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.
who leads your band?
- Thread starter black_JB62
- Start date
all for one, one for all!!! We all do what we can to help the band move forward. Some do more with some stuff than others. It all works out in the end.
In my old band Crawlspace the singer and I lead the band. We did almost all the writing, promotion and deciding direction in the band.
My new band that I have joined is definitly the guitar players band. He formed it and has kept it going as members have come and gone. It is a different experience for me not to be as involved. He basically writes the songs and brings them in as a finished product. My job is simply to come up with the bassline.
Crawlspace was completely different. The singer and I would work on concepts for songs, then bring them to practice and then the whole band would have a part in shaping the song. I much preferred that method, oh well, I am forming another band that will take that approach.
My new band that I have joined is definitly the guitar players band. He formed it and has kept it going as members have come and gone. It is a different experience for me not to be as involved. He basically writes the songs and brings them in as a finished product. My job is simply to come up with the bassline.
Crawlspace was completely different. The singer and I would work on concepts for songs, then bring them to practice and then the whole band would have a part in shaping the song. I much preferred that method, oh well, I am forming another band that will take that approach.
Im the "leader" of my band.
Just because I sing, write lyrics and co-wrote the music with my brother(Guitar player).But its really democratical. The set list is a dmocratical issue, we always play 15 songs, so, we can choose 5 each one of us. Besides, if someone dont want to play one song, we dont play it.I `ve never order somothing, i just talk to them. When i have a song in my mind, i talk to them and explain to the the way the song may sound. We write tons of concept songs, so I tell them the atmophere the song may have. But, then, the must feel free to play what they want.
Andy(the guitarrist) is the one who kepts the site runnin and booked the shows.
And my drummer... well, he let me live in his house!
Mike
Just because I sing, write lyrics and co-wrote the music with my brother(Guitar player).But its really democratical. The set list is a dmocratical issue, we always play 15 songs, so, we can choose 5 each one of us. Besides, if someone dont want to play one song, we dont play it.I `ve never order somothing, i just talk to them. When i have a song in my mind, i talk to them and explain to the the way the song may sound. We write tons of concept songs, so I tell them the atmophere the song may have. But, then, the must feel free to play what they want.
Andy(the guitarrist) is the one who kepts the site runnin and booked the shows.
And my drummer... well, he let me live in his house!
Mike
A band is like a political system in miniature.
A strong bandleader personality can be very "efficient" in the same sense as a totalitarian state, but it may not make the band members happy or fulfilled to participate in that kind of a system.
On the other hand, democracy is probably the least efficient system, but (in theory at least) everyone gets to participate on an equal footing.
In my band, some of the members have special needs. The singer certainly qualifies in that regard. We can't play two particular songs in a row (that might otherwise sound good together) 'cause the singer will burn out her voice on the first one and the second one will sound kinda weak.
So in my band, it's all about accommodating the special needs. Our band operates by consensus. Some of the members may "think" they're band leaders, but let 'em believe what they want to believe, as long as it doesn't hurt the rest of us.
A strong bandleader personality can be very "efficient" in the same sense as a totalitarian state, but it may not make the band members happy or fulfilled to participate in that kind of a system.
On the other hand, democracy is probably the least efficient system, but (in theory at least) everyone gets to participate on an equal footing.
In my band, some of the members have special needs. The singer certainly qualifies in that regard. We can't play two particular songs in a row (that might otherwise sound good together) 'cause the singer will burn out her voice on the first one and the second one will sound kinda weak.
So in my band, it's all about accommodating the special needs. Our band operates by consensus. Some of the members may "think" they're band leaders, but let 'em believe what they want to believe, as long as it doesn't hurt the rest of us.
jive1
Commercial User
Drummer. He books the gigs, and loves networking. He keeps the band going.
I am the czar of sound and PA, I keep the crowd from leaving.
Guitarist tries to be musical director, but it is in his mind only.
I am the czar of sound and PA, I keep the crowd from leaving.
Guitarist tries to be musical director, but it is in his mind only.
Bob Lee (QSC)
In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio!
- Jul 3, 2001
- 12,668
- 2,036
- 67
- Disclosures
- Former Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
I think a band works best when each member has something they can lead in, aside from their particular instrument or voice.
One member may be good at business, another at arranging, another at technical stuff, another at promotional things, et al. This shares the workload and invites a climate of mutual respect. If one person has to carry the responsibility and authority for everything, there are likely to be power plays and resentment.
My most recent band didn't have a designated leader, but the drummer was sort of the de facto business leader, and I co-led on the musical stuff. I quit because the drummer took it upon himself to fire our lead vocalist, telling her he talked it over with the other band members (he didn't) and that it "wasn't clicking musically" with her (she's a much better singer than he is a drummer ... I would've been impressed if he could've at least clicked at a somewhat steady tempo).
So I figured I'd get off at that point, too.
One member may be good at business, another at arranging, another at technical stuff, another at promotional things, et al. This shares the workload and invites a climate of mutual respect. If one person has to carry the responsibility and authority for everything, there are likely to be power plays and resentment.
My most recent band didn't have a designated leader, but the drummer was sort of the de facto business leader, and I co-led on the musical stuff. I quit because the drummer took it upon himself to fire our lead vocalist, telling her he talked it over with the other band members (he didn't) and that it "wasn't clicking musically" with her (she's a much better singer than he is a drummer ... I would've been impressed if he could've at least clicked at a somewhat steady tempo).
So I figured I'd get off at that point, too.
unless I'm a hired gun or it's a true (rare) democracy, I do all the "grownup" stuff.
sometimes I miss the days when that wasn't the case...
from the lows,
Stew
sometimes I miss the days when that wasn't the case...
from the lows,
Stew
That´s pretty much how our band operates. Our keyboardist handles the business part, trombonist is the webmaster and trumpet player arranges practises, deals with other bands (we share our practise place) and keeps the landlord happy. Drummer and I are the only ones that can operate the PA, so that makes it our responsibility.
Musically we have no particular pecking order. We play covers so usually everybody just takes care of his own part and that´s that. But at gigs I am definitely the leader, they call me "The King". I talk to the crowd and have the power to call songs if I like. I think it´s a good idea to give someone authority on stage, even if the band works as a democracy otherwise. A totalitarian leader eliminates all those annoying breaks where the band can´t decide what to play or do next. Singer is usually the logical choice, but it can be anyone - I was chosen as "The King" because I am pretty good talker (our singer really sucks at it).
the devil!!!! 
on a more serious note, most of the bands I've been in (as a guitarist or a bassist) have been led dually by the vocalist and lead guitarist. Most of my groups seem to follow the classic formula of the rolling stones, aerosmith, guns n roses and bon jovi, with the singer and lead guitarist doing most of the writing. Sadly we don't always follow their pattern of success and great songwriting. However, two of my favorite rock bands (motley crue and skid row) had bassists as their primary lyrical and musical writers.
on a more serious note, most of the bands I've been in (as a guitarist or a bassist) have been led dually by the vocalist and lead guitarist. Most of my groups seem to follow the classic formula of the rolling stones, aerosmith, guns n roses and bon jovi, with the singer and lead guitarist doing most of the writing. Sadly we don't always follow their pattern of success and great songwriting. However, two of my favorite rock bands (motley crue and skid row) had bassists as their primary lyrical and musical writers.
Depends on the kind of band that you're in. If you're in a garage band and most of the members are teenagers, everyone should have the same amount of input. Everyone learns how a band really works that way.
If, however, your band is pro, or evem semi-pro, then a committed leader is mandatory. A band without a leader is like a ship with no captain. It's doomed to founder from the gitgo.
Nothing wrong with the leader being a diplomat, though. Tyrants usually can't keep a group together anyway.
There are decisions that sometime have to be made and it's absurd to expect every member to have input on every decision.
If you are being paid to perform, you are conducting business! It's not very business like to tell a potential customer "I'll get back to you when I get together with my bandmates".
Harrell S.
If, however, your band is pro, or evem semi-pro, then a committed leader is mandatory. A band without a leader is like a ship with no captain. It's doomed to founder from the gitgo.
Nothing wrong with the leader being a diplomat, though. Tyrants usually can't keep a group together anyway.
There are decisions that sometime have to be made and it's absurd to expect every member to have input on every decision.
If you are being paid to perform, you are conducting business! It's not very business like to tell a potential customer "I'll get back to you when I get together with my bandmates".
Harrell S.
I'm surprised so few people answered "drummer". Assuming we're talking musically, of course it's a given that everyone should do 'their share'... but if you don't have a drummer who can really take a leadership position once the tape starts rolling, you're really sitting dead in the water.
Definatlely OTHER. animosity can build if 1 person is the top banana. And it shouldn't be a free ride for any member in a band. If 1 guy is running the show, he often gets the blame for not comming through, but if responsibilities are shared, 1 person cant wear the blame if things go sour. Comunication is so important and is a big killer to any band. Unfortunately a band has to be run like a business if you want it to run smoothly, and everyone has to pull their weight. 
I am the bandleader. i say yes or no, and act as the mother figure in the band. i write all the lyrics and most of the music.
the drummer is really the only other person that even tries to take any kind of leadership role. he mainly books the gigs. he causes problems as well, because he likes to have things his way all the time.
rhythm guitarist is the band treasurer. he books rehersals and the studios. he frequently co-writes with me.
lead guitarist plays guitar and really nothing else. he's the classic ace frehley.
the drummer is really the only other person that even tries to take any kind of leadership role. he mainly books the gigs. he causes problems as well, because he likes to have things his way all the time.
rhythm guitarist is the band treasurer. he books rehersals and the studios. he frequently co-writes with me.
lead guitarist plays guitar and really nothing else. he's the classic ace frehley.
great thread!
hmmm....all of us have a say in how things run or don't run. We all have say in music...and everyone helps develop their particular part to each song and then asks what the group thinks. We all write the music---and then Joe (vocals) changes them to fit how he wants to sing it.
Certainly some of our personalities are more aggressive than others so it's like a marraige--we argue about stupid stuff then realize how silly we're acting and just freakin' play.
but somehow I've gotten stuck with all the big stuff in my shed (PA/amps/speakers/etc)----but that's got nothing to do with leadership.
hmmm....all of us have a say in how things run or don't run. We all have say in music...and everyone helps develop their particular part to each song and then asks what the group thinks. We all write the music---and then Joe (vocals) changes them to fit how he wants to sing it.
Certainly some of our personalities are more aggressive than others so it's like a marraige--we argue about stupid stuff then realize how silly we're acting and just freakin' play.
but somehow I've gotten stuck with all the big stuff in my shed (PA/amps/speakers/etc)----but that's got nothing to do with leadership.
We try to keep it as democratic as possible. All decisions like set lists, which songs to record etc. is strictly democratic, and we try to keep and open mind to other opinions. The songwriting process is either jamming something up or someone coming with an idea, that always end up different than intended, but we know we're better together as a band, than anyone could be alone. And it's precisely our differences that makes the band good. If one guy was to decide everything in the band, or had the last word, we wouldn't be as great as we are... and we're great
In this sence I would disagree with Pk2r, because we are semi-pro going on without a bandleader (and we're not kids). On the other hand, not many pro or semi-pro bands do it this way, so I can see what Pk2r means.
My ideal has always been Red Hot Chili Peppers, as they seem to respect and value the creativeness of each other. Of course it's sometimes more problematic running things this way, but to me the result is so much better. The key is to balance between letting each member express his/her creative vision, and respecting each others taste so no one ends up playing something they don't like. And then try not to discuss taste too much. It always ends up in trench digging instead of creatively inspiring each other. So focus on the positive!
Well, I'm a hippie - and I'm proud of it.
PS: The practical stuff gets done by who ever's best at it. I'm the only one with a drivers license, the guitarist know about webdesign etc.
In this sence I would disagree with Pk2r, because we are semi-pro going on without a bandleader (and we're not kids). On the other hand, not many pro or semi-pro bands do it this way, so I can see what Pk2r means.
My ideal has always been Red Hot Chili Peppers, as they seem to respect and value the creativeness of each other. Of course it's sometimes more problematic running things this way, but to me the result is so much better. The key is to balance between letting each member express his/her creative vision, and respecting each others taste so no one ends up playing something they don't like. And then try not to discuss taste too much. It always ends up in trench digging instead of creatively inspiring each other. So focus on the positive!
Well, I'm a hippie - and I'm proud of it.
PS: The practical stuff gets done by who ever's best at it. I'm the only one with a drivers license, the guitarist know about webdesign etc.
