Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Band Management [BG]' started by Bassman8416, Nov 10, 2011.
In your situation No, unless she starts bringing more to the table.
I and my fellow "roadies" appreciate your point of view... but the backup singer still gets backup singer pay.
Just to show that I'm not a complete ogre, I would go so far as to buy her a lighter microphone. So she doesn't strain herself lifting it, see. If it's still too heavy, one of us roadies can put it on the stand for her (but she'll have to pay him $20. Roadies ain't cheap).
If she demanded equal pay, would you concede, or would you let her go?
There’s your answer.
EXACTLY !! In the Bands I'm in, I show up to help the Leader 100% of the time to unload. The Drummer, and Sax player, show up at their leisure, so naturally, I get more pay than they do. I also sing EVERY song, and that adds up in pay points as well.
Most certainly she should get an equal cut. Hell,work up some songs for her to sing. Make her earn her cut,AND feel better about herself. The voice is an instrument,why not use it more to the bands advantage? Feel fortunate that you guys have 2 singers,there's many groups-in-the-making out there that can't even find 1 singer,let alone two.
Fill in the form I have provided below:
Want her in the band?
Y ___ N ___
There's your answer.
Your sarcasm and wit are noted, but it was your post that addressed the issue of loading and setting up gear. All I did was reply.
I have to agree with those that think the singer is bringing some "intangible" goods to your band, such as her looks (even if she isn't gorgeous, the fact that she's cute is huge for your band's image).
Of course, the tangible part of her work is her singing (and if she did, the loading and stuff), but you can't just put value on the tangible. Take models, for instance. Do they do anything, besides being pretty and hitting the gym all day? Unlikely. But look at their paychecks. Consider that they actually get a paycheck considering what they contribute with.
Another thing: if she's good singer, why don't you make her a co-lead singer? That way, she does tangible work equal to the rest of the band.
I'm on the "musicians don't get paid to play but to load/roadie/soundman/promote " side of the fence.
Bawbawa Walters: "I bwought my own mike. "
bravo , good for you
As you said, she wasnt told and you are the newest member so there isnt much you can do except start from here. And, like my band, we pay a sound guy a tidy sum to schlep the PA so theres not much more you can ask her to do. Why isnt she singing on all the songs? Most songs at least have some backups. If not, on her songs "off", could she be out in the crowd with an email sign up sheet, or taking photos/video for the band site/facebook page? Or make her scout for gigs more (our singer, good looking female, gets more attention from owners than I would)
cant change it now.
Get her out marketing and she'
ll be worth it...
As you guys sound check use her to market.
If she's singing on all the tunes and at all the rehersals, I'd say "yes" IMHO, harmony vocals are not quite as easy as you might think. You'd be surprised how many so-called singers can't find a harmony to a lead vocal.
I think the arrangement is more than fair, in any band I have ever been in the only person who doesn't have to play something is the lead singer, and even that is a rare occurrence, usually with my bands the lead singer at least plays some rhythm guitar. She is primarily a back up vocalist and does not play anything. My theory is if there is a member of a band and a gig could be played with out that member, meaning they are non essential than they are not full members and should not get full cuts. Plus I'm not really a fan of backup singers who only sing backup and do nothing else, it's a job which can be filled by an instrumentalist most of the time and just seems like a dead weight position. You guys could just drop her have someone else pickup the backing vocals and make that much more per gig. It's a highly biased opinion I know but it's just my two cents.
There is no right or wrong, only what everyone agrees to.
You can't use the value of your gear to justify pay. Your instrument includes your guitar and your rig. You can't play without it, regardless of the value. A vocalists instrument is their voice. Yeah, they didn't have to buy it but it still needed to be developed the same as your playing did.
Is she a band member? If so then she should get an equal cut. If she's singing backup on a couple of songs then not so much. If it were my band I would ask her to start singing lead on a few songs to give the other singer a break. She also needs to be playing tamborine or cowbell or something.
Hauling gear should be a stipulation of being in the band. Pay is irrelevant to hauling gear.
This is just good thinking.
Give her a tambourine.
In principal, I'm not against paying a band member less if they are not a full participant, however, I think that should be an arrangement that is agreed to at the outset. Changing the terms of employement after the fact never usually goes down very well.
Women are just as capable at schlepping gear as any man. Your statement at best is 'old school' and ignorant, and at worst sexist.
Here are some related products that TB members are talking about.
Clicking on a product will take you to TB’s partner,
where you can find links to TB discussions about these products.
Browser not compatible