Technical Riders

[paulears]

Many of us get riders via email for one-nighters. Would it be any use to put the content of these up on the forum? I'm thinking that as they rarely arrive early, it would give others the chance to get an idea about shows that are scheduled, or just be of general interest to the student members. I realise that old riders are often very out of date, but I'd find it quite handy to see if an act has a band, or is just tracks. I've been caught out recently by acts that require overnight parking with power - and for us, permits take too long to get when the rider appears late - as most do.

 

Thoughts?

[Ike]

Sounds like a good idea to me, presumably private phone numbers and emails should be removed prior to uploading?

[b1nuzz]

yup. ill second that its a good idea. (once the above mentioned has been removed). Maybe on the Wiki?

[tivoliproduction]

sounds like a plan, I have a huge pile of them here gathering dust and generally getting in the way. obviously any personal info will be removed.

 

Russ ;)

 

just an afterthought, one of my production staff has actually started making a database of shows that actually dont issue a rider. so basically we fill in the gaps when they arrive which can be a pain in the arse but seems to be fairly useful for future visits.

[rudigure]

It sounds like a great idea I'd agree also, but wouldn't the tour management have issues with their riders being published on the net??

[Dave]

In my experience many riders are a cross between a work of fiction and a wish list.

 

I've lost track of the number of out-of-date ones that I've seen, or those which are just plain stupid (eg function band asking for an H3000).

[lightsource]

I've lost track of the number of out-of-date ones that I've seen, or those which are just plain stupid (eg function band asking for an H3000).

 

...or a 4 piece band (with small drum kit) wanting 39 channels.......

 

Good idea in theory, but would probably be out of date fairly quickly.

[niclights]

I'm not so sure it's a good idea. They are mostly wrong/out of date/written by someone not involved or generic and would therefore probably just cause confusion and unnecessary discussion. More importantly I really don't think promoters/bands/agencies would appreciate parts of the contract being made public. If there is concern about a particular production then it's easy enough to try and contact & if this fails and there's still no communication then it's not the venues fault.

[slipstream]

There was a website which had a load of the on it going back quite a few years - try google searching the blue room - think it's been mentioned before

 

Sam

[Bryson]

I've found that companies can be a bit cagey with their riders - I guess they worry about losing work before they even got a chance to explain where they are flexible, or their rider changes so often that it's only up-to-date that week. So if this was going to work, it would have to come with a huge disclaimer that the riders are for info only - that they may be entirely wrong (in either direction) and could have changed entirely.

 

I think there's also the worry that the riders will start to attract criticism from the wider web-based community, so writing them would become even harder. We would need the permission of the rider's "owner" to post anything - and that may be harder than you think.

 

That it would be useful to those of us who work in venues is undoubted. But I think we need to hear from some touring Production Managers before we could proceed. Anyone?

[Jivemaster]

With the riders of all relevant shows being still in the copyright of their author or their employer, republishing could be a specific offence bringing TBR onto disrepute or legal conflict.

 

An act's public image could be different from the image presented in their Tech Rider and publishing it (to be further copied and pasted onto the wider web?) could likely change the public's perception of a band or artiste bringing TBR into compensation situations, for which I suspect would not be good.

[jim b]

Many of us get riders via email for one-nighters. Would it be any use to put the content of these up on the forum? I'm thinking that as they rarely arrive early, it would give others the chance to get an idea about shows that are scheduled, or just be of general interest to the student members. I realise that old riders are often very out of date, but I'd find it quite handy to see if an act has a band, or is just tracks. I've been caught out recently by acts that require overnight parking with power - and for us, permits take too long to get when the rider appears late - as most do.

 

Thoughts?

 

My thoughts on removing the personal details would be that it makes it essentially pointless-the best part about having a spec from a year ago is that you can ring the contact on there who may still be on the show or who may be able to put you into contact with their replacement.

 

I don't think too many acts would be happy with their full riders going public-some have started giving out restricted logins to areas of their websites-probably the same guys who would have sent a spec in a timely fashion anyway.

 

I think the best approach may be the simple "heads up" approach on public forums like these after you've exhausted all other reasonable ways of getting hold of the info you require.

[minty]

I'm not sure I would want riders I have written to be in the public domain. Also my riders change on a regular basis, so I'm not too sure what use it would be.

 

Also if you have a problem with a rider and cannot reach it's author, or they don't get back to you, then it should not be the venues problem if things are not right.

 

Just my two pence worth.

 

Martin

[birt]

this topic immediatly made me think of this one: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1004061iggypop1.html

 

most of you guys have probably read it already, but it's still funny and a great example of how a rider can have way to much useless information. ;)

[paulears]

Smoking gun style riders are NOT what I mean. I'm talking about stuff that is poplar and tours. I mean this kind of thing. Consider Roy Chubby Brown. It's a biggish PA, needs FOH space, consists of a band, onstage monitor position, stracks of wedges, needs a real grand piano and 2 follow spots. We've got Jethro for the first time - and agents subbing from agents means the technical rider has just arrived for a show in a few days time. Turns out no crew required for get-in/out sound done from stage, just wants connection to our system - and a 4.30 arrival time.

 

Music acts are very similar - the tech specs are always difficult to get. I'd have found it useful to see what a turn required. I'm happy to accept riders change - but the kind of shows we have often run on 5 year old riders that bear little resemblance to what they really need. Last week I hired in some decking as the requirements were vastly above what we had - when they came, they didn't need them.

 

So having some available, perhaps with a few comments about how accurate they are would be handy. I've checked and only a few of mine say not foe distribution/private/confidential etc - and the other side of it could well be that it gives us the ability to see the kind of show it will be, and that helps everyone.