So there is a new band that I have occasionally filled in for. The music is very hip and marketable, the singer is pretty solid and has some aesthetic appeal. Problem: they are pretty heavily invested in a member that sticks out drastically. This is not a band of early 20s players with teenage pop potential, but still the demographic for the music is probably centered around a reasonably hip, mid twenties - early thirties audience... The guy is a good player and has been around the block in the industry, but it almost surprises me that he hasn't taken himself out of the equation. It seems that he should know that he doesn't belong in a gig like this and that it may be more for his own ego than what is best for the band. He's a good player but there are a lot of younger, "hipper" players that would add to the live performance instead of leaving the audience wondering why that guy is doing on stage. Some of his ideas are lacking quite a bit in stylistic and time period relevance. It is an unfortunate reality when a band has serious goals that the entire package matters and when the success of the project is on the line (everyone's investment), I think it has to be considered. It would even be better if they were just marketing the singer (with a band), but they want to market it as a full band. I kinda doubt they could pull off a novelty play on the guy's appearance and anything else is probably going to make for a failed camouflage attempt. Thoughts?