Band Leader Dilemna...

[::::BASSIST::::]

Okay, here's the story. About a year ago I decided to start my own band from the ground up. I had a pretty clear vision to start a 50s/60s band playing strictly popular covers from that era. I auditioned some players and slowly but surely got some pretty good musicians together. It took quite awhile to find the right fit in terms of the drummer, but I am confident the guy we have now is the right one.

Anyway, the guitarist and drummer are in their 50s, I'm 39 and the singer is 24. Generally, we all get along. However, lately I am feeling that my position as band founder and leader is not being respected as much as I would like. They talk about adding a 5th member right in front of me, but not really seeking my input. They accept it when I give it, but I feel I should be the key guy involved in that discussion. I founded the band and purposely choose the 4 piece format so that I could interchange the members as people come and go (drummer, guitarist, singer -> all seperate people). I do not want to add a 5th member for a few reasons, one of them being less money. Another thing that has come up is that the drummer booked a gig 3 months from now that I cannot do. However, even though I told him within 5 days that he'll have to change the date (to which he initally agreed) now he causing a big fuss about it. From my point of view its no big deal to change a date 3 months out... just push it back a few weeks if necessary.

Anyway, I could go on with other examples as well, but suffice it to say I find my role as band leader being usurped. So my dilemna is do I become more assertive about having my position as the band leader respected? Or alternatively, do I switch gears and relinquish control and have the band operate on a "general consensus" basis?

To give a bit of background information, besides being the founder, this is what I do:

-book 90% of gigs (including getting the cheques cashed, follow-up ph calls etc). The drummer has only ever booked one gig and nobody else has but me.
-own, transport, setup/tear down the PA
- write and organize the setlists
-pay for and maintain the band website
- maintain the facebook page
- take care of business such as banners, business cards and marketing materials
-drive the drummer to and from gigs and rehearsals and shoe-horn alot of his kit into my car

Basically, besides booking rehearsals, I do everything. Yet, we are all paid equally (which I prefer). A part of me feels like I am being taken advantage of. Now if my position of band leader was respected 100% I would not mind doing all the work so much as it is a labour of love. However, I refuse to be a dictator/tyrant. These guys are men. I accept that they want say in what happens with the band, I make a sincere effort to give them that. For example, everyone has equal say regarding the setlist. We all have 100% veto power. If someone doesnt like a song that is suggested, we just dont do it as there are many other great songs to choose from.

Anyways, my choice is let the band continue to go further down the path of the "general consensus" approach and basically give up alot of my control (which negates all my hard work in founding and maintaining the band) or trying to get them recognize my place as bandleader and not indirectly challenge it.

 

[wonderjosh]

Gotta be more assertive dude... they need to understand the dynamic.

 

[Bredian]

You could call the venue and change the gig schedule yourself, like a boss, as the PA goes where you go, and who's gonna deliver the drummer without you anyway??

On the other hand, you're dealing with adults, not teens. They all expect to have input even if you are the leader.

I did just leave a band where the BL wouldn't listen (effectively) to my input.

 

[::::BASSIST::::]

Yeah, I actually offered a couple times to call the venue and change the date myself but the drummer, "neglected" to comment on that suggestion.

I could put my foot down and start indicating that I will replace people if they dont play ball but two things:

1. Yes, they are adults and I welcome their input but there has to be a balance b/n their input and my ability to have the final decision on certain matters.

2. The three of them are VERY chummy. If I were to fire one, the others would certainly have a big problem with it... even to the point of the others quitting. Then I'd have to go thru the whole auditioning process again... which is a real bastard of a thing to go thru.

 

[nashvillebill]

In theory a band could be a democracy, with all members giving their input and all striving towards a common shared goal, which has been reached after mutual discussion.

But IMHO, the democratic approach does not usually make a successful band. A band needs a leader with a vision to really make it. The BL should listen to members suggestions, but overall, a strong BL gives a better chance of success. It's your band. Be assertive...again, IMO.

 

[Mike Dunbar]

I've gone through stuff like that. My last band was having a mutiny, they insisted that we have a band meeting, I just told them I quit and they could keep the band name. Of course, after few months that was the end of the band.

I now find that it's much easier to be a band member than a bandleader. Now I get to leave early, move only my own crap, complain about everything, and take better gigs when they come up.

 

[handofseven]

IMO, part of the problem is that you are doing the large majority of the work for an equal part in the band. You are the band leader, but from what you describe, the rest of the band doesn't give the title much respect, especially considering they are discussing a 5th member without your input. That's out of control. A previous post hit it on the head: you need to be more assertive. From what you describe though, it may be too late to reign it in without making waves. Discussion about adding members is pretty serious and it says a lot about how they feel about you, conscious or not, if they aren't really including you in the discussion. That would make me really angry, especially if I put in as much work as you do. I don't think you need to fire anyone, but IMO you need to have a meeting with the band and lay out terms you will be comfortable working under, so you can get the respect you deserve and feel better about the band. Good luck.

 

[jive1]

I now find that it's much easier to be a band member than a bandleader. Now I get to leave early, move only my own crap, complain about everything, and take better gigs when they come up.

+1

I also find that it's a whole lot easier to book yourself than a band.

 

[jive1]

In matters of conflict, I find that it is best to deal with tangibles. But because this is the music industry, there's few tangibles. Luckily there is one: money.

In the same way you wouldn't want to devalue or disrespect your band's talents by playing somewhere for free, you shouldn't devalue your work as a bandleader by not taking an extra cut. Take something off the top for the gigs you book and providing the PA. Even if you don't need the money, the money is a tangible symbol of respect. It says I do XXXX and there's value to it for the whole band.

 

[handofseven]

In matters of conflict, I find that it is best to deal with tangibles. But because this is the music industry, there's few tangibles. Luckily there is one: money.

In the same way you wouldn't want to devalue or disrespect your band's talents by playing somewhere for free, you shouldn't devalue your work as a bandleader by not taking an extra cut. Take something off the top for the gigs you book and providing the PA. Even if you don't need the money, the money is a tangible symbol of respect. It says I do XXXX and there's value to it for the whole band.

+1. Well said.

 

[ibateur]

Just because you created the band, and recruited the players, are you assuming they consider you the band leader and el-presidente? Or did you actually say (and continue to) that you are the band leader and final decisions are yours? I think you've shot yourself a bit in the feet by being extremely democratic about pay, and by spoiling them with all the work you're doing. You're like a band member/roadie/tech all in one, but the only thing that you do that is "band-leaderish" is book gigs. You're otherwise all equal.

Your description/conclusion seems to be that you're otherwise ok with this dynamic, outside of the 5th member and the discussion of work duties. I'd start delegating. Get someone to come early to setup the PA with you.

 

[loopee]

This....100%

IMO, part of the problem is that you are doing the large majority of the work for an equal part in the band. You are the band leader, but from what you describe, the rest of the band doesn't give the title much respect, especially considering they are discussing a 5th member without your input. That's out of control. A previous post hit it on the head: you need to be more assertive. From what you describe though, it may be too late to reign it in without making waves. Discussion about adding members is pretty serious and it says a lot about how they feel about you, conscious or not, if they aren't really including you in the discussion. That would make me really angry, especially if I put in as much work as you do. I don't think you need to fire anyone, but IMO you need to have a meeting with the band and lay out terms you will be comfortable working under, so you can get the respect you deserve and feel better about the band. Good luck.

 

[loopee]

Most definitely "well said".....100% on that

In matters of conflict, I find that it is best to deal with tangibles. But because this is the music industry, there's few tangibles. Luckily there is one: money.

In the same way you wouldn't want to devalue or disrespect your band's talents by playing somewhere for free, you shouldn't devalue your work as a bandleader by not taking an extra cut. Take something off the top for the gigs you book and providing the PA. Even if you don't need the money, the money is a tangible symbol of respect. It says I do XXXX and there's value to it for the whole band.

 

[cableguy]

In matters of conflict, I find that it is best to deal with tangibles. But because this is the music industry, there's few tangibles. Luckily there is one: money.

In the same way you wouldn't want to devalue or disrespect your band's talents by playing somewhere for free, you shouldn't devalue your work as a bandleader by not taking an extra cut. Take something off the top for the gigs you book and providing the PA. Even if you don't need the money, the money is a tangible symbol of respect. It says I do XXXX and there's value to it for the whole band.

If I'm playing in a band where one person provides everything you do to for the band I have no problem with him getting an extra cut. Maybe charge the band for PA rental & set-up. Tell the drummer you'll charge him 1/2 what a taxi will for transportation. From your post you seem like a good guy Torin, if the band want a democracy, split the workload 4 ways. They sound like a vocalist I used to play with that thought setting up the PA ment plugging in his mic.

Bandleader or democracy, makes no difference to me as long as the pay and/or workload reflect whatever one it is.
Good luck.

 

[Fran Diaz]

I'd start with that gig date: Give an ultimatum to the drummer and tell him that if he doesn't change the date before your next band practice you'll do it. If you want to be treated with respect act like the boss that you are.

When the dust settles on this matter and/or before a nice paying gig explain to the band that you are taking a cut from that next gig to pay for all the extra expenses that you have been covering (explain to them exactly what you have told us here).

You need to 'reconquer the land' that you gave away.

Let us know how it works out. Good luck

 

[John Bigboote]

To the OP:

Dude, you just wrote my life story. My wife and I decided to start our current project about two years ago. I came up with the concept (with her), the name, designed and built the logo, built the Web site, acquired four domain names (to cover variations), pay for hosting, printed the banner, the business cards, found the members, make and print the setlists, maintain the Reverbnation stuff, front money to the members when I get paid with a check, handle the 1099s, and -- wait for it -- GET THE GIGS. And, until now, I've been happy to split the money evenly, for the simple reasons that a) we're a six-piece, so the six slices can be pretty small, and b) the missus and I need the money less than anyone else in the band. So far, so good.

My problem is mainly with the male vocalist, who thinks it's a democracy. And in the interest of band harmony, I'm pretty willing to compromise -- to the point that I get pretty pissed off occasionally, but I keep it to myself (well, the missus definitely sees it sometimes). It figures that the guy who owns *no* gear (not even his mic) and has made no investment, but is the first to have his hand out at the end of the gig, would decide that the band is a democracy with six equal shares. What he doesn't know is, he'll get one warning next time he pisses me off, and then I'll fire his ass. I haven't been able to before now, because of timing and the fact we just had to replace our female vocalist, but I know another singer who'd kill for that slot, and he just might get it.

I say this because I think there's a time to be all magnanimous, and a time to be the boss. Choose carefully, and time it wisely. IOW, keep your powder dry, so when you flex the muscle you've earned, they know you're serious and not just being a despot -- or a pushover.

Regarding money: We've only been playing clubs for the year we've been gigging, but we're attracting more interest for weddings and events. And the rules are going to change when the bigger $$ jobs come. I'm currently negotiating a wedding, and they will *not* be getting 1/6 of the booking, rather they'll get paid for the gig, and I'll keep the balance. It's time for this guy to start getting some money back for his investment.

-jb

 

[Mystic Michael]

Anyway, I could go on with other examples as well, but suffice it to say I find my role as band leader being usurped. So my dilemna is do I become more assertive about having my position as the band leader respected? Or alternatively, do I switch gears and relinquish control and have the band operate on a "general consensus" basis?

It should never have to come to this point in the first place. That's the essential problem here. Had you nipped this phenomenon in the bud when it first began, the roles & relationships would be much more clear - and settled - by now.

Part of the problem is that by being so egalitarian and so democratic, you may have unwittingly sent mixed signals. Now you're going to have to reassert your authority as leader - in which case it's time to have The Talk. Or in order to avoid conflict, you could always wimp out, relinquish all claims to leadership...and allow the band to simply drift without clear, singular guidance.

Suggestions:

1) Call a meeting.

2) Establish a friendly, relaxed tone.

3) Take responsibility for any "confusion" in roles & responsibilities.

4) Explain that you feel the need to clarify - or re-clarify - some basic precepts & principles by which the band functions.

5) Lay out the the ways in which the band benefits from focused, single-minded leadership - and how you, as its founder & guiding light, must claim that right & responsibility for yourself.

6) Detail what this means in practical terms, i.e. that while you have always valued everyone's input and participation, for purposes of effectiveness & efficiency, there needs to be a decision-maker of last resort. That's you.

6) Don't be an arrogant jerk (obviously). But don't apologize or backpedal either. As nice as it would be for them to continue to like you, even more important is that they respect you. If you clearly articulate the vision of what you're trying to achieve, then show them the road map for how you're going to take them from Point A to Point Z, chances are they'll respect you for that.

7) Be prepared for whatever may come to pass. People have their own free agency: They're going to feel the way they want to feel, and behave the way they want to behave. You can't do much about that. So give it your best shot - but don't lose any sleep over it - no matter how it turns out.

Good luck...

MM

 

[lowfreq33]

It is a problem that you didn't set firm boundaries when you started the band. Now you're going to have to have an uncomfortable discussion.

But make no mistake, this is YOUR band! You started it, you picked the players, you handle all the business, own all the gear. The other guys just show up and play, and you don't even take a leaders fee. They should take this as an act of generosity on your part. I'm going on tour in April, and aside from the female singer, who is my equal partner, the band is getting a flat fee per show. We're establishing this right up front, and it's absolutely fair because we do everything. Own the vehicle, PA, band name, pick the songs, pay for rehearsal space, handle the website, booking, etc. We will be giving bonuses if it's a good week, as we see fit. We're not going to do 3 nights at a casino for $3500 and turn around and hand the guys $300. But it won't be an even split, because the work isn't an even split.

How's the pool of players where you live? I'm lucky, I live in a major music market, and if I have a gig that needs covering I can usually find a great player in an hour or two. If you have paying gigs booked it's really easy to find players.

Have you trademarked the band name and any related images? If not, do so right now. If these guys try to mutiny you'll want to have some protection. You may not have a problem though, because if you do ALL the booking they know they need you, whether they want to admit it or not.

 

[Stumbo]

It is a problem that you didn't set firm boundaries when you started the band. Now you're going to have to have an uncomfortable discussion.

You're running a business and bassically, you're the president. IME, you need to act like the owner/leader and act with authority. If people don't agree with you, find other people. Not everyone will like you, but they have to respect you. You can't really be one of the "guys".

Btw, freedom of speech goes two ways. Since they have their opinion of things, you need to speak up as you go to keep control. Putting things in writing as far as how the band is organized is crucial. I suggest you take minimum percentage off the top as a BL fee..5 or 10%. Some BL's take a full extra cut.

I suggest that you read some small business leadership/ management books.

You might want to check out the following links and get some ideas on what you want in your "band constitution" and how you want to manage the band:

If I only knew then...
Intro
Books
Book - "Bandalism"
Democracy/dictatorship?
"Leading" a band
Band "funds"?

Check out my >500 links thread below for more info.

Good luck.

 

[Stumbo]

What he doesn't know is, he'll get one warning next time he pisses me off, and then I'll fire his ass.

IME, since you haven't set up an rules ahead of time, you're getting pissed off is the worst measure of how and when a BL should act.

Why are you getting angry? You're the BL. You need to speak up as you go, and not wait until the NEXT time. The vocalist is exercising his right to free speech. If you have been silent, then he thinks you agree with him.

I suggest you put everything in writing on how the band is to be run, call a band meeting, hand out the rules and let things fall where they may. In the future, when someone new comes on board, hand them a set of the rules, keep a signed copy on file and things will go a lot smoother.

But, if you do put everything in writing, you'll have to live up to your end of the bargain because if you make changes on the fly, everyone will hold the rules against you as well.