Band opinion clashes - Songwriting and what matters

[mutedeity]

Here we go....

Lets degenerate into a string of stereotypes based on the limited experience some of you have with musicians you can only judge yourself by having played with.

[Fetusyolk]

Originally Posted by mutedeity

Here we go....

Lets degenerate into a string of stereotypes based on the limited experience some of you have with musicians you can only judge yourself by having played with.

hahaha hey nowww we're only talking about people we've played with specifically (at least i am), not the musicians with said instruments as a whole

[Joe Nerve]

Originally Posted by Geddyfleaharris

The band voting thing is a tough one. As Mutedeity pointed out someone always perceives themselves to have "lost". When it comes to writing songs I usually hope that the guys in my band will eventually hear what the song really needs.

While there are of course no hard and fast rules, I think this approach is PC stuff that inevitably winds up causing more trouble than "helping" anyone. There's nothing wrong with feeling wrong. There's nothing wrong with having your idea "vetoed". It's good to get used to the feeling that sometimes you ARE wrong. It's unhealthy to think otherwise. Like the teacher that tells Johnny, "That's the right answer. To another question."

If everyone presents their ideas and it's discussed and then there's a band vote, it is waay quicker and easier to simply be done with it, move along, or come up with something different altogether. Someone is going to wind up "losing" no matter what. Isn't it better it be the one guy who everyone else disagrees with?

[nun lover]

Originally Posted by mutedeity

Here we go....

Lets degenerate into a string of stereotypes based on the limited experience some of you have with musicians you can only judge yourself by having played with.

or we could all meet up at the original poster's practice space and form an advice panel after evaluating the song. you'll speak first, of course. the rest of us will nod in manic agreement.

[mutedeity]

Originally Posted by nun lover

or we could all meet up at the original poster's practice space and form an advice panel after evaluating the song. you'll speak first, of course. the rest of us will nod in manic agreement.

I would be fine with that if I was being paid as a producer and receiving the appropriate production points.

Other than that I would prefer to leave it to the band to decide what is in their own best interests and try to give them some advice on how to sort this kind of thing out themselves as a rough template others can learn from.

[mutedeity]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

While there are of course no hard and fast rules, I think this approach is PC stuff that inevitably winds up causing more trouble than "helping" anyone. There's nothing wrong with feeling wrong. There's nothing wrong with having your idea "vetoed". It's good to get used to the feeling that sometimes you ARE wrong. It's unhealthy to think otherwise. Like the teacher that tells Johnny, "That's the right answer. To another question."

If everyone presents their ideas and it's discussed and then there's a band vote, it is waay quicker and easier to simply be done with it, move along, or come up with something different altogether. Someone is going to wind up "losing" no matter what. Isn't it better it be the one guy who everyone else disagrees with?

It really has nothing to do with being "PC". It is also not about whether that idea works or not, either. It's about the way you go about dealing with this kind of thing and how to be most effective about resolving these issues.

Bands that are "equal" share are more problematic because there is no-one to default to when disagreements like this come up. I would treat this thing the same way though even as a band leader. As a band leader, my policy is "lead by example". That means if someone wants to do something and I don't agree with it I am more than prepared to analyse and critique their idea and give my reasoning for why that part should be done differently or reconsidered. In turn I expect that other person can give me a rationale behind what they are doing as it relates to the music.

That way there is discussion and resolution is reached through having an understanding of what works and why and what in turn does not work and why. Of course as a band leader I have to option to veto any argument, but I would always allow the other person to make a case for their approach.

I in turn as a hired musician will understand that the musical director will have the last say, but I am also prepared to give a rationale for any ideas that I bring into the situation.

If you take the "lets vote" approach and you end up with an outcome that says "we don't like your idea and you have to live with it", you really aren't displaying anything other than an ability to gang up on someone when their ideas clash with yours.

You aren't showing that you understand their approach, or have tried to analyse it and quite frankly you shouldn't be surprised if you complicate your working relationship in the process by making that person either more difficult to work with or less willing to contribute when you need them to.

Which brings me back to the lead by example approach. If you are going to veto someone you probably had better make sure you have a good understanding of what they are doing and an alternative suggestion for them to try that shows that while you understand their approach, you believe that the band and the piece will be better served by that particular approach being altered.

Just to answer your question, no, it is not necessarily better that it be the one guy everyone disagrees with, that person might be the one who is doing the one thing that while the other guys don't get it at first, makes the piece better for having done it. Hence why this whole positive reinforcement and discussion process is much more effective than the "lets vote on it" scenario.

[Shaun_Bass0]

Wow, thanks for the response you lot, some really good advice in there!.

Rehearsal is weds so we'll see how the nice approach works first, although if its the same as last time he may end up with my p wrapped round his head!!

Cheers...

[WhiteKnuckles]

Originally Posted by fenderhutz

Break into a complicated slap bass line during the verse.

Refuse to change it.

Best idea yet.

[mambo4]

On the opposite side....
A good drummer friend o mine was playing with an overly flashy bassist , leaving the rhythm to the drummer.

Drummer: "what were you doing during that song, man? you were allover the place..."
Bassist: "I was playing some lead bass, dude!"

Next set, the drummer decided to abandon the beat and just riff on his cymbals and toms for several measures. Bassist :shoots drummer a dirty look.
Drummer:" I'm playing lead drums, dude!"

A funny anecdote, but I don't think I'd like to play that gig.

In my band, everybody is on board with whatever serves the song.
Myself and others have all had their ideas shot down in order to serve the song,
and we are of a temperament where no one holds grudges.
Final say goes to the front man/chief song writer.

Mute's comment about client service strikes home for me. As a commercial artist by day, my paycheck depends on using my creativity and skill without ego attachment -which is a challenge for anyone who invests a lot of time learning an art. I keep myself on track by reminding myself that everybody involved in a project, band or otherwise , is trying to achieve the same thing : an appealing, quality result.

[Geddyfleaharris]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

While there are of course no hard and fast rules, I think this approach is PC stuff that inevitably winds up causing more trouble than "helping" anyone. There's nothing wrong with feeling wrong. There's nothing wrong with having your idea "vetoed". It's good to get used to the feeling that sometimes you ARE wrong. It's unhealthy to think otherwise. Like the teacher that tells Johnny, "That's the right answer. To another question."

If everyone presents their ideas and it's discussed and then there's a band vote, it is waay quicker and easier to simply be done with it, move along, or come up with something different altogether. Someone is going to wind up "losing" no matter what. Isn't it better it be the one guy who everyone else disagrees with?

Don't get me wrong. This has nothing to do with being politically correct. Personally I cannot stand how PC society has become but that's a whole other topic. In our band we have no problem telling each other if we think someone is off track or something isn't working as far as the songs go. But with what I will term the "business decisions" we usually try to work out our discussions to the point that everyone ends up in agreement with the decision rather than having a decision forced down someone's throat by a vote. There is usually an informal vote to guage where everyone is at with the idea and then we work the solution from there. Yes it takes a little more time but I (and my band) do this for fun/hobby. Hypothetically if I was having decisions thrown at me by vote where I was consistently out of step with the rest of the players and disagreed with the direction, why would I stay in the band? Life is too short to be playing in a band that you/I am not happy with. I guess our band is old enough/experienced enough that we know there has to be compromise from everybody to make it work in a positive, fun way.

[Joe Nerve]

Originally Posted by Geddyfleaharris

I guess our band is old enough/experienced enough that we know there has to be compromise from everybody to make it work in a positive, fun way.

Interesting how I thought the same exact thing. I guessed the people I play with are just old enough/experienced enough that we know to just let stuff go and not waste time worrying about our feelings getting hurt. It seems to just come down to whatever works best for the people involved. I don't believe either of us are right or wrong.

And if someone is constantly out of step with everyone else I think they SHOULD find something that suits them better.

[Bochafish]

Sorry to necro the month old thread.

I have found that when these types of things come up, just record. Record the song with his fill, record a version without it, record one with a calypso beat if you want, doesn't matter. Then when you go back and listen to all of the versions, 99% of the time the best sounding version will become clear. You can bounce it off of friends of the band too, the more opinions the better.

There have been plenty of times I thought I was killing it, but changed my mind after hearing a recording.

[Bass Viking]

Originally Posted by Bochafish

Sorry to necro the month old thread.

I have found that when these types of things come up, just record. Record the song with his fill, record a version without it, record one with a calypso beat if you want, doesn't matter. Then when you go back and listen to all of the versions, 99% of the time the best sounding version will become clear. You can bounce it off of friends of the band too, the more opinions the better.

There have been plenty of times I thought I was killing it, but changed my mind after hearing a recording.

That's exactly what I was about to say but you beat me to it!

In one band I was in, we did a tune that started with a drum intro. The drummer made it so flashy and complex that the rest of the band couldn't figure out where to come in. This can be heard on a live recording we made. Yikes!

[Zappstorius]

+1 on recording the song and playing it back. If the drummer has any musical taste and his playing is really that far away from what the song needs I'm sure he'll agree with you guys and probably feel bad about pushing it this far.

[Jonny B]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

Like the teacher that tells Johnny, "That's the right answer. To another question."

I get that all the time.