• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Dictatorship vs. Democracy: Pros and Cons

Which Structure do you Prefer

  • Band Makes Choices

    Votes: 60 64.5%

  • Band Leader Makes Choices

    Votes: 33 35.5%
  • Total voters
    93
#21
I've been in both types, and both can work.
What doesn't work is a band where one person thinks he's running the show, while everyone else thinks it's "all get an equal vote". That gets weird after a while, and either dies and ugly death or readjusts.
 
#22
Although our singer is the self-proclaimed band leader, I am taking the position of man behind the man. While he's fantasizing about singing arena rock to sold-out stadiums, I'm thinking about logistics, spending a lot of time reading the Band Management forum in order to get us out of the garage, and forcing direction upon him and the other players (except the drummer, who keeps me sane when I deal with everything else).

I support the idea of democracy and the band needs to have a general consensus about direction and intent, but when we first started nobody would step up with song ideas or band direction. Somebody has to be capable of dealing with the hard realities of decision making, and sometimes you can't waste time waiting for everybody to get their mind made up.
 
#25
I'm a natural leader. If things need to get done and nobody else steps to the plate I'll take charge, and once I'm in that position people better like how I do things. If not, then they should have been the ones to lead in the first place.

That's the way the world works.
 
#26
In my group collaboration is mandatory. By that, I mean to say that everyone has buy-in, and we all handle different aspects of the projects or concerts we do. If it's your arrangement, you, or your designee are in charge of it, and you take input from the group. Now, I'm surrounded by professionals every day. If you have a disparate group of people and not everyone wants to, then that's a different story.

It's true that some groups wouldn't work if one personality wasn't behind it. But I'd say if someone is unhappy unless they are leading, that person should surround him or herself with people who are comfortable with/want that.
 
#30
Confusing. "Band makes choices" is ahead by a 2:1 margin, yet nearly every post says that someone must be responsible. See, after 30 years in the corporate cesspool, I refuse to accept responsibility without the authority to make stuff happen. It's a losing proposition otherwise.
 
#31
I'm was in 3 bands with the same dictator/guitard, the bands have the same bass/guitar/drums but different lead singers. I work full time so they are all "hobby bands".

I recently quit one of the bands as the dictator/guitard recorded songs with the singer and told me I had to play the bass parts exactly as he had recorded them. I insist on making my own bass parts so I quit that project.

All of the bands that I have been in before this had been democracies with one or two guys organizing. All of the musical decisions were made democratically and most of the business decisions were made democratically. The organizers handled details like contacting rooms, sending e-mails for scheduling practices etc.

The guitard/dictator of the 3 bands makes all of the decisions and just tells people what he expects of them. This type of situation might be somewhat acceptable in a "working band" where alot of money was made and people depended on that income but not in a hobby band.

When you have a dictator who has poor judgement or uses the band to only meet his goals run for the hills!

This guy insisted on:

1. No agent. Agents might take some control away from him and tell him where to play.
2. No bars/clubs. He doesn't want to play for "drunks".
3. No hits, only obscure tunes. He expresses distain for "wedding band" songs.
4. Only his originals. No one else can write songs or participate in songwriting except the lead singers. (I had to play the bass part he had written)
5. No charts. Even though all of our gigs were small venues ($0-40 per musician).
6. No clothing that he didn't approve (He would nag endlessly about my hat).
7. No superficial damage to equipment (I was missing a wheel on my combo).
8. No participation in the selection of covers. Only he gets to select the cover tunes.

The singers in these bands are good but the bands will never go anywhere due to not having an agent and therefore never playing large venues.

Being in a hobby band with a control freak/dictator is a mistake that I'll never make again. The main thing about being in a hobby band is to have fun and enjoy your hobby and this is impossible with a dictator. Lesson learned!
 
#33
I prefer Leadership over Dictatorship. Leaders motivate, dictators demoralize. A band should have a clear leadership wherein a final decision should be made by one with input from all. But this demands a small amount of wisdom and respect on everyones part and that may be hard for someone who "wants" to be in charge.
 
#34
I think it depends on the types of personalities you're dealing with. Some people crave leadership and actually like being told what to do, while others..not so much. In a six person band I play with, I dictate what we're going to do to the followers, and with the others, I get their vote. Nonetheless, there is some type of leadership in the band. Also, the decisions that I make are always in the best interest in the band. I've been in bands where there was always some hidden agenda, and I got out of those very fast.
 
#35
The band situations I like best are those in which the players know and trust one another well enough to let individuals take over the band aspects at which they excel.

If someone has promo/PR skills, they take point on those projects. Somebody else might design the website, another negotiates bookings, someone else puts together the gig setlists, etc. In theory, there might be one person who is best suited to make *all* the decisions, and if so that person should be the traditional band leader. However, IME that's rare.
 
#36
kesslari said:
I've been in both types, and both can work.
What doesn't work is a band where one person thinks he's running the show, while everyone else thinks it's "all get an equal vote". That gets weird after a while, and either dies and ugly death or readjusts.
Click to expand...

This made me laugh. It's exactly what happened in our last band. At some point the guy decided he was the band leader despite us never having any kind of discussion about it. It died and ugly death and the three of us that left are still making jokes about him at rehearsal.
 
#37
I assume the situation and viewpoint you're in is that you are NOT the band leader.

The more I do music and the older I get, the less I want a band leader to make choices. Unless... ...that individual is going to pay me really well to come in, and do the part. I am in one band that does pay me very well. And I've been with them for 10 years.

Take my comments with a grain of salt. I'm generally tired of being in someone else's band, and want to do my own.
 
#38
In my professional playing days, I always worked for a Bandleader/Dictator - he gets the gigs, hires and fires the players, provides the charts, choses the songs AND deals with the issues all of the above generated. I just turned up and did the gigs! and, for me, life was easier that way.
 
#39
m_bisson said:
I'm a natural leader. If things need to get done and nobody else steps to the plate I'll take charge, and once I'm in that position people better like how I do things. If not, then they should have been the ones to lead in the first place.

That's the way the world works.
Click to expand...

I'm very much this way. I don't know if I'd say I'm a natural leader as much as I am accomplishment driven. I can't stand to see stuff that needs to be done not being done when there is an ability to do it. Especially, if I already learned the lesson for not doing certain things in another band.

So, if there's a good band leader who has everything under control and everyone is doing what they need to do, then I just sit back and relax and do my thing. But, if there's tasks that are left unattended that need to be accomplished, I will step up if I care about the band. I've ruffled feathers in the past, been accused of trying to take over the band, whatever. But, in the end, if the band accomplishes our goals and we all benefit, that's what's most important moreso than who spearheaded it. Sadly, there are some who would rather be in charge of a failure than being a supporting player for success.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back