I'm surprised this answer didn't come up sooner. He clearly (according to the post anyway) said that the gig required an upright player. If you don't play upright, you don't get the call. That isn't unreasonable in any way I can see.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
How would you react to this?
- Thread starter PauFerro
- Start date
I'm surprised this answer didn't come up sooner. He clearly (according to the post anyway) said that the gig required an upright player. If you don't play upright, you don't get the call. That isn't unreasonable in any way I can see.
OP is only miffed not to be reciprocal first chair on identical programme material gigs booked by the drummer per the original verbal arrangement.
I think he under rates upright visuals but he's been playing the tunes on BG at similar gigs so there's a schism.
As hard as it sounds, I'd try to be happy for the guy. He got a good gig and you helped. Just try to be happy because being upset won't fix anything it'll only stress you out more.
My personal reaction: be okay with it. Musicians move on.
My reaction if I risked spending lots of money with the expectation I'd be paid back some way somehow: slightly upset, but I knew the risks.
What it really breaks down to me is the idea that the Drummer didn't get enough gigs for OP, regarding the 18:1 gig ratio, then moved on. That's the risk, yet OP still made gig-money because he included the 1st Call Drummer.
So what would make things better: Drummer gets 17 gigs for OP and/or Drummer terminates the trio?
Even if the Drummer's Trio was in direct competition of the OP, OP still has the advantage of better promotion/networking. So 2016 might remain 18 gigs for the OP, and 1 gig for the Drummer's Trio.
Also, OP can now promote the other musicians to 1st or 2nd call. That's good too.
To me it would be in the best interest for everyone if all parties remained cordial. If just the idea that the OP might blacklist former musicians just because they wanted to do their own thing, that might make everyone not want to answer OP's future 1st, 2nd, or 3rd calls.
I'm a bit biased: drummer in my band is always afraid of another drummer poaching band members. But to be honest, the other drummer is just better. My drummer just has the advantage of having a PA, we practice at his place, and being a good guy. But one day, I'm certain I'll just up and go regardless of friendship and/or band loyalty. I have my own musical dreams too.
My reaction if I risked spending lots of money with the expectation I'd be paid back some way somehow: slightly upset, but I knew the risks.
What it really breaks down to me is the idea that the Drummer didn't get enough gigs for OP, regarding the 18:1 gig ratio, then moved on. That's the risk, yet OP still made gig-money because he included the 1st Call Drummer.
So what would make things better: Drummer gets 17 gigs for OP and/or Drummer terminates the trio?
Even if the Drummer's Trio was in direct competition of the OP, OP still has the advantage of better promotion/networking. So 2016 might remain 18 gigs for the OP, and 1 gig for the Drummer's Trio.
Also, OP can now promote the other musicians to 1st or 2nd call. That's good too.
To me it would be in the best interest for everyone if all parties remained cordial. If just the idea that the OP might blacklist former musicians just because they wanted to do their own thing, that might make everyone not want to answer OP's future 1st, 2nd, or 3rd calls.
I'm a bit biased: drummer in my band is always afraid of another drummer poaching band members. But to be honest, the other drummer is just better. My drummer just has the advantage of having a PA, we practice at his place, and being a good guy. But one day, I'm certain I'll just up and go regardless of friendship and/or band loyalty. I have my own musical dreams too.
This has been an interesting read. I don't do much booking anymore, but when I did, by far the largest consideration I usually made was was "who's the best player I can get for the amount the gig pays?" I never really expected reciprocation; my take on it was always that, if people were going to hire me, I wanted it to be because they wanted to work with me, not because they felt they owed me anything.
That being said, if things went down the way the OP says they did (which no one here has any reason to doubt) then this drummer had to know that he was potentially burning a bridge by pursuing the new trio (or else is incredibly dense, or just wasn't listening when the OP explained his expectations) and so I don't see any problem with the OP knocking him down a notch or two on the Gig-call totem pole. Drummer probably expected that, and who knows, he may have even wanted it.
That being said, if things went down the way the OP says they did (which no one here has any reason to doubt) then this drummer had to know that he was potentially burning a bridge by pursuing the new trio (or else is incredibly dense, or just wasn't listening when the OP explained his expectations) and so I don't see any problem with the OP knocking him down a notch or two on the Gig-call totem pole. Drummer probably expected that, and who knows, he may have even wanted it.
If you liked him, then you should have put a ring on it.
If you, the drummer, and the piano player had formed a band, and the other two decided to leave or fire you and replace you with an upright player, I could see how you'd be hurt. But even then - that stuff just happens.
But in your case, you had a list of musicians to call. Maybe the drummer didn't like the gigs you were booking but did them as a favor to you. Maybe there's something in your playing or your personality that the drummer doesn't like. Or maybe the drummer and piano player would rather be in a regular steady band with an upright bassist instead of sitting by the phone and hoping you'd call.
Its all speculation, but here's the thing - it happened, move on. Learn a lesson. Don't burn that bridge / the bassist may have to quit and they might ask you if you'd be interested in joining.
If you want to be in a band, form one. If you want to book gigs and then assemble a group of musicians from a list - that sounds like a lot more work and a lot less fun.
If you, the drummer, and the piano player had formed a band, and the other two decided to leave or fire you and replace you with an upright player, I could see how you'd be hurt. But even then - that stuff just happens.
But in your case, you had a list of musicians to call. Maybe the drummer didn't like the gigs you were booking but did them as a favor to you. Maybe there's something in your playing or your personality that the drummer doesn't like. Or maybe the drummer and piano player would rather be in a regular steady band with an upright bassist instead of sitting by the phone and hoping you'd call.
Its all speculation, but here's the thing - it happened, move on. Learn a lesson. Don't burn that bridge / the bassist may have to quit and they might ask you if you'd be interested in joining.
If you want to be in a band, form one. If you want to book gigs and then assemble a group of musicians from a list - that sounds like a lot more work and a lot less fun.
I think that's just how it goes. You use whoever is most appropriate for any given job. My guess is if the bar owner had asked for an electric bassist , the drummer might well have called you.
There is no entitlement however, I think.
You book him because he does the gigs well and not because you think you owe him anything. Right?
How would I react?
I'd say 'Have a good one!' .
Judging by this and some of your further posts it seems obvious that he wanted a band and you're pretty upset about it that he started one. You had your chance at starting one, too, but instead of commiting to a group of guys you have a list of people with rankings whom to call first. That might sound nice at first hand, but actually I wouldn't feel appreciated even if I was on top of the list. Why? I'd be a number and any event could push me down the list - as evidenced by this thread - so why should I care about commiting to your circle of interchangeable musicians when I could have a real band?
Did you ever ask him if being a hired gun for you is what he wants out of music? Did you ever ask any musician who you work with that question? That'S the first and most important thing for me when I play with someone. If you don't share the same goals it's no use. Simply expecting people to do what's your idea of music won't work out well.
Aside from not getting your concept of playing. I'd move on and if I really wanted commitment out of other musicians I'd start a band not that gun for hire stuff.
Electric bass guitar and string bass and what? Tuba? Fender Rhodes keyboard bass? Are these different instruments interchangeable because they are in the same range and capable of providing the same function?
Please speak English. Tacking a ? on some words doesn't make a question.
As far as OP is concerned he is being cut out of some jazz gigs where a BG can be found just as acceptable as a DB.
Having read the entire thread, I'll take a stab at this;
I believe the one component of this situation that's been overlooked by most responders here is the different relationship that was struck from Day 1 between the bandleader and this particular drummer and the relationships that exist between the bandleader and all the other players on his "call list."
This drummer responded to the OP's ad that sought more than just a drummer but someone who shared business responsibilities: "In fact, when I brought him on to this group, it was with the understanding that he would book gigs alongside me. He agreed to that."
This info does not appear in the OP's initial post but in his third or fourth one. But it defines a relationship that has a business component in addition to the musical "sideman; show up and play the gig, get paid" component.
This is where the drummer falls down and where the OP has a right to be miffed.
I believe that the drummer has "the right" to play with whoever he chooses outside of the bandleader's gigs. But starting a "side business" doing what he initially agreed to do for the bandleader (booking gigs) while not fulfilling his commitment to the bandleader should not have happened without the drummer approaching the bandleader to discuss the change in the nature of their relationship. So the OP has every right to be pissed.
It seems likely to me that the drummer's initial foray -- restaurant trio gig w/ upright player -- was a one-off that just "clicked" for the players involved who then said, "Hey, let's do this again." It's very likely that there was no malicious plot hatched by the drummer, the new trio "just happened." Stuff happens. Ockham's Razor = simplest answer.
So I'd advise the OP to prioritize his call list in a way which suit his clients, his players and himself the best. I'd guess he's been doing that all along and that this "misunderstanding" is just another bump in the Road of Life.
You should talk with the drummer about this, dispel your pent up anger.
Then, if calling this drummer for gigs irks you, call another drummer. If this drummer brings significant "value added" to your product, bite the bullet and call him first. Whatever allows you to be happy and sleep well at night.
I believe the one component of this situation that's been overlooked by most responders here is the different relationship that was struck from Day 1 between the bandleader and this particular drummer and the relationships that exist between the bandleader and all the other players on his "call list."
This drummer responded to the OP's ad that sought more than just a drummer but someone who shared business responsibilities: "In fact, when I brought him on to this group, it was with the understanding that he would book gigs alongside me. He agreed to that."
This info does not appear in the OP's initial post but in his third or fourth one. But it defines a relationship that has a business component in addition to the musical "sideman; show up and play the gig, get paid" component.
This is where the drummer falls down and where the OP has a right to be miffed.
I believe that the drummer has "the right" to play with whoever he chooses outside of the bandleader's gigs. But starting a "side business" doing what he initially agreed to do for the bandleader (booking gigs) while not fulfilling his commitment to the bandleader should not have happened without the drummer approaching the bandleader to discuss the change in the nature of their relationship. So the OP has every right to be pissed.
It seems likely to me that the drummer's initial foray -- restaurant trio gig w/ upright player -- was a one-off that just "clicked" for the players involved who then said, "Hey, let's do this again." It's very likely that there was no malicious plot hatched by the drummer, the new trio "just happened." Stuff happens. Ockham's Razor = simplest answer.
So I'd advise the OP to prioritize his call list in a way which suit his clients, his players and himself the best. I'd guess he's been doing that all along and that this "misunderstanding" is just another bump in the Road of Life.
You should talk with the drummer about this, dispel your pent up anger.
Then, if calling this drummer for gigs irks you, call another drummer. If this drummer brings significant "value added" to your product, bite the bullet and call him first. Whatever allows you to be happy and sleep well at night.
Last edited:
I've read the first 4 pages of responses, and am very much in agreement with the suggestions to not burn bridges. I also concur with the route you appear to have chosen. Nothing much to add to that perspective.
This is a fair point, and I offer my support. If you hadn't said it, I would have. This is one thing this group is great for; airing of grievances. Take the good and the bad, it is the internet, but I have valued your posts in the past, and I appreciate that I have friends out here that will listen and comment on my issues.
I will agree with others that say he may have found something in the DB player that he didn't find with you. Chemistry. Chemicals? Either way, I've found the gig triangle theory to hold true--good music, good hang, and good pay put a gig in the sweet spot for me, and many of us. Maybe this is the first time he's ever found all three--based on your description of the work you do, the music and pay are probably spot on. But something about this guy--maybe his sister is cute? Maybe the piano player really grooves with him, making the drummer's job even easier and more fun? Maybe they plan to add the DB's cousin on vibes/sax/kazoo, but had to convince him they were serious, hence the video. He might be "marketing" to his uncle, who never thought much of him because he didn't play with an upright player...
Could be anything. Could mean he's short-sighted, immature, smitten, whatevs. But he's obviously feeling some connection/fulfilling a need there that he doesn't with you.
No sweat. Again, I think your go-forward plan is sound. And I appreciate the discussion, for a number of reasons. Sorry for the ramble... where's my coffee?
This is a fair point, and I offer my support. If you hadn't said it, I would have. This is one thing this group is great for; airing of grievances. Take the good and the bad, it is the internet, but I have valued your posts in the past, and I appreciate that I have friends out here that will listen and comment on my issues.
I will agree with others that say he may have found something in the DB player that he didn't find with you. Chemistry. Chemicals? Either way, I've found the gig triangle theory to hold true--good music, good hang, and good pay put a gig in the sweet spot for me, and many of us. Maybe this is the first time he's ever found all three--based on your description of the work you do, the music and pay are probably spot on. But something about this guy--maybe his sister is cute? Maybe the piano player really grooves with him, making the drummer's job even easier and more fun? Maybe they plan to add the DB's cousin on vibes/sax/kazoo, but had to convince him they were serious, hence the video. He might be "marketing" to his uncle, who never thought much of him because he didn't play with an upright player...
Could be anything. Could mean he's short-sighted, immature, smitten, whatevs. But he's obviously feeling some connection/fulfilling a need there that he doesn't with you.
No sweat. Again, I think your go-forward plan is sound. And I appreciate the discussion, for a number of reasons. Sorry for the ramble... where's my coffee?
To me, with my limited knowledge of the situation, it seems like the drummer is just looking to have fun, while the the OP is looking to run things like a business. I don't know who is right, but I'm fairly certain that neither are wrong.
1111
I guess that would be fair if it were purely a visual difference. The gigs are not identical if one requires an instrument he doesn't play. There's plenty of his in my town that I can't get because I am not a competent upright player, like the entire jazz scene pretty much.
Just had a quick gander at the alerts that popped up overnight regarding this thread. I want to give heartfelt thanks to Jeff Elkins, Keyser Soze, cntlb, and Matt Holt for making balanced, mature comments that influence my thinking. Their posts are characterized by:
a) consideration of the facts as I gave them, at face value
b) an absence of personal attacks, slang labels, or assumptions about the personalities involved
c) an apparent understanding of the details of the situation. not requiring me to correct their understanding of the important details. All appear to have read the thread enought o understand it thoroughly, which puts considerable weight on their opinions.
d) not necessarily agreeing with me, but showing the ability to step into my shoes and approach the situation with empathy, providing a reasoned opinion that provides angles I had not thought of.
e) demonstrating business acumen
f) not questioning the existence of the thread in the first place.
These are the kinds of posts that make TalkBass a valuable place to go for advice you can't get from people in your face to face circle of friends. Thanks guys.
a) consideration of the facts as I gave them, at face value
b) an absence of personal attacks, slang labels, or assumptions about the personalities involved
c) an apparent understanding of the details of the situation. not requiring me to correct their understanding of the important details. All appear to have read the thread enought o understand it thoroughly, which puts considerable weight on their opinions.
d) not necessarily agreeing with me, but showing the ability to step into my shoes and approach the situation with empathy, providing a reasoned opinion that provides angles I had not thought of.
e) demonstrating business acumen
f) not questioning the existence of the thread in the first place.
These are the kinds of posts that make TalkBass a valuable place to go for advice you can't get from people in your face to face circle of friends. Thanks guys.
Last edited:
I was just about say that the best posts in this thread are from Jeff Elkins and Keyser Soze. Thanks, guys, and thanks to PaulFerro for being willing to share and (hopefully) get us all thinking.
If you don't play the instrument that's called for, there's no point in getting upset. Just move on.
