which the girls "vogue" a defiant "That'll show him!" pose.

• Then, after a brief pause for applause, we immediately go into a two or three part girl vocal tune like "Lady Marmalade", with the lead girl doing a brief verbal intro over the opening phrases before they start in singing.

Admittedly, it's a bit more work than just stepping up to the mike and singing. But, it is always well received - entertainment, rather than just performing, if you will.
 
Last edited:
I have been helping Suzy keep master chart lists for a number of bands including three big bands (85 to 320 charts), a jazz combo (70 charts), and a sax quartet (100+ charts). Usually I run an Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with a reference number, title, composer & arranger (for the BMI/ASCAP coverage reports) and whether it's a vocal or Xmas number.

Sidebar: Having inherited a library that was 100% illegitimate, I also marked if we had a legal copy and every year we target 10 to 15% improvement on owning originals. Three of the five groups are now totally legit.

I noticed over the last 4 year that I've been doing this that the musicians are split as to how they arrange their book. A third of the group like to sort alphabetically and the rest do it numerically. So when a chart is called, it's usually by name and then the first person who finds it chimes in with the number.

In the sax quartet book, the music is sorted alphabetically with no numbers and we don't have to do the number/title dance. None of these bands have more than one chart with the same title (different arrangers). I'm beginning to thing ref numbers just add a layer of complexity that really isn't necessary.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I'm kicking this around right now for a new rock band I'm playing (and arranging) for. The nice thing about the numbers is that they are definitive. Alpha titles can be deceiving. Is 25 or 6 to 4, filed first in the book or under "T". Do songs that start with The or A get filed that way, or by the first letter of the second word. What about when the leader says "Let's play that Turtles song".

My other rock band has over 200 numbered charts in the book, so that is getting a little unwieldy as well. One of the things that helps is to buy 3 ring dividers that you can number (1-20, 21-40, etc.).

I do the Excel thing, and drop them into a lineup before the gig, then have all the extra tunes listed numerically on a second page. I should probably list all the extras in alpha order to find them more quickly.
 
I have been helping Suzy keep master chart lists for a number of bands including three big bands (85 to 320 charts), a jazz combo (70 charts), and a sax quartet (100+ charts). Usually I run an Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with a reference number, title, composer & arranger (for the BMI/ASCAP coverage reports) and whether it's a vocal or Xmas number.
Dude. Use Access. Better tool for the job. Ask one of the marketing guys down the hall :p.

About 150 years ago when I was helping invent the saxophone -- or something like that -- I was also an Assistant to the Director. I coded a music library database in Hypertalk (i.e. for Hypercard -- it was a Mac application). The Director was insanely happy with it. I could even put in extensive notes about the pieces, as well as any copyright information. Heck, I could probably code it in Access, today. Relational databases are MUCH gooder than dealing with Hypertalk.

As to physically organizing the music, if you assign each chart a number and that number's in your database, it'd be cake to look it up. Just print out a list for folks every now and then -- or, maybe not even. If you've Access Web Extensions, you could put the thing online and people could access it from Crackberries or another smart phone.
 
excessively long--feel free to ignore

Interesting and coincidental in timing, as I just finished entering into an Excel file 422 titles with the composer, arranger, style, et al of each for a community band that I play in. This band is one of the oldest in the US, dating well back into the 19th century. If any listing of the library holdings exist anywhere, I have not seen it. Furthermore, the sorting and storing of the charts is in a state of total chaos. Some of the music (the previously mentioned 400+ sets) is in individual boxes labeled with title, composer, arranger, but shelved in no particular order. An attempt had been made at one time to sort by "type of music" (e.g. march, symphonic transcription, movie/musical titles, etc.) but that had long since fallen apart.

We began our efforts with these boxed sets and created a deck of index cards containing the info we most needed (title, composer, arranger or transcriber, style of music, plus a couple of other fields which are less critical at this moment and can be entered at a later time if need be. Because of the sheer amount of music involved here and the necessity to cope with how to physically store these holdings, we are using index numbers. We simply numbered all of the boxes currently shelved, starting with #1 on the top shelf and continuing until we reached the last chart on the shelf, entered that number onto the card, and then entered all of the cards into an Excel file. Thus, we can sort by title, by composer, or by any other field on the chart. For example, in choosing pieces for a concert, the director often needs to sort by style. For this situation, I think index numbers are the only possible way to enable us to easily locate physically the pieces we need. Plus, any additions to the library can simply be assigned the next consecutive number and shelved next in line. (I agree that Access would have been a better choice, but no one who has to work with this library other than me had ever used Access, do not have it on their computers, and do not want to acquire and learn it)

That was the easy part! Yet to come is the sorting, recombining into orderly concert band sets, boxing, shelving, and recording what is currently stewn in chaotic fashion on every available surface in two rooms. I think that the 400+ titles that we've just finished cataloging constitutes about half of the total holdings of this group. Anybody want to come on down and help?!

There is no particular point to this post----anticipating the magnitude of what has to happen next to organize this library has sufficiently stressed me such that I am using you kind folks to vent! And if there are any suggestions or words of wisdom that you have to offer they will be welcomed (as long as they do NOT involve redoing the 422 charts that we've finished--that might just push me over the edge). :emoji_astonished:

Thanks for listening (reading)!

Cheers! Ruth
 
Dude. Use Access. Better tool for the job. Ask one of the marketing guys down the hall :p.
Access is evil, evil, evil. I hate it thoroughly, I'd quit a job (or refuse the offer) if I had to code in access. Yech, boo, hiss.

Our own band has sort of an excel sheet too, but I'd rather have some sort of Wiki which could easily store mp3s and scanned sheets along with whatever number of keywords you'd come up with and allow full text search.
 
Ruth,

Having just cleaned up over 400 charts in our big band book, I have three suggestions.

1. Wear thin rubber gloves, or use those little rubber finger guards to prevent paper cuts.
2. Wear a mask to avoid breathing in all that paper (and other) dust.
3. Have a warm (not hot) iron handy to remove wrinkles from parts that have gotten mashed, although watch out if there is old tape on the parts. Found that one out the hard way.
 
Now, for those of us who use electronic doohickeys, wouldn't it be neat if we posted either some template, or a one-page PDF so that others could see what it looks like, what others have been doing?

Methinks that many of us are chewing around the same problems, be it organizing the literature, be it setting up an online rehearsal calendar (where members can enter absences, directors check the lineup etc) or other administrative trivia (not!). About time we're getting organized...
 
Access is evil, evil, evil. I hate it thoroughly, I'd quit a job (or refuse the offer) if I had to code in access. Yech, boo, hiss.

Our own band has sort of an excel sheet too, but I'd rather have some sort of Wiki which could easily store mp3s and scanned sheets along with whatever number of keywords you'd come up with and allow full text search.
Access can be evil, especially if it's used for the wrong application -- like a 200-user database -- but if you're going to make a database that only a few people at any one time will use, it's very good. And the interface is, arguably, more user friendly than SQL.
 
Over the past couple of months, I have made the changeover to something called Bento, a non-relational database for the Macintosh from the makers of Filemaker. I made the swap so that I could ditch my massive Excel spreadsheet which (used as a database) had all sorts of information about all of my charts.

Excel works well enough, but it's not all that convenient when used with PDAs. My Palm system PDA used a program called Handibase, one that was more than flexible as far as structuring the database. However, moving information from the computer Excel sheet to the Palm Handibase database was a pain.

Not so with Bento. While the program is missing one or two features that I would like to have, it has a seamless interface with the desktop version of the program. I do my input into the laptop when inventorying the new arrangement, then push the button on the iPhone version of Bento and it's done.

I'm doing a limited rewrite on my "How to manage a music library" document (complete with pictures and a flow diagram someone made for me) mentioned elsewhere, this to account for the Bento system. I'll send it off to Pete tomorrow instead of today.
 
Huh? What? I missed somethin'.

Considering I dunno what's going on, I'll mention about something that TTT posted: copying stuff into a Wiki.

When I was an actual music director playing with actual music, I had to administrate copyright through a company called "CCLI" ("Christian Copyright Licensing international"; I worked at a church). The version that we had stated that we could have the original sheet music and a photocopy for archival purposes. I think they'd sue the church I worked for into bankruptcy if I copied their music into a Wiki -- provided, of course, that a) Wikis existed at that time and b) the church didn't go bankrupt anyway.

I think that would be a GREAT idea, from a usability standpoint, TTT, but from a legal standpoint, it'd be questionable, even if you were the only one that had access to that Wiki.
 
What is a Wiki? Some sort of Hawai'ian gimmick? Inquiring minds want to know...

The "fair use" dodge implies some sort of means to keep the music intact so that the errant trumpet player who leaves his box in the back of his truck in a windstorm (or some lesser calamity) likely to be encountered during the normal course of business doesn't scuttle the whole collection of music. I've seen this happen on at least two occasions, and it's not a pretty sight.

But, it's one thing to have insurance against losss; it's quite another to go around duplicating music and passing it out to all and sundry. Tossing it out there on a website (which is what I assume a Wiki is at this point - correct me if I'm wrong here) is quite another.

Over the past eight years, I've encountered a couple of folks with flexible morals who have tried to "borrow" arrangements ("just for a week" - yeah, right). If was something I could do without, I offered to sell it to said individual (at a massive discount, mind you). They didn't take.

Sure, the arrangements aren't inexpensive. But, somebody has to pay the arranger (and the publisher, nad the rights holder), or music don't get mad.

My opinions, of course.
 
Yup, putting copyrighted charts up on a "Wiki" would most likely get you hung out to dry if anyone caught you...
Who said they'd be accessible by anyone "out there"? No one in their right mind would do that, without proper lockdown measures. Just because it's on a server doesn't mean it can't be protected...using today's technology doesn't automatically imply misuse and copyright infringement.
 
To be fair, I have only one example that supports my interpretation. My federal agency here in the US of A (the Labor Department) ran into just those sorts of issues when they sought to place a copyright protected document (with full disclosure and payment to the document's owner) on the agency's "intranet", a proprietary version of what a "Wiki" appears to be.

In the end, the onerous strictures placed on the computerized document use (each user certified to the copyright's owner, a bizarre shifting password system (you needed to obtain a new password each time you wished to access the document), and crippling the document that you finally could access (no illustrations, no tabular data (the main reason for accessing the document in the first place) made it much more realistic to purchase a thousand hard copies of the document every two years than following the computer use model.

So, at least in that one real world experience with such distribution, things just didn't work smoothly. And, this was with a publisher that was anything but mass market. As commercially available sheet music has been widely pirated in the past, and is largely subject to centralized printing and distribution when "new", it would appear that those holding onto the product would be just as willing to impose similar strictures if they knew of the effort.

Technology has far outstripped "obsolete" concepts like rights ownership. However, those who own the means of creation, production and distribution (with apologies to Karl Marx) haven't given up just yet.

Our original "free" book, the one that we started with almost ten years ago, had plenty of commercial charts (it was original copies all, I might add - not one photocopy in the bunch), but it also had something not all that unique in the world of music. A significant number of the "originals" in the boxes were handwritten charts with no imprint indicating copyright at all, just the last name of the arranger noted on the pre-printed manuscript paper. Under the provisions of the arranger exemption to music copyright, all well and good.

However, after comparison to other, clearly commercial arrangements, these "originals" turn out to be nothing more than note for note, accent for accent and dynamic marking for dynamic marking copies. (I've even caught one of my arrangers doing this once.) The thought of someone copying out a whole musical arrangement, note by note, boggles my mind, but it has happened, is happening (my "gotcha" instance was just two years ago), and (I am sure) will continue in the future.
 
Sometimes it does explicitly say in your license, "May not be copied into any electronic form."

I think it's something that you'd have to check the license for and possibly call up the licensing company and ask. Hey, when they might be able sue you for thousands of dollars per extra copy you have, it's well worth the phone call.
 
Back
Top Bottom