Should absent band members pay for recording session?
 

I've got a situation here.

My band (7 piece ska band) booked a day in the recording studio for January 27th with everyone agreeing that they could make it that day. In the past we always split the recording studio fees equally.

Turns out 1 of our 2 trombonists can't make it to the recording session even after saying that he would be able to. We have the ability to record without him since we can have our 2nd trombonist do his parts for him.

However, since we are all in a band collectively, do we have him pay his share of the recording studio fees?

Link to my band's soundcloud for reference

https://soundcloud.com/youandalltheblindpeople

Thanks for your input guys!

Yes

I'd base this on how much notice he gave you. If it was 2 weeks or more, I'd say no. If it was short notice, then yes.

I think yes, too. He's in the band, it's the band's recording, his inability to properly schedule should not be any one else's problem.

Ask the studio owner. Maybe he'll give you a 6/7ths rate. Then charge the 2nd trombone player and additional 1/7th, for overdubs. You might get in and out for 7/7ths. :D

Will he benefit from the recording? (Are you selling it at shows, using it as a promo to book more shows, etc.?)

If so then yes he should pay his share (or go without his share of the benefits).

+1

Just my perspective, but ALL recording costs should be split evenly, regardless of one's presence.

Yes.

If you guys are a "all for one, one for all" type of group--like, you all want to make it in the biz--then particularly yes.

If this player isn't "officially" part of the band, then no. But in most cases, I would say yes.

Is he an invested player in the group? Yes? Then yes. No? Then no, don't make him pay.

Just my opinion.

Absolutely! If he suggests another date and it's rescheduled, great. If he simply cancels, he needs to pay his portion.

if you are going to use the recording and he is going to benefit from it, i.e. sell CDs or use it as a demo, then he should split the cost. IMHO anyway.

Yes as this is a band project. :)

Add another 'yes' from me. If he's benefiting from the recording then he should pay his fair share.

Well, I guess there could be a few things to think about. Was is a justified reason, will it likely loose him from the band, can he replaced if so, etc

What I would do is put it to him. If the recording is likely to produce some income for you, ask him if he would like any of that money. If he does, then make him pay.

Also agree on the time frame. Over all, I think he should pay unless it is an exceptional reason he can't make it & he doesn't want any profits

Yeppers. Band project, equal split. His own fault if he can't make it. He'll still reap the benefit from the product.

+1

Hired gun? No.

Will he share in the "benefit" of having the recording produced? Yes.

Does he want to go in the studio by himself afterwards to record his part?

Your post kind of resembles the drum notation for a Dream Theater song. :D

Absolutely, yes. Why should the rest of you have to pay more, and the other trombonist have the inconvenience of having to record the extra parts, because you've been let down by a band member who'd already said he could be there?

Yes, as already stated it is a band recording session. I believe the final product (demo, record), whatever it is should be split equally. Bass and drum tracks are usually done first with the rest being scratch tracks. I still pay my share for the remaining sessions and most times will sit in on them, although I am not recording.

@jmattbassplaya, I really dig the scared to love track. Its got a great hook and turnaround, well written song.

Not only would I charge him, but I would list him on the recording. He is a band member, no?