Song Choice Rant - Sorry long

Hard to lose all that hard work ain't it? Found myself there in very similar circumstances receintly, ergo.......
You either go along to get along in order to save a TON of hard work and let your following do the talking, when you start to lose them then you can say 'See' and then edit out the dogs. Keep in mind there MAY be a gem or two in there. Audiences can be weird so sometimes you've got a winner where you didn't expect one. Or you bail, there are really only 2 avenues. The third option, the 'carrot' and the 'stick' approach of which you're about to get a ton of varients suggesting on always requires more stick than it's worth, or are legally allowed to apply.

My complete understanding and empathy either way you go. In my case I came out way better in the 'newer' version that arose from the ashes. Perhaps you will have this luck too!!

 

Feel for ya, Man.

I was recently handed the same 'opportunity'
Singer wants to throw out everything we worked up over the past 10 years,
and do 'danceable music', and I was asked the fateful question:
"Give me a list of all the tunes you know"
Honey, I've been playing bass and backing people up for well over 40 years.
It just ain't that simple.

So, two days of rehearsal with a bunch of sidemen who are totally unfamiliar with our product,
whole new setlist that the core group is not familiar with, and we're gonna "knock 'em dead".

I hear that train a-comin'...............

 

I don't know what they are thinking. In almost any bar in America you can play BonJovi and Journey (and stuff like that) all night and have the crowd eating out of your hands.

 

First I read this:

Then I read this:

So, are you at the top of the food chain, or not?

How important to the band's success is the singer? That is the key. If the singer will be very hard to replace I see some very self-distructive actions by the gui**** and BL/drummer.

 

I don't think there's any need to keep things secret from one another because that's just where problems end up coming from.

If I were you, I'd more or less say something along the lines of:

"We appreciate you trying to step up and take the lead, but we don't think you've thought things through. For one, these songs put us in direct competition with other bands who already do these tunes and do them better/more convincingly than we ever could due to talent, backing vox, costumes, stage show, etc.. Two, we don't even have the means to pull off these songs as the band currently has no keys, ability to use samples, etc... Third, this goes against how we've traditionally chosen songs with each person choosing five songs and us discussing them. We think it's pretty inconsiderate and rude of you to assume we'd be fine learning these 30 songs without us getting our say or vote on them. If you'd like to choose your top 5 of these songs we will gladly discuss them as part of normal band procedure and go from there, but we won't learn all thirty because, again, they'd put us in direct competition with other bands, because we realistically couldn't do them all, and because it's not fair to the rest of us."

If he argues from there then tell him you and the singer have already discussed starting another project so perhaps it's time to split ways since the lead wants to do his thing and you guys have been thinking of doing something else.

 

a few issues:

1. Guitarist put in a bunch of work by himself w/o consulting. Is the band's uneven leadership dynamic unbearably grating on you? If not, I'd be inclined at this point to bracket off issues with his persuasive tactics. Instead, I'd be inclined to just thank him for his initiative, so I could focus any necessary discussion on the other aspects of the proposal.

2. The songs might not work for the instruments and players you have in the band. I always think in disagreements about whether a song or arrangement will work, it's easier and quicker to give it an honest try than to argue about it. That said, I wouldn't try all 30 as an experiment. Instead, as a band pick four of five of the most promising from the list to try out. It may be you're absolutely right on this front, in which case playing the songs will make your position pretty clear.

3. You'll lose your band's current audience if you add these 30 songs. Maybe; but there are ways to expand your band's range and expand the kinds of gigs you can take. Lots of us play in bands that play jazz sets for part of a gig and become dance bands for the rest. Others play with a stable group of musicians that take different kinds of gigs under two (or more) different band names. Other mix in a new genre gradually, and find which tunes work with their established core crowd.

 

My band approach. Someone propose that something is out of line, you TELL them it is.

THEN ask if they want to put it to the test?

Audience reaction determines final say. BAM! Problem solved.

 

IMO once a band has enough songs to be gigging.... every song they add should have a purpose. In other words, don't waste peoples time learning songs unless they fill a void you are missing or are MONEY SONGS. If your band can't play a particular tune, they need to move on rather than butcher it but the general public is more tolerant of bad playing than bad singing...so if your singer can sing it than you can probably pull it off.

 

Ive experienced something similar, in my first "real" cover band.

After rehearsing pub rock cover tunes for 6 months and on the cusp of finally gigging the material, the band leader brings in a new vocalist, hands us a set list of over 60 R&B, blues and cruisy songs and says "change in direction guys".

When the band pushed back, he snapped (over email) and "dissolved" the band (also over email).

Never again.

Another band I auditioned for (and would have declined) told me their method for choosing songs was democratic, with the first criteria being 3 of 5 members must "know of" the tune or its automatically out. Yuk! Whatever happened to just listening, liking, learning and testing a tune live?

 

To my mind, if somebody's going to be dictating to the band like that, the "sidemen" better be paid well for their silence. No say? More pay! If I don't have a voice in what happens, then I should be compensated accordingly. That means guaranteed money for gigs, paid rehearsals, paid photo shoots, paid interviews, meal allowance, lodging, mileage, etc.

In a "partnership" arrangement where a band is composed of equals, everybody should respect & be supportive of everybody else's ideas. I think it's also good business sense. You just never know where a good idea will come from, & you also don't always recognize a good idea until you see it in practice. Anything that any band member wants to try should have the other members' 100% support. Try it & see. If it doesn't work, drop it. But at least give everybody in the band their due respect. Else, pay for people's silence.

 

Dude, time to get rid of that guitarist! He seems like a control freak who only cares about himself.

 

Good luck, Michelob. With these two wanting to push through their agenda it's going to be tough keeping harmony in the band. As they've already dropped the bomb instead of just 2 or 3 tracks and let it be known that it is no longer a democracy I don't see how anyone is going to come away with this without losing face.
I believe you may need the help of Jive1!

 

The lead guitarist might as well spit on and slapped the patrons face. Treating a long time fan like this in a major band felony in my book. I would put my foot down at this point and have a band meeting to discuss and determine if the band has any future with it's current members.

Edit: Sounds like the lead guitar player has hijacked the position of BL from the drummer. Only he makes up the set list?

 

I agree with this position 100%.

If you do what the boss says to do, then you should get paid accordingly.