Members Vito Corleone Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 my point is that there seems to be more than one direction that the band can go. What are these different directions? Where are you hoping to take the band? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MikeyParent Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Do you use the keytar much? They carry a stigma, and it's too bad because they're actually pretty awesome. I've got my little compact rig with a pivoting stand, which helps immensely. I used to use it exclusively in my 80s band (I had 2 then actually) but I am playing more two-hand stuff now and need to be behind the Axiom sometimes... and even when I dont, for most stages there is really almost nowhere else I can because of space contraints. FWIW, most of the derision you will hear about the keytar will be from elitist musician types. The crowds {censored}ing LOVE it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I'm am certain that Rick Allen would disagree with you on that second statement. wtf are you talking about? surely IF rick allen could play guitar or sing or play keys (i realize that this is a big if), he would consider himself to be a better musician that he is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MikeyParent Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I agree completely. If you are playing party music or power metal, they're amazing. The crowd might not notice how much it opens things up, but they'll chuckle at the cheese factor and you'll put on a better show. It doesn't fit with our presentation, unfortunately. But I would say it does for most bands here. I dunno, works for DragonForce and Sonata Arctica :poke: [video=youtube;1MgLNnzeQFw] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SLScott86 Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Sonata Arctica is awesome, and a huge guilty pleasure of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well I didn't give any examples but my point is that, if you are not in synch with what your bandmates want, maybe this is not the band for you.You want a band like "The Eagles" where everyone sings and plays, they (seem to) want a band with a frontman, nothing wrong with either format, just different strokes.Rod This is precisely why I had so many years of frustration going in and out of bands. Practically every band I ever had always wanted to have just one frontman/singer. And they sure as hell didn't want ME to be that person. They preferred my keyboard playing or my bass playing or my guitar playing. If I had just decided from the get-go to form a band made up of multiple singers, like The Beatles, The Eagles, The Cars, KISS, etc., maybe things would have been different. But trying to change a majority vote from within was probably a pointless exercise. I solve that problem now by simply singing as many songs as I want and letting the bass player sing a bit for variety's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members caeman Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 For a band to succeed, you need a team effort and a common respect for each other's function in the musical construct. A good way to cause problems is to diminish your fellow band mates by thinking they are "less" because of their instrument choice, especially if it is their only instrument choice. Some musicians may not care to learn a second instrument, and doesn't make them any less a musician. To do, well, the problem is with you...not them. A band has to be a family, not enemies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 tim7string: maybe if you sucked more on bass, guitar and keys, the band would let you sing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 For a band to succeed, you need a team effort and a common respect for each other's function in the musical construct. A good way to cause problems is to diminish your fellow band mates by thinking they are "less" because of their instrument choice, especially if it is their only instrument choice. Some musicians may not care to learn a second instrument, and doesn't make them any less a musician. To do, well, the problem is with you...not them. A band has to be a family, not enemies. i'm not trying to diminish anyone. the only thing i asked to the potential bandmate was, 'do you play any instruments'? i don't see how asking about someone's skills 'diminishes a fellow bandmate'. if that is indeed something that they have 'chosen' (btw, i'm not sure whether not knowing how to do something really counts as a 'choice', but that is another point altogether), then how would my acknowledgement of that fact diminish them in any way? it was their 'choice' not to learn an instrument, after all... i refuse to fall into the bull{censored} politically-correct mindset of acting like people are equal when they are clearly not. a person who knows more about music (all other things being equal of course) is a superior musician, in the same way as someone who knows more about carpentry is a better carpenter. to ignore this obvious fact is pure nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted October 5, 2012 Moderators Share Posted October 5, 2012 i'm not trying to diminish anyone. the only thing i asked to the potential bandmate was, 'do you play any instruments'? i don't see how asking about someone's skills 'diminishes a fellow bandmate'. if that is indeed something that they have 'chosen' (btw, i'm not sure whether not knowing how to do something really counts as a 'choice', but that is another point altogether), then how would my judgement of them diminish them in any way? it was their 'choice' not to learn an instrument, after all... i refuse to fall into the bull{censored} politically-correct mindset of acting like people are equal when they are clearly not. a person who knows more about music (all other things being equal of course) is a superior musician, in the same way as someone who knows more about carpentry is a better carpenter. to ignore this obvious fact is pure nonsense. Some people specialize (like playing one instrument or singing only) and some people diversify. Doing one or the other doesn't make anybody a better or worse musician; it's just a choice of where to put your time and effort. "Political correctness" has zero to do with it. I play guitar, bass, and drums (and sing a little) and sometimes I wish I'd specialized more, to be honest. (And sometimes I don't!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 right. but you specializing on guitar means that you are trying to learn more about guitar. knowing more about guitar makes you a better guitarist and a better musician, and learning more instruments also makes you a better musician. imagine two equally skilled guitarists (this is what i meant when i said 'all things being equal' in my last post). guitarist A knows drums, bass, keys, music theory and can sing. guitarist B doesn't know drums, bass, keys, music theory and cannot sing. everything else being equal (as in: assume that one of them isn't a total dick, assume that they both have fully functioning hands, assume that neither of them is deaf, etc, etc), guitarist A knows more about music and is therefore the superior musician. i honestly can't believe it is necessary to explain this point, which is essentially the idea that knowledge = power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted October 5, 2012 Moderators Share Posted October 5, 2012 right. but you specializing on guitar means that you are trying to learn more about guitar. knowing more about guitar makes you a better musician, in the same way as learning more instruments also makes you a better musician. imagine two equally skilled guitarists (this is what i meant when i said 'all things being equal' in my last post). guitarist A knows drums, bass, keys, and can sing. guitarist B doesn't know drums, bass, keys, and cannot sing. everything else being equal, guitarist A knows more about music and is therefore the superior musician. i honestly can't believe it is necessary to explain this point. Sure. So what is it you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 what i am saying is that a person who only does one thing, i.e., a specialist, better be DAMN good at that one thing. a lead singer who cannot play an instrument better be a damn good frontman, i.e. they must have high levels of 1) vocal ability, 2) sex appeal, 3) stage presence, etc.. the guys who my bandmates have been hailing as 'the perfect guy to sing' don't particularly excel in these categories, or at least not enough for me to take a back seat vocally. they would probably be a good fit if they played an instrument, but neither of them do. i'm not keen on adding someone to the band who is probably below average compared to the other members of the band. also i think it's perfectly acceptable to say that someone who chooses to not improve their skill set is somewhat less of a musician/carpenter/painter/etc that someone who does strive to make themselves better (all other factors being equal of course!). they are not necessarily less valuable as a person (i am somewhat inclined to say that they ARE less of a person, but that's another debate altogether), but they are certainly less valuable as a teammate. and the subject of this discussion is the value of someone as a teammate, not as a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pickinatit Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I've seen plenty of singers in local bands who were just karaoke wannabes. Then your gripe is that they aren't really very good singers/frontpersons. I've seen plenty of singing guitar players that only thought they were good enough to carry the band. Those bands would have been much better off with a front man that could only sing & a guitar player that could only play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 1) vocal ability' date=' 2) sex appeal, 3) stage presence,QUOTE'] Think that big guy from meatloaf was hired on the prerequisite of "sex appeal"? I think some of his "stage presence" was his size, not his "sex appeal" Maybe for your band those are the requirements but I think a "presence" for a front man is important both on and especially off the stage. I get your point you wanna rock and lead singer wants to roll, unfortunately that's the way it goes. Any band I was in when I would sing as the drummer the first question from the lead singer was "what do I do?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 tim7string: maybe if you sucked more on bass, guitar and keys, the band would let you sing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Then your gripe is that they aren't really very good singers/frontpersons.I've seen plenty of singing guitar players that only thought they were good enough to carry the band. Those bands would have been much better off with a front man that could only sing & a guitar player that could only play. I am good enough to carry a band...in a bar band environment. Casino stages or festivals? That's debatable. Going on The Voice? That would be laughable at best. As the old Slade song made famous by Quiet Riot goes: "So you think my singin's outta time/It makes me money." If we added someone that was radio-ready level, sure, we'd all rake in the bucks, until they got a better offer. If I were in my early 20s and the right great singer that just sang was interested in having a band with me long-term and we hit it off great, absolutely, let's do it. I'll be Townshend to your Daltrey. Never found that right person, so I'll just keep on doing what I do instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Then your gripe is that they aren't really very good singers/frontpersons.I've seen plenty of singing guitar players that only thought they were good enough to carry the band. Those bands would have been much better off with a front man that could only sing & a guitar player that could only play.in some situations. Depends on the genre largely as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Consume Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 i agree that the band might not be the best fit for me. what i'm trying to determine is whether my perspective on how to create strong vocals in a band makes sense or not, and whether or not i should try to sell my band on 1) a group approach to vocals, and/or 2) a slightly different skill set for a prospective 4th member of the band. i'd like to at least attempt to communicate my ideas (which really aren't as radical as a lot of people make them out to be) before walking away from a group of people that i enjoy personally and musically. It does, but sadly, in this day and age, image carries far more weight than talent with the masses.Before MTV, rock stars could be as ugly as home-made sin, after MTV, it was "pretty boy" time.The best guitarist I know, also happens to be the ugliest guy I know.The guy leaves more talent in the toilet than the vast majority of players have, and I'm dead serious about that - he wound up playing biker bars because that was the only place he ever felt comfortable - read as, it was the only place he could get laid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rangefinder Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 i agree that the band might not be the best fit for me. what i'm trying to determine is whether my perspective on how to create strong vocals in a band makes sense or not, and whether or not i should try to sell my band on 1) a group approach to vocals, and/or 2) a slightly different skill set for a prospective 4th member of the band. i'd like to at least attempt to communicate my ideas (which really aren't as radical as a lot of people make them out to be) before walking away from a group of people that i enjoy personally and musically. Dude, the reason you are coming across as "radical" is that you seem to be going in 10 different directions at once, and making all sorts of value judgments at a personal level that range from irrelevant to bizarre. If you can find a way to put all that aside, you seem to have identified the core issue in your post above, and if you focus on THAT, you may get somewhere. The real question is, how does your band want to share the vocal duties? There is no single right answer. But there are a whole bunch of ways to get sidetracked ("OMG our singer went and smoked a cig during MY song!!1!1!!!! He's not a REAL musician!@!!#$$@#@!!!") by issues that don't really matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted October 6, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 it seems to me that there are really only 2 options: share vocal duties or don't share them (i guess we could be an instrumental act as well). as i've mentioned since the first post, the only value judgements i've been making have been in regards to a band member's worth with respect to the band, i.e., 'how valuable is this prospective member?'. i don't see how assessing someone's potential value is 'personal' or 'irrelevant' or 'bizarre'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted October 6, 2012 Moderators Share Posted October 6, 2012 it seems to me that there are really only 2 options: share vocal duties or don't share them (i guess we could be an instrumental act as well). as i've mentioned since the first post, the only value judgements i've been making have been in regards to a band member's worth with respect to the band, i.e., 'how valuable is this prospective member?'. i don't see how assessing someone's potential value is 'personal' or 'irrelevant' or 'bizarre'. It's only personal if you let it be. By "assessing someone's potential value", what is it you value? Having a band that slays the A room crowds? Having a band that is breaking new ground musically? Having a band that is a gas to play out on the odd weekend night? These are all valid goals. So what are you try to achieve? Once you know what that is... um... you can go like, achieve it and stuff, by picking someone who brings what you are missing for that particular goal.. It's pretty {censored}ing simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 It's only personal if you let it be. By "assessing someone's potential value", what is it you value? Having a band that slays the A room crowds? Having a band that is breaking new ground musically? Having a band that is a gas to play out on the odd weekend night? These are all valid goals. So what are you try to achieve? That's what I was asking. This thread is at a dead-end as long as the OP wants to talk about the potential value of adding another singer to the band but refuses to fill us in on where the band is now and what they are trying to achieve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rodclement Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Agreed. He should have this discussion with the band, not us! It's not about the singer, it's about his goals matching the band he is currently playing in or wants to play with. Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Something that may be happening here that I've seen before is that the band has decided they need a lead singer/front man to help them get to the next level, and the OP is reluctantly going along with the idea but has set up a barrier in his mind by deciding that it's only worth doing if the new singer is the 2nd coming of Robert Plant rather than being willing to understand, as the rest of the band might, that the new guy doesn't have to be phenomenal in order to help the band move forward. He can add another dimension even if he's only on a level commensurate with the rest of the band. In fact, it's probably better for the band in the long run if he's somebody who can fit it and grow with the band rather than being a level-or-two better than the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.