Would you join a band named after the lead singer?

[Freddels]

I would if the person has the draw. But, you're saying that she doesn't really have much draw right now.

So, she wants everyone to kick in to help build her name. In a year or two when the members are all different, you'll have nothing (but some experience but no name recognition) and she'll have a year or two of name recognition (good or bad). I wouldn't pay to be in her band.

[jmac77340]

Unless you absolutely love the music, I'd pass. She expects you to help make her dream a reality. You get to play what you're told to and pay for the privilege of playing it..like a hired gun situation..albeit, a "not-for-profit" hired gun. Minimally, if you want to do this, she can foot the bill for the rehearsal space. You're already sacrificing your time and skill. Her dream, her overhead.

[dtripoli]

Who cares what a band name is?
As for chipping in $$ for rehearsal space, you'd be doing that anyway with the other guys.
I'd rather help out a pretty good singer with studio rehearsal rent(up to a point) than pay nothing to back up a mediocre singer

[Joebarnes]

Originally Posted by dtripoli

Who cares what a band name is?
As for chipping in $$ for rehearsal space, you'd be doing that anyway with the other guys.

Actually, no, we would likely be using the drummer from my old band with the other guys, and she has a space at her house.

[Jim Nazium]

Originally Posted by Joebarnes

Happily married so unless you're asking me to imitate Van Halen on bass, tapping is off the agenda.

Well if there's no potential for fringe benefits, then forget it.

Originally Posted by derrico1

+1 to this looking like a sideman gig, not a band. That's fine, as long as it's treated (and paid) like a sideman gig.

The name wouldn't be a stopper, especially if her name has real positive value as a draw (which might be somewhat independent of how much talent she has).

But combine the name (and what it says about how the "band" will be run) with her wanting you to kick in rent (on a free rehearsal space?) and the empty gig calendar? There would have to be some *serious* networking appeal to make this worth any of your time professionally.

All kidding aside, I agree with derrico1. I don't care about the name at all, and from what I've read it sounds like that isn't really the issue for you either. But a startup band with no gigs, paying for rehearsal space, etc would really limit the appeal for me, unless I thought the music was really awesome.

Maybe go to a couple fo rehearsals and see how it sounds, and how you get along with everyone?

[jaywa]

Originally Posted by bobbybass85

Most of the bands I've played in were named after the lead singer. In each case they were solid guitarists and vocalists, wrote the music (which we had some freedom with in terms of how it was put together as a band), organized the band practices (when, where, how often etc) and landed us the majority of the gigs we played.

In these experiences the music would be recorded by the lead, at their cost (typically with no input of mine or other band members). We were there to mold a recorded piece into a live-performance.

This is my situation exactly. I am a sideman in a self-named band that does the BL's original music, supplemented by covers. The BL owns all the production gear, the vehicle, handles all the bookings, records his original tunes at his expense (with pro studio musicans), and I'm part of the live band that essentially "covers" what he recorded with the pro's.

I have absolutely no problems with the band being named after him because he's taking on the lion's share of the financial risk and workload and I basically don't need to do much more than show up for [mostly very fun] gigs, play [through a very nice P.A] and collect [mostly very nice] pay. In fact it's a relief not having to explain what some quirky name means or worse, be associated with a band with a lame name (been there done that).

[electracoyote]

Originally Posted by jaywa

This is my situation exactly. I am a sideman in a self-named band that does the BL's original music, supplemented by covers. The BL owns all the production gear, the vehicle, handles all the bookings, records his original tunes at his expense (with pro studio musicans), and I'm part of the live band that essentially "covers" what he recorded with the pro's.

This is very common. I've worked with two such artists over the past couple of years. They spent a bundle on getting into a prime recording studio in some place like Los Angeles or Nashville, hired a producer with a proven track record for producing hits, hired the best session men available that they could afford, made what sounds like a polished major label recording, and spent a ton of money. But now they are faced with the task of promoting their brand and their product. Enter: Local musicians on a shoestring budget.

I can understand someone having an aversion to this, because the reality is, as soon as the artists get their big break and another big investment, the first thing they are going to do when they hit the road and widen their circle beyond their region is to hire better, more experienced musicians. But, you could be just good and just lucky enough to make the cut. Remember: It might not be the artist's sole decision whether you stay or go. Investors, managers, and producers could also have their say in the matter.

At the very least, it is good experience, if that matters to you. You meet people who are really sacrificing and trying to make a living at this.

[MarkMgibson]

The OP just said that the band was named after the singer, and that she has written all the songs (she may be the only one who can write). That doesn't necessarily mean she's just looking for side-men - if that were the case I wouldn't do it unless I was being paid.

Just make sure you know what she wants. If she's looking for musicians to collaborate with, the name doesn't matter one bit. If she's looking for people to play what she tells them to play, give it a big miss unless she is a serious talent.

[fdeck]

I was in a similar situation. A singer wanted me to join his band. Based on his repertoire, I told him that he'd be much better off in the long run working with side-men. He hired me for quite a number of gigs, along with other bassists when I couldn't make a gig. That lasted until he started doing mostly out-of-town gigs, and then he had to find a different set of players, but it was a good string of gigs for me while it lasted, and we're still on very good terms.

[soulman969]

Well if Susan Tedeschi asked me to pay for weekly rehearsal space to play in HER band I'd say yes but for Susan Sunshine, no.

If she wants to produce her own band to back her on her material she has to pay the freight. Tell her that's what a producer does and unless she has another one she's it.

I'm looking for situations that pay me not the other way around so I hope you (OP) are too. Next she'll want you to marry her and take out the trash, LOL.

[lowfreq33]

This is one of those "have your cake and eat it too" situations. I see a lot of people trying to do this. They want all the benefits of having band members, but also want all the perks of being a solo act. Look, if someone wants it to be all about them then they have to pay the cost of doing that, which includes covering all the expenses. I've been in this situation before, and I'll NEVER do it again.

My band is "owned" by myself and the other singer, and the rest of the band are hired guns who get a guaranteed minimum amount per show when we go on the road. We provide the transportation, hotels on off days, fuel, handle the business and booking, and renting rehearsal space when needed. Occasionally this means that after all the expenses are taken out of a gig we make slightly less than the band. Also means that if we make more than them they can't complain about it, although if there's extra money we always give them a bonus. It's called paying the cost to be the boss. We stand to gain the most from any success, so it's only fair that we take the greatest risk.

[pklima]

Sure I would. I've even tried to talk a singer once into not using a band name because her own name was quite good for marketing.

Depends on the genre, too. If you're doing Rihanna-style pop and have one person doing all the lead vocals, using a band name would be kinda weird. If you're doing rock, not using a band name would be kinda weird.

[MarkMgibson]

Originally Posted by lowfreq33

This is one of those "have your cake and eat it too" situations. I see a lot of people trying to do this. They want all the benefits of having band members, but also want all the perks of being a solo act. Look, if someone wants it to be all about them then they have to pay the cost of doing that, which includes covering all the expenses. I've been in this situation before, and I'll NEVER do it again.

My band is "owned" by myself and the other singer, and the rest of the band are hired guns who get a guaranteed minimum amount per show when we go on the road. We provide the transportation, hotels on off days, fuel, handle the business and booking, and renting rehearsal space when needed. Occasionally this means that after all the expenses are taken out of a gig we make slightly less than the band. Also means that if we make more than them they can't complain about it, although if there's extra money we always give them a bonus. It's called paying the cost to be the boss. We stand to gain the most from any success, so it's only fair that we take the greatest risk.

I agree with you if this is in fact the situation. It might help if the OP can tell us how old this girl is and how much actual gig experience she has. I'm getting a "young singer just starting out vibe", and that's a little different. If she's an experienced singer with a lot of experience, then he should be getting paid for sure.

[ChrisB2]

Sure, the question in the title, yes, I would join such a band.

Your situation is a lot more than just that, though. In your situation I would probably be looking for other opportunities.

Bottom line, do what you want. And it sounds like you want to leave, so just leave.

[AuntieBeeb]

As several other people have pointed out, the problem here is less about the name of the band than the commitment you're being asked to give to it. To answer the question simply: yes. I've played in several bands named after the front(wo)man.

The more subtle question: you're being asked to chip in for rehearsal rooms but are not convinced the band is worth the investment. Regardless of the band name, maybe go along to a couple of rehearsals and see if you think it has potential, or is just going to be an uphill struggle. If it's the latter, politely resign before you get too involved.

[Joebarnes]

Thank you all for the forthright advice. For those of you who advised me to attend a few rehearsals; I attended the first one last night. Walked in to find lead guitarist playing through a Blues Jr. and a small extension cab and the vocalist/guitarist playing through a smaller Line 6; so no wall of noise or anything stupid like that.

Someone asked the vocalist's age; Mid 30's I would say. They gave me 3 songs to rehearse prior to the rehearsal. After we ran through those, they started in on some of the originals, and I was able to pick up the changes pretty quickly.

The drummer is one of the better ones I've played with; and we seemed to lock in right away.

Their goal is to get out and gig quickly, so that is in line with my goals. Several times they commented it was nice to play with a Bass player who didn't keep winding up their volume (And I thought it was only guitarists who did that )

I received several compliments throughout the night about my playing and they offered me the job at the end of the night (I know, a possible red flag, but based on the conversation throughout the night, I get the impression it is more they have gone through a lot of players who didn't mesh well).

So; Moral of the story at this point is I am going to ride this train a little bit and see how it goes. I am supposed to jam with the other group and see how that goes; but based upon that initial experience, a lot of my trepidation has washed away. Now I just have to work on that name.

[scottbass]

Originally Posted by Joebarnes

The drummer is one of the better ones I've played with; and we seemed to lock in right away.

This is one of the most important factors in determining if you are gonna enjoy this ride. Nothing ever works out well with a bad drummer!

Originally Posted by Joebarnes

So; Moral of the story at this point is I am going to ride this train a little bit and see how it goes.

Congratulations on gathering the information necessary to make an informed decision. Best of luck with your new train ride!

[MarkMgibson]

Sounds like a pretty decent gig actually. I hope you're out playing in front of audiences soon. Best of luck.

[jazzbill]

yes i would. I did. and i am.

[bwardmusic]

I like the response above -- this is her band, and you are someone to create the low frequencies according to her standards and input. I would not be paying for rehearsal space unless there was some other compensating benefit.

It doesn't sound like there is.