Low drama hobby bands - share your tips

[Brother Goose]

A. I am the founder and nucleus of my band so I get to set the vibe. This may not work with everyone - but I feel that some executive ownership is important.

B. Everyone is a responsible member of society with careers that support them and families that love them - making our musical family a "bonus"

C. Only book gigs that work with everyone's schedule

D. Involve spouses in fellowship and promotion - giving them an emotional stake and getting important critical creative feedback

E. Focus on the process and practice first- rather than stage antics and ego munchies.

F. Provide rewards: songs for that showcase someone, a massage certificate for the drummer, Bourbon/gift cards for the rehearsal host

G. Don't overwhelm members w text threads. We keep creative suggestions in a virtual "whiteboard" on Google and I refer everyone to it when new song ideas occur.

H. Focus on high art vs. getting high and making art

 

[Michael Stanley 2112]

Involve as many lawyers and contracts as you can.

Serious answer: I'm not sure what you're looking for is attainable except in very specific circumstances. Most of the musicians I know want to gig at least once a month (which is why my gigging career is over).

Then, there's a bit of a perplexity for me: You want a nice, low drama situation, but you know you want to be the "leader".

There's a situation that screams "Low drama" to me.

 

[Evets1987]

My best tips for this situation are.
1. Be the only band member
2. Learn every instrument to the best of your ability
3.record yourself

Bands with no real goals never last in my experience

 

[Mediocrity Man]

Right now I'm dealing with too much too fast. The band leader wants to add new songs before we even finish or polish the previous ones. There is often an attempt at playing things we should not. Out of musical abilities and out of vocal range. Turn it up loud, put some lights up and add smoke and it will all be fine. I'm just not buying it anymore. We are asked for suggestions, input but in the end he does what he wants. This is a hobby for me, not a career. Everything revolves around the guitar players and the bass and drums are background. We piss off the the owners and management way too often. He is crude and classless. I've already started looking for something new.

 

[G On Bass]

Currently I'm in an originals Hobby band. We work on songs by sending files. The guitarist will write something, send me a version with and without a bass line, then I'll come up with something and send it back. Then we post it online in a folder for the drummer to ignore. That way, songs are ready and we maximize what time we have.

The biggest thing is patience and communication. People have lives and life-dramas that are real and they can't always be available to rehearse all the time. As long as people communicate that, and the band is OK with it, then proper expectations can be set and appropriate decisions made and expectations set. If you need someone who can rehearse every weekend, make sure they know the expectation, and if you are a player who can not rehearse but maybe every 2-4 weeks, make sure people know. If everyone is OK with it, then great. Of not, find the right situations.

I've not had great luck being in hobby-cover bands. Invariably, someone will want to gig and/or at least one regular player is either consistently unprepared or just terrible and keeps the whole thing from being enjoyable.Not to mention, I am beyond sick to death of 90% of the songs 'everyone knows'.

Also, substance or alcohol abuse, especially during rehearsal/jam/gig time has its own gravity that attracts drama like nothing else and people giving in to that are to be avoided, IME.

 

[bdplaid]

I'd love to hear strategies and tips from folks that have succeeded in having low drama hobby bands, whether now or in the past. How have you dealt with personnel changes, changes in direction, varying levels of interest over time, substance use, attitude, differences in opinion, and even your own attitude about the project?

Long story short I've done well managing my past bands from a logistical and financial standpoint, and in my next band I plan to be the band leader, host rehearsals, decide the material. As stated it'll be a hobby band - just playing for fun and mental stimulation outside of the 9-5, M-F work schedule.

Place ZERO emphasis on player's ability, 100% emphasis on their personality and probably personal politics too. The absolute main thing: Do they fit, and are they a friend? Hobby bands are all about the hang. And sometimes, because everyone has a personal investment, they sound really, really good.

 

[Michael Stanley 2112]

Currently I'm in an originals Hobby band. We work on songs by sending files. The guitarist will write something, send me a version with and without a bass line, then I'll come up with something and send it back. Then we post it online in a folder for the drummer to ignore. That way, songs are ready and we maximize what time we have.

The biggest thing is patience and communication. People have lives and life-dramas that are real and they can't always be available to rehearse all the time. As long as people communicate that, and the band is OK with it, then proper expectations can be set and appropriate decisions made and expectations set. If you need someone who can rehearse every weekend, make sure they know the expectation, and if you are a player who can not rehearse but maybe every 2-4 weeks, make sure people know. If everyone is OK with it, then great. Of not, find the right situations.

I've not had great luck being in hobby-cover bands. Invariably, someone will want to gig and/or at least one regular player is either consistently unprepared or just terrible and keeps the whole thing from being enjoyable.Not to mention, I am beyond sick to death of 90% of the songs 'everyone knows'.

Also, substance or alcohol abuse, especially during rehearsal/jam/gig time has its own gravity that attracts drama like nothing else and people giving in to that are to be avoided, IME.

I've been looking to make music with folks remotely. I LOVE this idea.

 

[Lowbrow]

Maybe, maybe not. I've spent a lot of years in bands happy as a clam to show up, play with others, and not have to make any decisions. So maybe what I'm looking for is folks that, like me of yesteryear, want to be led.

Works for me. After decades as a multi-band worker I now run my own remote band made up of acquaintances gained over the years — I choose the tunes, charge my cohorts with performing their parts in a manner that I spec roughly, and produce the recorded results myself. I play bass and guitar, pick up new and different participants from time to time, but my drummer is my brain trust and remains consistent. I’ve only have to show one member the door so far!

 

[Scott Williams]

• It has to be fun for everyone, rehearsals and playing.
• Split any pay and tips equally and immediately. Make this a priority. We always split tips when we are done playing.
• Figure out a way to coordinate calendars.
• Establish a process for adding songs.
• Have even just a few small public gigs so you have something to work towards.
• Don't co-buy any gear. Everyone is responsible for their own stuff and typically you can cobble together PA gear.
• Everyone helps setting up and tearing down. Always. Getting the drums from the car to the basement or stage is everyone's job.

 

[burgerdj]

Honesty. Everyone needs to come in with the same level of expectation and to check in over time depending on how well things are or are not working.

 

[IanStephenson]

Define what you mean by "hobby band" and make sure everyones on the same page.

To me "Hobby band" means you meet up most weeks and play music together. If a gig turns up that's great. If it pays even better. You're hanging out with friends and it's fun.

Where that's going lead to conflict is when someone wants to gig more regularly, or get "better" gigs. Someone else thinks a gig means turning up whenever, inviting their friends, knowing most of the songs more or less ok... If it's a hobby band then thats what he signed up for, but whoever booked the fancy gig isn't going to like it.

If you're calling it a "hobby" band then you're branding it as a hang our, play a bar gig once every few months, get enough cash to cover the tab band. If you every want it to be something better, then tell people that before they sign up.

What others might mean by a "hobby band" is just "its not our main source of income". But you turn up in time to be ready for sound check. You know the parts. You nail them. We take good gigs, do them well and get paid good money for them.

Either is fine for the right people, but not knowing which type of band you're in is pretty much 90% of every "my band is falling apart" thread. Everyone knowing what the ground rules are up front will save you pain.

 

[LBS-bass]

Sorry to bust out yet another apparently unpopular opinion.

Song list really depends what kind of hobby band it is. I believe two things: Everyone should have input and feel comfortable making suggestions. And everyone should (within reason) also have veto rights and that means in general and at showtime.

Not all hobby bands are created equal. Some are started with some sort of artistic vision and they are not just a gathering of friends who all want to have fun playing familiar music. If your band has some sort of vision, particularly if that vision is strategically aligned with maximizing audience appeal through the music you play, the group needs to guard against mission creep.

What I mean by that is that, if everyone's just tossing out their favorite songs to play, you'll have a stylistic mishmash that might be fun for the band members but might not make sense to an audience. That's fine if your core goal is just to entertain yourselves and you have no reason to attempt to get into venues, but maybe not fine otherwise.

So, while I agree that everyone should have input, I believe not every suggestion should be an automatic "yes" in the case of a band like this. Discuss everyone's suggestions, and decide as a group.

The other reason to do this is that, if one person really dislikes a song, or doesn't believe in its appeal, the audience senses that. If your band wants to maximize fun for everyone - band and audience - your entire songlist should be making you all happy so that you can relax and enjoy playing. This is why it's good to agree on - I know this sounds silly - what happiness is, from the very start.

Some people are made happy by simple three-chord songs, others by a challenge involving complicated changes and odd time signatures. It all works a lot better if you all know from the start that you're on the same page. If one of you hates playing Wagon Wheel because it's too simple that person isn't going to be happy with a whole night of simple changes.

I don't believe every hobby band needs a leader. They may need someone to organize and pull them together at the start, but if you're not playing out and it's basically a jam circle, nobody needs to "lead" that, just organize it so that you all know when, where and what you're going to be playing. But if your goal is to play shows, you do need someone making decisions or guiding decision processes, unless you want everything you do to happen by accident.

 

[LBS-bass]

Place ZERO emphasis on player's ability, 100% emphasis on their personality and probably personal politics too. The absolute main thing: Do they fit, and are they a friend? Hobby bands are all about the hang. And sometimes, because everyone has a personal investment, they sound really, really good.

I could not be in a band with players who can't play. This is, to me, a gross overshoot of priorities. It should be possible to find bandmates who are good people and also competent players. If not, I'd rather not.

 

[gln1955]

Sorry to bust out yet another apparently unpopular opinion.

Song list really depends what kind of hobby band it is. I believe two things: Everyone should have input and feel comfortable making suggestions. And everyone should (within reason) also have veto rights and that means in general and at showtime.

Not all hobby bands are created equal. Some are started with some sort of artistic vision and they are not just a gathering of friends who all want to have fun playing familiar music. If your band has some sort of vision, particularly if that vision is strategically aligned with maximizing audience appeal through the music you play, the group needs to guard against mission creep.

What I mean by that is that, if everyone's just tossing out their favorite songs to play, you'll have a stylistic mishmash that might be fun for the band members but might not make sense to an audience. That's fine if your core goal is just to entertain yourselves and you have no reason to attempt to get into venues, but maybe not fine otherwise.

So, while I agree that everyone should have input, I believe not every suggestion should be an automatic "yes" in the case of a band like this. Discuss everyone's suggestions, and decide as a group.

The other reason to do this is that, if one person really dislikes a song, or doesn't believe in its appeal, the audience senses that. If your band wants to maximize fun for everyone - band and audience - your entire songlist should be making you all happy so that you can relax and enjoy playing. This is why it's good to agree on - I know this sounds silly - what happiness is, from the very start.

Some people are made happy by simple three-chord songs, others by a challenge involving complicated changes and odd time signatures. It all works a lot better if you all know from the start that you're on the same page. If one of you hates playing Wagon Wheel because it's too simple that person isn't going to be happy with a whole night of simple changes.

I don't believe every hobby band needs a leader. They may need someone to organize and pull them together at the start, but if you're not playing out and it's basically a jam circle, nobody needs to "lead" that, just organize it so that you all know when, where and what you're going to be playing. But if your goal is to play shows, you do need someone making decisions or guiding decision processes, unless you want everything you do to happen by accident.

None of that should be an unpopular opinion, but yeah, TB.

The thing we have to keep in mind is that even if something is a hobby band, it doesn't mean you don't take it seriously and try to be the best you can. A hobby band might be a very informal jam thing, or it might take on most of the attributes of a pro band, just without the expectation that it's going to pay the bills. Nothing wrong with either, but be sure everyone knows which situation they are in and are happy with it.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

You don't have to even "gig occasionally" to have fun and develop chops. A hobby band could be as simple as a recording project, one song at a time, just to see how you can juice its playing and production quality. Everyone could learn new songs, try different genres, get new skills. The only things that matters would be having fun and all agreeing on the quality angle.

As soon as someone starts jabbering about focusing on one style, set lists, getting gigs, what clothes to wear, lighting, blah blah blah -- well, use your imagination. Or read posts in Band Management if you've never experienced it before.

 

[knumbskull]

In my experience it’s best if everyone is simply clear about what’s happening and can plan their lives around it.

Agree some common goals, and figure out how much time and effort (and money, if applicable) everyone is happy to put in to achieve them.

make it as specific as possible - like “write 45 mins worth of original material to play 1-2 local gigs per month, with rehearsals every Thursday night at X location” (or whatever).

 

[MrLenny1]

I've had numerous hobby bands. At first members seem to be on board then
issues come in like, girl friends/wives. Drugs, booze, lazy, never ready for new tunes.
This also pertains to working bands. Same issues except we get payed.

 

[Spidey2112]

Ditch the egos, give and take, respect and patience.

 

[gstaats]

I could not be in a band with players who can't play. This is, to me, a gross overshoot of priorities. It should be possible to find bandmates who are good people and also competent players. If not, I'd rather not.

Agreed. I do find that finding players with similar skill is needed. It's ok for folks to grow as a band in skills.. but bringing someone on board that can't play or is an obvious drag on the group really kills a project.

 

[Jazzdogg]

My suggestion is to find people who are steadily and successfully employed. They have learned that dedication pays off. They have learned to work with others. They have learned that compromise is often required to make things work. They understand the need for time management. They understand realistic goals.

I find nothing worse than trying to work with unreliable and needy people. These type of people are often chronically unemployed for a reason.

I hope I haven't ruffled too many feathers.

Amen.

The road to disappointment is paved with unrealistic expectations.