Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Next time, make it your band. Then you can choose to do what you want and delegate the rest to other members as you see fit. Unfortunately, that comes with it's own share of headaches, too. Finding a group of equally responsible musicians? I don't know of any such thing. But there are better situations than the one you were in. Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

I won't be in a band w/ a couple--too many bad experiences. But, if the two of you are a good team (and it sounds like it, with you setting up the PA and her doing the booking), it sounds like you've got the catbird seat in this band. Find a new drummer and guitarist (who, unlike me, are willing to be in a band w/ a couple).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

I won't be in a band w/ a couple--too many bad experiences. But, if the two of you are a good team (and it sounds like it, with you setting up the PA and her doing the booking), it sounds like you've got the catbird seat in this band. Find a new drummer and guitarist (who, unlike me, are willing to be in a band w/ a couple).

 

My experience was good because THEY were good. I haven't had any bad experiences with a couple but I can only imagine that it would be bad if the COUPLE made it so. Why else would it be otherwise? So the OP might really need to take a goods look at how they handle their couple-ness while being band members and make sure that any mistakes they might have made in the previous band they don't make in the next one.

 

Although, I will note that he didn't say that his spouse quit the band.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members


Although, I will note that he didn't say that his spouse quit the band.

 

That could be the best thing that's happened to him in this situation. I've had enough bad luck with couples in bands that I'm willing to consider it being MY problem, and not the couples', but it's a problem either way. The big problems aren't that the couple brings relationship bull{censored} into the band--usually they're self aware enough for that. The problems are that 1) you've reduced your networking potential, as couples usually know the same people, and 2) you've got a "voting block" that will almost always stick together in band decisions. If you're in a 3 piece, you're just {censored}ed. In a 4- or 5-piece, getting two more votes on any issue is a majority. The couple suddenly becomes the most powerful force in the band.

 

Except for this one couple I worked with, where they REALLY got off on conflict (and, presumably, the disgusting make-up fornication), and I could get any decision to go my way by pitting the wife against the husband. But still, that's a toxic environment, and not what I'm looking for.

 

Anyway, can you tell that I've got a Sunday morning gig at a motorcycle festival, and therefore decided to do my drinking tonight?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

That could be the best thing that's happened to him in this situation. I've had enough bad luck with couples in bands that I'm willing to consider it being MY problem, and not the couples', but it's a problem either way. The big problems aren't that the couple brings relationship bull{censored} into the band--usually they're self aware enough for that. The problems are that 1) you've reduced your networking potential, as couples usually know the same people, and 2) you've got a "voting block" that will almost always stick together in band decisions. If you're in a 3 piece, you're just {censored}ed. In a 4- or 5-piece, getting two more votes on any issue is a majority. The couple suddenly becomes the most powerful force in the band.

 

I can see how that might be. I think the key, again, is to just have everybody on the same page from the outset. I've never been big on band "voting". I've never been interested in joining any band that didn't have enough of a direction mapped out that there wouldn't ever really be that much to vote ON. And I like bands with a relatively strong leadership core. Whether that involve me or not, I don't care much---I'll take charge if the band needs it or I'm fine just showing up and playing my parts as long as a feel comfortable that the band leader(s) has their {censored} together. But yeah, I can see that if a band is much of a democracy at all, having a 2-person block would pretty much make being a democracy pointless.

 

Anyway, can you tell that I've got a Sunday morning gig at a motorcycle festival, and therefore decided to do my drinking tonight?

 

Not yet. You need to have a couple more. :thu:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Or, at the very least, help from the other members. No excuse for anyone standing around during set up. I don't care WHO owns the PA, everyone should pitch in and get it set up. You all use it. (Unless the owner of the PA doesn't WANT any help, of course)

 

That would be nice. In my band, I setup the PA. Occasionally someone will help with the monitor runs. During pack up everyone pretty much pitches in. (Load in 3 hours. Load out 45 minutes) I really like the help at the end of the gig. (I have setup the system so it's hard to set it up wrong.) My only complaint is when someone takes out one of my cable cases before everything is packed up. (I always do the cables after the large items are off the stage and out of the way.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

That would be nice. In my band, I setup the PA. Occasionally someone will help with the monitor runs. During pack up everyone pretty much pitches in. (Load in 3 hours. Load out 45 minutes) I really like the help at the end of the gig. (I have setup the system so it's hard to set it up wrong.) My only complaint is when someone takes out one of my cable cases before everything is packed up. (I always do the cables after the large items are off the stage and out of the way.)

 

In our band, only myself and the singer actually set up the PA, staging and lights . We also own the PA, lights and staging, store it, transport it, etc. After not getting much help, we basically said the everyone was on a basic per gig pay system. So all the players get X amount of money. If we book a gig that exceeds that amount, then the singer and myself split the overage, for all the trouble we go through with the PA, staging and lights. We haven't had anyone complain about it, as really, the "band" is mostly the singer and myself with the others just showing up and playing the music. Every "band" is different, and folks need to figure out which method ( template as guido calls it ) works for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

That would be nice. In my band, I setup the PA. Occasionally someone will help with the monitor runs. During pack up everyone pretty much pitches in. (Load in 3 hours. Load out 45 minutes) I really like the help at the end of the gig. (I have setup the system so it's hard to set it up wrong.) My only complaint is when someone takes out one of my cable cases before everything is packed up. (I always do the cables after the large items are off the stage and out of the way.)

 

We're getting the load-in thing down better. We've got it down to 1 1/2-2 hours. We try to give ourselves 3 in case there are problems. Everyone has their duties. The sound guy sets up the mixer, the FOH speakers and runs the snake. The singer, bass player and guitarist set up the backlighting first. I get started on the monitor mixer. The drummer starts unpacking his kit. When the backlighting is up then the drummer can set up his riser and his kit and the bass player, guitarist and I move to our personal gear. The singer starts running mic cables. The bass player and guitarist move to the front lighting. Then a quick sound check if the venue/gig allows and we're good to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Thanks everyone for the great responses!

 

I think the key, again, is to just have everybody on the same page from the outset. I've never been big on band "voting". I've never been interested in joining any band that didn't have enough of a direction mapped out that there wouldn't ever really be that much to vote ON.

This is how is should be! We've tried the band voting and it's always caused problems, because there's been that one guy that is not on the same page.

 

As far as the couple thing - we've really made an effort to not mix our 'couple-ness" with the band "couple-ness". :facepalm:

 

In our band, only myself and the singer actually set up the PA, staging and lights . We also own the PA, lights and staging, store it, transport it, etc. After not getting much help, we basically said the everyone was on a basic per gig pay system. So all the players get X amount of money. If we book a gig that exceeds that amount, then the singer and myself split the overage, for all the trouble we go through with the PA, staging and lights.

 

This sounds like a great plan.

 

We did a festival last night and had a number of people wanting to book us, so there's now some awkwardness with that. Plus I fear that the band is going to fall apart instead of moving forward with a new bass player. Today, the wife asked if I was going to turn into one of those jaded bitter musicians that never plays anymore (you know - the type that puts up all those CL rants!). My answer: Only if I stay in this band!

 

We still have a few more gigs to do, so we'll see how things end up. We have a couple clubs that have booked us until the end of the year, but I'm thinking that if we give several weeks notice, we should be able to cancel without falling out of favor for whatever the next incarnation will be.

 

Wish me luck! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Plus I fear that the band is going to fall apart instead of moving forward with a new bass player. Today, the wife asked if I was going to turn into one of those jaded bitter musicians that never plays anymore (you know - the type that puts up all those CL rants!). My answer: Only if I stay in this band!


We still have a few more gigs to do, so we'll see how things end up. We have a couple clubs that have booked us until the end of the year, but I'm thinking that if we give several weeks notice, we should be able to cancel without falling out of favor for whatever the next incarnation will be.

 

Well, none of this is on you, imo. You quit the band, you gave reasonable notice, and you are prepared to serve out your time. If they can't find another bass player in six weeks, the band was doomed in any case, and if they goof up the relationship with venues during the transition, oh well, not your problem.

 

Obviously it indirectly influences your life because your wife is still involved in the band, and I won't try to get into the marital side of things, but I think there has to be a "Chinese wall" at some point where you can be a supportive spouse, but won't get dragged into any drama with what is now "her" band.

 

That said, it seems like the band still has significant "brand equity". Is there any chance of you and her taking over e.g. who would have to go, and what would the new lineup look like?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

In our band, only myself and the singer actually set up the PA, staging and lights . We also own the PA, lights and staging, store it, transport it, etc. After not getting much help, we basically said the everyone was on a basic per gig pay system. So all the players get X amount of money. If we book a gig that exceeds that amount, then the singer and myself split the overage, for all the trouble we go through with the PA, staging and lights. We haven't had anyone complain about it, as really, the "band" is mostly the singer and myself with the others just showing up and playing the music. Every "band" is different, and folks need to figure out which method ( template as guido calls it ) works for them.

 

So you get comped from the bandmates which is pretty standard practice,

What I'm trying to understand your already getting comped, but comp again when you make extra? Maybe I missed something.

 

I'm in a band and we comp for PA and lights and have no problems but we get equal cut after the comp is taken out. I dunno your math seems weird to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

I was in a 4 peice band for a few years with 2 brothers. They were essentially a 2 vote block, always putting either the drummer or myself in the awkward position of tie breaker. Drummer was a total pushover so I was usually screwed.

They also fought like brothers, anywhere and everywhere. I remember making them stop the truck and let me out once cause they were screaming at each other across my face while I was sitting in between them.

 

The band was originally a three peice, and when the singer proposed adding his brother I adamantly protested for all the obvious reasons but was out voted due to the pushover drummer.

 

I eventually quit of course, none to soon.

My replacement and the added brother actually got in a fist fight while they were on the road. Glad I got out of that one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

1. Make a decision at the outset what kind of band it will be. If the intention is to be an original band, and Joe X wants to do covers only, then don't get him.

2. IMO the people who own, run and set up PA and/or lights need to make more. How much more and how the $ is to be divided is up to the individuals. For anyone to just show up with their gear and set it up and make the same as someone who spends several extra hours setting up PA gear is simply not fair.

3. Nobody in the band should have veto power! That just doesn't work and usually causes hard feelings. I'm not sure that voting on things is the right way, either. I think it might be better if one or two members of the band make at least the main decisions.

4. Anyone who is a working on-stage contributing member of the band should get paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

So you get comped from the bandmates which is pretty standard practice,

What I'm trying to understand your already getting comped, but comp again when you make extra? Maybe I missed something.


I'm in a band and we comp for PA and lights and have no problems but we get equal cut after the comp is taken out. I dunno your math seems weird to me.

 

I thought it was clear, but I guess not. All the band members get the same amount of money per gig, including myself and the singer. So, for an example, let's say we agree everyone gets $100.00 per gig. If we get a gig that pays $500.00, then everyone gets an even split and neither myself or the singer get anything more for our extra work on owning, storing, transporting or setting up the PA, staging and lights. However, if we book a gig for $700.00, all the members still get their $100.00 each, but the singer and I split the additional $200.00 over the $500.00. This only applies when we use our PA and lights. If we play a festival or club, and all that is supplied, then it is an even split. Of course, this can come up for a revision. So, in the future, we have the option of increasing the "minimum" pay per gig. So, we are not "comped" on gigs were there is no additional funds over the minimum per musician per gig pay rate. It's probably not for everyone, but our method makes sure that all the players can count on a minimum pay per gig. If we took funds from every gig for the PA and lights, we would either have to turn down some gigs that did not pay enough, or everyone would have to play for less. Make any sense now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

In our band, only myself and the singer actually set up the PA, staging and lights . We also own the PA, lights and staging, store it, transport it, etc. After not getting much help, we basically said the everyone was on a basic per gig pay system. So all the players get X amount of money. If we book a gig that exceeds that amount, then the singer and myself split the overage, for all the trouble we go through with the PA, staging and lights. We haven't had anyone complain about it, as really, the "band" is mostly the singer and myself with the others just showing up and playing the music. Every "band" is different, and folks need to figure out which method ( template as guido calls it ) works for them.

 

We do something similar to this, but IMO more fair to the other members. Our singer and I own/store/transport the PA and for that we take a flat rate cut off the top of each gig where the PA is used. The rest of the pay is cut 4 ways, less $20/gig that goes to me for band booking expenses, website dues, etc etc.

 

If we make more money on a gig, the cost of the PA stays the same. The reason I say this is more fair to the other members is if we're making $X normally but I get us a gig for $2X, why should we split so much 'extra' money? The amount of work, etc, associated with the PA stays the same, and therefore the PA should IMO cost the other members a flat rate.

 

Even though we take an extra cut for using the system, the guys still help set it up and tear it down. All the guys in my band are willing to help with whatever we ask. They're great guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

I thought it was clear, but I guess not. All the band members get the same amount of money per gig, including myself and the singer. So, for an example, let's say we agree everyone gets $100.00 per gig. If we get a gig that pays $500.00, then everyone gets an even split and neither myself or the singer get anything more for our extra work on owning, storing, transporting or setting up the PA, staging and lights. However, if we book a gig for $700.00, all the members still get their $100.00 each, but the singer and I split the additional $200.00 over the $500.00. This only applies when we use our PA and lights. If we play a festival or club, and all that is supplied, then it is an even split. Of course, this can come up for a revision. So, in the future, we have the option of increasing the "minimum" pay per gig. So, we are not "comped" on gigs were there is no additional funds over the minimum per musician per gig pay rate. It's probably not for everyone,
but our method makes sure that all the players can count on a minimum pay per gig
. If we took funds from every gig for the PA and lights, we would either have to turn down some gigs that did not pay enough, or everyone would have to play for less. Make any sense now?

 

So why don't you say, OK each member gets at least this much per gig, plus $X we split for the PA and lights = we can book a gig for this much minimum?

 

Simple enough to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Dude, I'm not looking to get in an argument over this. I already said it's not for everyone. You don't like it, fine. But you're not in my band, so your opinion matters little to me whether you like it or not. We see the advantages, even if you do not. The other "bandmembers" are really not bandmembers in the normal sense of the word. We actually use quite a few different players, and rotate them from gig to gig. We call them and they show up. It's not ideal nor the way I want it, but we have had trouble with every musician in one way or another. I do not fault them; it's just the way it is. We want/need a certain caliber of player that can play a certain way. Most of these types do not want to be tied to one band. So, we have a pool we choose from. They literally have little input and we don't vote on things. We just say" Here's a gig at so and so. You available ?" It is really more like a duo with a drummer, bassist and keyboard player as backup musicians. So, I'm not concerned about whether they thinks it's fair. If they get paid what they have agreed to, it is not relevant to them what myself or the singer earn, which, many times is no more than them. But we do so much more. See ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Dude, I'm not looking to get in an argument over this. I already said it's not for everyone. You don't like it, fine. But you're not in my band, so your opinion matters little to me whether you like it or not. We see the advantages, even if you do not. The other "bandmembers" are really not bandmembers in the normal sense of the word. We actually use quite a few different players, and rotate them from gig to gig. We call them and they show up. It's not ideal nor the way I want it, but we have had trouble with every musician in one way or another. I do not fault them; it's just the way it is. We want/need a certain caliber of player that can play a certain way. Most of these types do not want to be tied to one band. So, we have a pool we choose from. They literally have little input and we don't vote on things. We just say" Here's a gig at so and so. You available ?" It is really more like a duo with a drummer, bassist and keyboard player as backup musicians. So, I'm not concerned about whether they thinks it's fair. If they get paid what they have agreed to, it is not relevant to them what myself or the singer earn, which, many times is no more than them. But we do so much more. See ?

 

So your band is basically musicians for hire type of band. That's cool bro no need to flame over it.

Now I know and end of story. IMO David advice was great advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...