am I totally unreasonable?

[ChrisB2]

Originally Posted by JohnMCA72

Quad's "fault" was in not being clear up front, what was expected, what everybody's role was, & how things were going to be run.

That's fine and you're right, but then Quad was faulted for actually clearing up what was expected, what everybody's role was, & how things were going to be run... and for stating that he needs to have final say.

I don't know how a guy is supposed to lead if he doesn't have the final say. Either a band, business, or organization is a pure democracy, with each member having an equal say, or someone is the leader and they have a greater say. Regardless of whether the members are paid or not.

[kcole4001]

In the band before my last band, I auditioned, since I didn't know the guy and was merely recommended by someone else I had played with, and after he decided he liked my playing , he laid out the ground rules.
Nice and clear: what's in, what's out, how much goes to each member and why, basically "It's my band, this is how it is, if you have a problem with it let's know right now".
That band was together for 10 years, and we all felt like partners, but with clearly defined limitations. Worked very well, because everything was up front and clear.

My current band is roughly a democracy, and progress is much slower.

Regarding the original question, as long as the ground rules were laid out at the start, then it's perfectly reasonable to expect cooperation from anyone who agrees to be guided by these rules.

They're not set in stone, but remain good guidelines for running a band.
The vision is there, and it sounds like a plan for a successful band, just stick to your idea and keep the big picture in mind.
Don't be too harsh, let everyone know that someone has to be in charge, but keep things flexible and be open to suggestions.

[jive1]

There's lots of great stuff in this thread, lots of it.

I'm going through a similar situation with a band member, but I don't have to clout to force anything because I can't guarantee any money. So, you gotta work things out until you can get to a point where you can make it your way.

Being a band leader automatically makes you a lightning rod, so it's part of the job description. Sometimes you can get lucky and get a great band of guys behind you, but more often than not, you have to deal with something. Even the agreeable guys find new jobs, have changes in family, find new bands, get bored, etc. Sometimes the agreeable guy becomes the pain in the future, and you may realize the pain really contributes alot to the band in some form. You just have to be objective, and not take things personally.

Quibbling over the repertoire is a pain, but an unavoidable part of being in a band, especially one that isn't successful yet. The key is to be flexible, creative, open, and proactive. I'm going through a similar situation, and what I've done in the past is discuss goals, priorities, and then the repertoire. What's the goal of the band? If it's just to have fun playing your favorite songs, then just go democratic. But if it's to play out, then what is the market you want to reach? What type of venues do you want to play? What kind of money would you like to make? What kind of crowd do you want to draw? Sounds like you already have many of those questions answered already, at least to yourself.
Based on the info above, draw up 2 lists. First is an immediate song list of about 40-50 songs, enough to get you through a long gig. Then draw up a list of 80-100 songs. All band members get a say in those songs. There's 1000s of songs out there that would work for a multitude of venues that can be easily learned that you shouldn't have too hard a time to do it. The only band member that I'd give a little extra leeway to is the vocalist. Don't quit until you have those 2 lists done. By doing that, you have an immediate repertoire and have established a direction you want to follow. By agreeing as a band, future disagreements can be remedied by simply pointing out we all agree to this xxx ago. If people don't want to do the list, or get angry about it in the future, then the question you want to throw out is do you want to continue quibbling about the song list, or do you want to solve the problem? If they'd rather quibble, then it's time to replace that band member. At that point, for whatever reason this person would rather argue than solve a problem. If you can't tolerate that, then replace the person. Some people are just that way.

[electracoyote]

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

I think a lot of people here are going to say you`re taking this too seriously...

... luckily for you I`m not one of those people.

I'm not one of those people either.

Your guitar player is a management problem. You need to lay it on the line with him and the band one last time who's in charge. Any more obnoxious power plays, cut him loose. Anyone who wants to walk out with him is more than welcome.

You have a vision, I like your approach. You're putting a helluva lot of work into this vision. Don't compromise. Just because this is a local project (for the time being) does not mean lowering your standards and letting too many cooks spoil the stew. And that's what will happen if you demure to your ADD guitard.

Can you imagine what would have happened to people like Alice Cooper, Gene Simmons, David Bowie, etc. if they had cowed before people who told them their vision sucked? Theatrics, stage presence, wardrobe, and crowd interaction are what WILL seperate you from the run-of-the-mill. And if you feel confident that your set lists are bonafide party starters, you gotta stick to your guns.

Better to start over with a new player or two than compromise on a vision.

[PlanetEarth]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Either a band, business, or organization is a pure democracy, with each member having an equal say, or someone is the leader and they have a greater say. Regardless of whether the members are paid or not.

With respect to business: rarely a democracy, but, employees are paid. Alternatively, an organization may have volunteers and a hierarchy similar to business but this is typically pretty clear.

All I can say is this: if I went complaining to my boss every time I hired someone that subsequently was not a good match, I know for a fact he would question me as to what I'm doing wrong, why I can't make it work, and why I didn't have the instinct up front to see it coming.... All of which I'm prepared to assume responsibility for AND look at as an opportunity to learn something.

In the abstract sense life is about decisions and a constant learning process, all we can do is make the best decisions we can and try to learn from everything, good or bad. IMHO, and I've seen this a million times, you will never change anything if you start with the external, you always have to look in the mirror first and move outward from there, something I've learned the hard way. The more opposition a situation is to my personal opinions, the more challenging the solution, and ultimately the more I learn from it. FWIW, personally, to place blame and walk away is easy and haunts me as a personal failure.

[mcapote]

to me its your band and you are letting him into it, that automatically would put in my head if it were me, I'm a supporting member, and If I wanted more say on the way things run I would of started a new band from scratch with him holding the auditions. New members need to earn their way into that type of contribution to an established band. You told him the play list before he joined, he said he could play it now he doesn't want to? [cheesy rap imitation voice] peace out[/cheesy rap imitation voice]. On a side note I sit in once in awhile with a cover band and its actually the guitarist who wants to do covers of beastie boys (fight for your right) and Ramones (I wanna be sedated) good covers, and people in our age group love the songs, keep playing em. so I would say he isnt the right fit for your band simple as that, if your other guys wants to follow him out, ohh well.

[electracoyote]

Originally Posted by mcapote

New members need to earn their way into that type of contribution to an established band.

+1,000,000

I just joined two bands within the past month, lead guitar for a country band and bass in a classic rock band. I am biting my tongue a LOT. You just don't mouth off and offend the person who got the ball rolling, and you choose your words carefully. After you've had a chance to establish yourself and give the original concept a chance, then you can speak up. If you thought the people in charge were on the wrong track from the start, you shouldn't join the band in the first place.

[crijan]

I'd recommend even further defining your business model up front, have the plan for the band stage "uniform" before you ever form the band, have the side-show crowd interaction stuff already worked out, initial setlist (subject to additions subtractions after the band has it down), potential gig locations, etc.

Then once you have members that are bought-in to the plan you can take their inputs and choose to apply them or not based on if they fit with the original plan or not.

As soon as you have a full-band that's bought in and a marketable enough product (website, photos, recordings, etc), book a paying gig immediately. That will light the fire under the band to get the setlist down and stage show rehearsed.

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

I don't know how a guy is supposed to lead if he doesn't have the final say. Either a band, business, or organization is a pure democracy, with each member having an equal say, or someone is the leader and they have a greater say. Regardless of whether the members are paid or not.

Well, it comes down to how you view leadership. Some leadership theories, particuarly transformational and servant leadership theories, challenge the traditional hiearchal role and structure of leadership. Of course, there is no universally "correct" style of leadership. Some situations call for transformational leadership and some call for transactional leadership. Some situations call for participative leadership and others call for autocratic leadership. Bands, in my experience, usually call for participative leadership styles, unless it really is strictly a hired gun situation. Then, a transactional style may be more effective.

I do agree with Jive, though; this is an excellent thread. In my experience, having cats who aren't on the same page can be incredibly frustrating. I also totally agree with what the OP is trying to do. Many bands fail because they have no direction or mission. Sometimes, cats get together, learn or write some material, and then expect success. A successful band has a lot of planning behind it. Unfortunately, many musicians don't think in those terms.

[bassybill]

Originally Posted by Beej

Just fire him. Life's too short to waste time on messing around with someone's issues. There are plenty of capable musicians everywhere who will be happy to know where they stand in the band.

If this guy isn't mature enough in his 30's to know when something isn't a good fit for him then can him. He's probably feeling like he's not entirely happy with the way things are, but can't just come out and say it. Remember when your first girlfriend at age 13 decided she didn't want to go out with you anymore but couldn't tell you that so she just started treating you like s***? Same difference. Note the age. You described him as ADD, probably a pretty sound observation.

I learned long ago not to put up with this kind of crap anywhere and anytime. I have a reputation as being a bit blunt, but you know what? Everyone knows exactly where they stand with me, there are no questions. Everyone gets my respect until they do something to lose it. He's responsible for his own behaviour. If he can't understand that, why the heck should you waste any emotional energy on dealing with his issues? Sometimes people I work with question me in this, "But Beej, you're a therapist!" I answer cleanly, "yes I am, but I'm not your therapist."

Your idea, your band, your rules. Like it or lump it. You will find people who will work in that model, but you need to be super clear up front about how things work - that way there will be no surprises down the road. It may sound a bit draconian, but in the end, if everyone knows their place, you'll all be happier for it...

Excellent post. Quoted for emphasis.

[bassybill]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Sheesh, some of you guys are making it sound as if there are only two types of bands: those that are pure democracies, and those that have a leader with paid employee musicians.

I play in a cover band with a leader, and everyone gets an equal share of gig receipts. In other words, we all share risk and reward, with no guaranteed income, but yet we also have a leader we follow.

There's nothing wrong with Quad's vision for his band. I don't think he's demanding that you join him and follow his rules. Just because you don't like his structure doesn't mean it's wrong. And his bandmates are probably free to leave at their will also.



So, it's Quad's fault that this guy ran out and booked free gigs on his own? Let me get this straight: you're saying that if you were the leader of this band, and you don't want to play for free, and one of your members booked your band for free anyway, you would be okay with that? Right?

You have five seconds to reply and either say yes, that would be okay with you, or go away and think very hard about the idea that, hmmm, yeah, leaders are okay, and they need to have some basic level of control. The outcome of the latter will be life changing.

Thank you for saving me some typing.

[Quadcam]

Just an update. I worked things out with our guitarist, we sat down and had a discussion regarding the band and how things are to be handled. There had been a lot of miscommunication between us and I think we cleared everything up.

I explained that , yes, it is my band but at the same time it's our band. I take care of all the band duties but I also take everyone input on issues. Everyone has a voice and in the end it all comes down to whats best for the band as a whole.

Theres so much less tension now and everyone seems to be happy.
So, I'm really glad we all sat down and talked everything through

[Geddyfleaharris]

Originally Posted by Quadcam

Just an update. I worked things out with our guitarist, we sat down and had a discussion regarding the band and how things are to be handled. There had been a lot of miscommunication between us and I think we cleared everything up.

I explained that , yes, it is my band but at the same time it's our band. I take care of all the band duties but I also take everyone input on issues. Everyone has a voice and in the end it all comes down to whats best for the band as a whole.

Theres so much less tension now and everyone seems to be happy.
So, I'm really glad we all sat down and talked everything through

Good to hear. Funny how just sitting down face to face can most times resolve issues quicker then emails, voice mails etc. Upfront communication is the key!