• 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.

Overloaded myself and it got sketchy.. Any tips?

Dgl44

Dgl44

Oct 30, 2014
114
96
Slovenia
#1
Hey!

Not a regular poster here, but more of a reader.
Nevertheless, now that I found myself in a bit of a sketchy situation I thought that this could be the right place to maybe get some third person views of my situation.

I've been in an all originals rock n' roll band for two years now, very active band, breaking through steadily on the local scene (a town of 40k people ans the surrounding areas but a very populated music scene), and we've put countless hours into the band, blood sweat and tears and everything that goes with building a band from the ground up.
Mind the important fact that I'm the one in this band most determined to pursue music on a professional level no matter of this bands success. But the level of input from all members is high. Let's call this band band A.

Well just as band A started stagnating, with motivation at an all time low I started getting session gigs. One of these got me in a rather well known rock band on a national level. The next step up from band A. Better musicians than myself, a professional drummer, 4 out of 5 people really devoted to the band. But only one album released in 10 years (15 + bass players changed). I liked the music, I liked the vibe and flaky me took the offer of being a full time bassist. Let's call this band band B.

Now at the same time another band was formed from the need for money. My girlfriend (serious relationship) who is a saxophone player and I started the project as a simple jazz wallpaper music (more of a smooth jazz stuff, low level but the stuff that sells with bars and such around here). It immediately exploded and all 4 of us are completely into the idea of making this a well situated versatile band, video trailers, shitload of repertoar, house band gigs (got one already and another on the horizon). Let's call this band band C.

Now I'm gonna try to explain my dilemma as simply as possible. I'm not too good at putting in simple :D

-Band A is the band with which I feel the deepest connection as so much was put into it and we're great friends.
-Band B is the same genre as band A but on a higher level with higher level musicians
-Band C is the only of the three that pays. Both others use the band pot regime.

I've just gotten to the point where I decided that I should start geting something in return from music, started getting session calls here and there, got myself a bit of a name, getting random calls and proposals on social networks.
And nust as I decided to pursue a session player career with band A for the safety net of regular gigs, I've gotten myself into 3 bands at once.

Band A had a meeting this week and we set up a proper plan on how to contine and where to aim. I like it, it's a step up from how we ran this band.

Band B has international booking agencies on standby, they were just waiting for a steady bassist so they can embark on a tour. Still, a tour happening is not a week away but more of a year away. But I've seen the emails, it's real stuff.

Band C plays the kind of music I most enjoy at the time, with lots of improvisation and on the spot jams even at gigs, which people really dig.

I still want to start making music at least a part time income.
Is it possible to be active enough with 3 bands?
Should I talk to band B about not agreeing with the band pot situation and that I want a fifth of the gig money and will invest my part when needed?
Should I focus on one band or at most two? If that, which band would you lay off first?

So many questions...
Well if you made it this far, I'd really appreciate your view of this situation and your thoughts of how you would react/decide. Because me.. I'm lost. For the life of me can't figure out which way to turn.

Thanks in advance!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groove Doctor, wintremute and Torrente Cro
#3
Oh, and it's real hard to walk away from a band that you've put so much into but if band "A" can't step it up it's time to use it as a springboard to better things (quit and put your energy into band "B"). Many famous musicians started out being recruited from a band that they had outgrown - it's the way it works above a certain level, congrats on reaching it :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: onosson, smogg, interp and 2 others
#6
RoadRanger said:
I'm playing with 6 bands at the moment. I'd say ride it out for a while and see if band "A" gets it's poop together, and if Band "B" ever gets a tour together that you don't have to chip in for - make SURE that isn't their plan :wideyed:. Band "C" is a no-thought-needed keeper.
Click to expand...

I agree - I'm not hearing yet that you have actual conflicts from the bands being too busy, just POTENTIAL conflict. The bands should each know what your schedule and availability look like, don't give them any nasty surprises. But don't go quitting one project on the assumption that another will pan out a certain way in the future. If the other project doesn't pan out, you've gone and lost the project you quit as well.

So, yep - band C is your sure thing that you should hold on to. The nice thing is that it sounds like it's casual enough and sufficiently under your control that if band B gets a tour, you could probably set it aside for six weeks and then come back to it easily. Bands A and B sound like they have potential but I wouldn't count chickens until they're hatched.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groove Doctor, smogg, getbent and 3 others
#7
What's the day job? Can it sustain touring absence? Does it even matter if you have to quit and find another job after the tour?

It sounds like you are spreading yourself very thin with rock bands of very limited prospects of ever paying you anything.

The jazz improv pays. Session work pays. How about that dayjob?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lokikallas and smogg
#9
If Band B has had 15 bass players in 10 years, I would wonder why. If I stayed, I would lobby for a cut of the gig money. It is not like any of the other 15 guys really invested in anything did they? They played for free for less than a year each, so the other guys could be in a band. But, really good players are hard to pass up. Go through this with open eyes and ears.

Sounds like you have the time to be in all 3 with added session work. Sounds like Band C is the one that keeps you fresh. Keep it going. If all ventures paid, I would keep it up. At some point a free gig is standing in the way of a paying gig or session.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groove Doctor, smogg and Roy Royerson
#10
Wow! Thanks for all the replies so far! Definetly got me thinking.
Day job is starting in October. Till now it was session gigs, local alternative venue work as a sound guy, tehnician, working on local festivals etc. etc. So no steady job.
But with October I'm starting a 6-2 or 5-1 job that will pay above average. So at least to keep my head above the water for a while.
But I'm still young enough with enough job opportunities to be able to leave for a tour if that should happen.
Exactly as hrodbert696 said, A and B are both prospective so it's hard for me to pass them up, but they both still need to find a niche in the scene to start making some real money. A is not yet on the level with the music and the outlook of the band and B is lacking in the PR department and the music is a bit too 80s, although high quality (they got known on the scene because the level of music and production was so high that everyone thought that they were a big time american band).
 
  • Like
Reactions: smogg and hrodbert696
#12
guy n.cognito has a good point. Those of us who play wiith multiple bands are certainly loyal to each band, but we have to think of ourselves first. If money is important, then whoever makes the most money should get top priority. Band B's touring may sound prestigious and fun but it takes a long time for rock bands to start making real money (some never do).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spearsy, smogg, garp and 3 others
#13
brianrost said:
Band B's touring may sound prestigious and fun but it takes a long time for rock bands to start making real money (some never do).
Click to expand...

Great point. We've all heard it before: "dude, we are working on a massive tour! In a year!" Rarely do these actually come to fruition. If they do, they are often not nearly as lucrative as they were billed.

Remember, play bars still makes you a "bar band", even if those bars are in another country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spearsy, murphy, obimark and 2 others
#14
Maybe put the most focus on band C and put the other two on the back burner. That's my two cents. If band C is the most fun and pays why not pursue that while playing in the other groups on the side. I wouldn't say just chase the money gigs but if you enjoy it, get to express yourself and get some extra income how can you not persue it. You can ride the wave while your band is getting some momentum.

When I've played with multiple groups I'm always honest about my priorities and what I can commit. Usually when projects are stuck in the mud or rotating players at a crazy rate like bands A and B there are a lot of hurdles. And the 15+ bassist thing is a red flag to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groove Doctor, SmokinJoe992 and bassbully
#16
As a professional that has been in similar situations, the solution... IMO, is very easy...

Unless it's in writing, signed, and verified by your lawyer, it's not worth considering. I would be professional and organized, but people and their grand plans... If not implemented correctly, become pipe dreams. 3 projects is doable with organization. The grander stuff, wait for it to be on paper... And remember, their plans won't necessarily end with you on bass, so take care of your best interests first, without crapping on anyone... IMO...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LiquidMidnight, pcake, bdplaid and 7 others
#18
It sounds like Band A is the hang, Band B is the music and Band C is the money. I find it helpful to define what my ultimate goal is first (make a living, succeed in music, play with the best musicians, have a good time, etc.) and then see which choice furthers that goal. Also, I agree with the other postings, straddle the fence with all three bands (or two of three) while you can before you have to make a decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nev375 and interp
#20
It depends upon how often they are gigging and rehearsing. I'm a weekend warrior - at one time in one band, but had to quit because they were too busy for my life. Right now I am in two bands and subbing for a third, and I wouldn't mind filling up my calendar a little more.

You say you want to make music your career. In that case, success is determined by how much money the music is making (or has the legitimate chance to make). That is how you need to look at your bands. From what you said:

1. Band A is almost dead - you need to determine whether it has a future, or if it is better just to be friends.
2. Band B - How do you see them as a business? There is a difference between fannies in the seats, and $$$ in your pocket.
Both of these sound like bad options for someone who wants this to be their career.

3. Band C sounds like a keeper - good music, good gigs, good hang (you have all three).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groove Doctor, murphy, waveman and 2 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back