Two names, One band

[Agitator]

Here's the deal:

 

For a little over a year, I've been playing in an eight-piece instrumental band called SuperSka. This band has a four-piece horn section, and a four-piece rhythm section, and we play vintage ska & reggae: Skatalites covers, etc.

 

We've done pretty well around the local scene for the last year, playing once a month or so to small but consistent crowds (big enough for our local bar to keep booking us).

 

So, all well and good, except that we've had a lot of turnover and subbing in the horn section. This has gotten worse since last summer and I (as de facto manager) have gotten sick of finding subs, sending them the sheet music, and arranging rehearsals so we can get the subs up to speed.

 

So in the fall, I created a new band, the SubVersions, that's just the rhythm section from the SuperSka band (gtr/bass/drums/keys). Our repertoire is more oriented towards soul, reggae and funk (Booker T & the MG's, The Meters, etc., plus a lot of old reggae). We're still instrumental, although I'm trying to get various guest vocalists to sit in from gig to gig (e.g. on Tuesday we had a lady friend sit in on "Tears of a Clown", "I Wish" and Gladys Knight's "My Imagination").

 

So, all well and good. The SubVersions played our second gig on Tuesday and got a few folks in... not bad for a 6:30 Tuesday show. I'm hoping that with the greater availability of the rhythm section guys we could get a residency with the SubVersions (bi-weekly or even weekly) that would be hard to swing with the full eight-piece band due to conflicts and availability.

 

So, here's my question: up until now (and keep in mind that the SubVersions only played our first gig in mid-December), I've been keeping our web presence under the "SuperSka" name. I.e., same mailing list, same facebook/twitter pages, same superskaboston.com website. I've been promoting the new band as "SuperSka presents The SubVersions" to play up the connection between the two.

 

We have about a hundred-odd names on our email list, 200+ "likes" on facebook and a decent number of twitter followers (about a hundred).

 

My feeling is that since the two bands are essentially the same personnel (give or take the horn section), and would probably appeal to a lot of the same audience -- plus the fact that I'm busy (with a full-time job and two kids) and kinda lazy -- I should just keep all the web stuff under the same "SuperSka" name and websites. It's bad enough these days that you have to maintain a website, an email list, a facebook page and a twitter account, and I really don't want to have to maintain two of each.

 

So... any downside to keeping the two bands "together" in terms of mailing list/website/facebook etc? I guess if the SubVersions crowds ever start to outpace the SuperSka crowds I might consider splitting it off into its own identity but for now, this seems like the easiest way to reach the largest number of fans who are likely (IMO) to like both bands.

 

Thoughts? Anyone dealt with a similar situation in the past?

 

TIA, guys.

[wardjames]

 

Here's the deal: For a little over a year, I've been playing in an eight-piece instrumental band called SuperSka. This band has a four-piece horn section, and a four-piece rhythm section, and we play vintage ska & reggae: Skatalites covers, etc. We've done pretty well around the local scene for the last year, playing once a month or so to small but consistent crowds (big enough for our local bar to keep booking us). So, all well and good, except that we've had a lot of turnover and subbing in the horn section. This has gotten worse since last summer and I (as de facto manager) have gotten sick of finding subs, sending them the sheet music, and arranging rehearsals so we can get the subs up to speed. So in the fall, I created a new band, the SubVersions, that's just the rhythm section from the SuperSka band (gtr/bass/drums/keys). Our repertoire is more oriented towards soul, reggae and funk (Booker T & the MG's, The Meters, etc., plus a lot of old reggae). We're still instrumental, although I'm trying to get various guest vocalists to sit in from gig to gig (e.g. on Tuesday we had a lady friend sit in on "Tears of a Clown", "I Wish" and Gladys Knight's "My Imagination"). So, all well and good. The SubVersions played our second gig on Tuesday and got a few folks in... not bad for a 6:30 Tuesday show. I'm hoping that with the greater availability of the rhythm section guys we could get a residency with the SubVersions (bi-weekly or even weekly) that would be hard to swing with the full eight-piece band due to conflicts and availability. So, here's my question: up until now (and keep in mind that the SubVersions only played our first gig in mid-December), I've been keeping our web presence under the "SuperSka" name. I.e., same mailing list, same facebook/twitter pages, same superskaboston.com website. I've been promoting the new band as "SuperSka presents The SubVersions" to play up the connection between the two. We have about a hundred-odd names on our email list, 200+ "likes" on facebook and a decent number of twitter followers (about a hundred). My feeling is that since the two bands are essentially the same personnel (give or take the horn section), and would probably appeal to a lot of the same audience -- plus the fact that I'm busy (with a full-time job and two kids) and kinda lazy -- I should just keep all the web stuff under the same "SuperSka" name and websites. It's bad enough these days that you have to maintain a website, an email list, a facebook page and a twitter account, and I really don't want to have to maintain two of each. So... any downside to keeping the two bands "together" in terms of mailing list/website/facebook etc? I guess if the SubVersions crowds ever start to outpace the SuperSka crowds I might consider splitting it off into its own identity but for now, this seems like the easiest way to reach the largest number of fans who are likely (IMO) to like both bands. Thoughts? Anyone dealt with a similar situation in the past? TIA, guys.

 

 

I really like the idea. Check out this website: http://platinumrockstars.com/

 

One band, two tributes and a party rock band. Brilliant. They can play the same venue opening for themselves, and they have a variety act for Private parties.

 

I'd eventually like to incorporate the same idea with my variety country band and then a couple of tribute acts.

[wheresgrant3]

I've seen other bands do it... I don't see a problem with it really it... in fact it can actually make both projects look 'more in demand'.

[Lee Knight]

The Tedeski Trucks Band did something similar. They've since created seperate websites... but initially... if you looked up Tedeski Trucks, it took you to Daryl Trucks site, then you had an option of seeing specific Tedeski Trucks tour info. There was no Tedeski/Trucks site. You're right, the same people are interested in both. Yes, it is a seperate entitiy, but you shouldn't, and I wouldn't try to reinvent the wheel. It is not a similar market and fanbase, but an identical one.

 

Why not have a tab or a photo link saying "And WTF is this SubVersions thing all about?!?!?" Then you explain on another page...

 

By the way, I want to play in your band and sing! You guys sound like too much fun. I'd love singing Gladys' My Imagination. Keep on... keepin' on.

[J.Paul]

I love the idea

 

The concept of the public understanding that one name means one set of tunes and another name means another experience might take some massaging but is achievable. I think you're on the right track.The "presents" thing is great. Good job.

 

There could be questions of ownership though.

Horn sections (or whoever else is a partner) invested months and years in rehersals, and shows to help build the brand and then you take the mailing list and EPK and start building another revenue stream.....of course the flipside is if they were more available then you wouldn't be doing this (I'm guessing).

 

If it's only been 6 months I would keep the two imaged together as EPK/websites. Another year of shows might make things more clearer as to if the names should be split.

My 2 cents

[fishmanrod]

I think it's fine.

An alternative might be, eventually, to be the SubVersives, with the "SuperSka Horns". Further solves the identity crisis.

Cheers!

[Agitator]

Thanks everyone... I guess I was just worried that someone would say "Good God, don't do that, this is what happened to me.... " but it seemed like a reasonable thing to do.

 

 

The concept of the public understanding that one name means one set of tunes and another name means another experience might take some massaging but is achievable. I think you're on the right track.The "presents" thing is great. Good job.

Thanks. The main thing I want to accomplish with the "presents..." is to keep people from wondering "Why the heck am I getting spam from the SubVersions on the SuperSka email list?".

 

 

There could be questions of ownership though. Horn sections (or whoever else is a partner) invested months and years in rehersals, and shows to help build the brand and then you take the mailing list and EPK and start building another revenue stream.....of course the flipside is if they were more available then you wouldn't be doing this (I'm guessing).

Good point, but if there's one thing these guys haven't invested months in, it's rehearsals, ha ha. We're lucky to get two or three of the four horn players together to rehearse once for any given gig.

 

Three of the four original horn members have had to leave the band on their own volition because they couldn't commit to our low-paying (but fun) gigs. One of them is the guy who wrote about half of our charts when we were starting out, but since it was his decision to leave, I don't think he has any problem with us "cashing in" on his work (he hasn't mentioned it, and I've told him how grateful I am to him for all the work he put in back when we were starting out). As you say, if they were more available, I would be looking to get a residency with the bigger band and it wouldn't be an issue.

[kmart]

 

I think it's fine. An alternative might be, eventually, to be the SubVersives, with the "SuperSka Horns". Further solves the identity crisis. Cheers!

 

 

That's a winner of an idea tight there.