How do you leave a band gracefully?

[Vermoulian]

 

If Duke Robillard is a "nickel and dime guitarslinger", then so is your precious Buddy Guy.

 

 

You lack perspective. It's glaringly obvious to anybody who's not being intentionally self-delusional that those guys are an order of magnitude apart in their significance in the world. Even in Louisville, Buddy Guy plays the Louisville Palace with B.B. King while Duke Rollibard plays Jim Porter's Good Time Emporium.

[wades_keys]

 

You lack perspective. It's glaringly obvious to anybody who's not being intentionally self-delusional that those guys are an order of magnitude apart in their significance in the world. Even in Louisville, Buddy Guy plays the Louisville Palace with B.B. King while Duke Rollibard plays Jim Porter's Good Time Emporium.

 

 

WTF are you going on about?

 

If people didn't appreciate guitar here, then why the {censored} would a "2 bit" gunslinger like Duke make his home and his gigs here?

 

You've just made my point. Hey, I'm glad you live in a vibrant city with a great music scene. Good for you.

 

But who the {censored} are you to tell me about what people here like and appreciate? I've made my home here for over 30 years. I gig here.

 

You don't. SO don't pretend to tell me that you know more about what people here like and appreciate than I do.

[tim_7string]

If you expect guys to make mistakes - drop the beat, play wrong notes, etc - it's going to effect your playing and most definitely your singing. Their job is to confidently and reliably support the lead in its various forms. Maybe I'm spoiled because I've played with reliable pros. . . . . Give a new project time to gel, but if I can't count on the rhythm section, I'd rather start over - yet again - or play in the music room alone.

 

Jesus, after all that stupid arguing, SOMEONE FINALLY GETS IT!

 

If the band was kickass all around...great drummer, fantastic bass player, another smokin' guitarist and/or keyboardist and me on guitar and vocals...yeah, I could have stepped it up to be more "frontman" like. But the musician in me was too busy trying to hold the thing together while it was falling apart every second.

 

Thank you, SeniorBlues.

[SeniorBlues]

This is getting silly . . .

 

DC doesn't come to mind when you think of guitar players, but you can put Danny Gatton, and Roy Buchanan under our column.

 

Let's move on.

[SeniorBlues]

Jesus, after all that stupid arguing, SOMEONE FINALLY GETS IT! If the band was kickass all around...great drummer, fantastic bass player, another smokin' guitarist and/or keyboardist and me on guitar and vocals...yeah, I could have stepped it up to be more "frontman" like. But the musician in me was too busy trying to hold the thing together while it was falling apart every second. Thank you, SeniorBlues.

 

You're welcome.

 

I can understand putting up with all this if you need the income, but I'm a pro from another era who is now a hobbyist. (I like to get paid, but that's a different issue.) If you don't like how I play, I don't expect you to put up with me . . . . . and vice versa.

[wades_keys]

 

This is getting silly . . . DC doesn't come to mind when you think of guitar players, but you can put Danny Gatton, and Roy Buchanan under our column. Let's move on.

 

Absolutely.

 

Because I wasn't talking about the city, but what people here appreciate.

 

Hell I love the city of Chicago.

 

Can't say the same for the people that live in it, if these Chicago forumites are any representation.

 

Rude, confrontational, arrogant, condescending: those are some of the words that immediately come to mind.

[wades_keys]

Jesus, after all that stupid arguing, SOMEONE FINALLY GETS IT! If the band was kickass all around...great drummer, fantastic bass player, another smokin' guitarist and/or keyboardist and me on guitar and vocals...yeah, I could have stepped it up to be more "frontman" like. But the musician in me was too busy trying to hold the thing together while it was falling apart every second. Thank you, SeniorBlues.

Don't take this the wrong way, Tim.

 

But water seeks the lowest level. So what you are saying would probably never happen: why would smoking players get in a situation to where they have to wait for someone else to up their level?

 

I ain't cuttin you down, not at all. But if you want to be happy in music, it pays to know just where you are with what you are trying to do.

[tim_7string]

It has nothing to do with old videos. Like I said when I first mentioned Bachman to Tim7strings, it isn't 1974. Having the stage presence of Bachman in 1974 is no defense for lack of stage presence TODAY. The other guys I mentioned, their guitar playing/front man skills carry forward in a manner that simply covering the songs well can be useful for a modern cover band's stage presence. Playing BTO is just playing some old song. Nobody much knows, or cares, who played the song originally and have zero connection to any stage presence the guitarist did or didn't have in 1974. Tim7Strings rattled off a bunch of cover tunes sang by rather boring looking (or at least visually unmemorable to anyone today) guitarist/front men as if that was somehow a defense for having weak front man skills in a cover band TODAY. It doesn't work that way. If you're boring to look at while playing "Rock 'n Me", using "hey, I look pretty much EXACTLY like Steve Miller did when HE sang it!" is no excuse and isn't going to buy your band ANYTHING.

 

Never said I acted exactly like Steve Miller. I said I might cop a similar vibe to him. Truthfully, I don't know what my vibe is, but I know that SOME people enjoy it. Some people enjoy it A LOT.

 

If it was a "singer/guitarist" off between me and you, I don't think it would be much of a contest, David. If it were between me and your cute (and very talented) lead singer? Not a chance. No one would even vote for me!

 

You keep insisting that the ONLY frontpeople that should exist should be like the ones you are describing because, as you say, "it isn't 1974." And I say I disagree with you. Perhaps in the context of wanting to make the most money and be in a band with people that are the best at what they do, playing the same generic songs everyone else plays...sure, why not? That's not my goal. Never has been. I have a whole different vibe, one I have cultivated over years. I know what songs sound best with my voice, so I sing those. I know what songs I can play guitar well enough on. I play those. And I make sure that people ARE entertained by the passion I put into my playing. Obviously, those two videos didn't capture that passion very well.

 

I make my conclusions based on how well the bar did, how many people are dancing, how many people left...then came back, and how many people left other bars to come to where my band plays.

 

Are the standards lower here? Absolutely. Obviously, I don't have to do much to generate interest from people if the bands suck so bad, they can be entertained by a singing guitarist that isn't moving very much. But in my market, it's working and that's fine.

[wades_keys]

Well, you just let a good solid drummer go on down the pike.

 

And for what?

 

So you can add another guitar player?

 

I'd call that a false start AT BEST. You were convinced you could make a trio work. But it didn't.

 

So why would this next outfit have any better chance than the last one did?

 

You ain't getting any younger, and I ain't looking to piss you off: but dude, you haven't had a steady gig that you're happy with in a while. I don't like to see that. If I didn't care, why would I put this out there? I'd like to see you succeed and be happy with a gigging situation.

 

Stopping and retooling ain't the way to get it done - at some point, you've got to see it through.

[tim_7string]

 

Well, you just let a good solid drummer go on down the pike. And for what? So you can add another guitar player? I'd call that a false start AT BEST. You were convinced you could make a trio work. But it didn't. So why would this next outfit have any better chance than the last one did? You ain't getting any younger, and I ain't looking to piss you off: but dude, you haven't had a steady gig that you're happy with in a while. I don't like to see that. If I didn't care, why would I put this out there? I'd like to see you succeed and be happy with a gigging situation. Stopping and retooling ain't the way to get it done - at some point, you've got to see it through.

 

 

Band politics are pretty important to me. It was a stupid error on my part to agree to let two friends tell me what to do when I originally hired them. If I need to have "hand," then so be it. I will have hand with my own band, because I won't be hiring a great drummer that is linked to a bass player that can't play very well. I'll just hire a decent drummer by himself.

 

As far as this other band goes, I get along with all the guys well, but I will be making it clear that I am not exclusive to it. And if they want another gig on the books, some of them can simply back me in my group. It's a win-win.

[Vito Corleone]

Never said I acted exactly like Steve Miller. I said I might cop a similar vibe to him. Truthfully, I don't know what my vibe is, but I know that SOME people enjoy it. Some people enjoy it A LOT.

 

I never said you said you acted exactly like Steve Miller. I was just trying to make a point about the comparisons you were making between yourself and the original singers of some of the songs you cover. You WERE trying to say that since all those songs are done by not-particularly-great-frontman that that made it ok if you weren't so great yourself, right? THAT'S what I took from your comment anyway.

 

If it was a "singer/guitarist" off between me and you, I don't think it would be much of a contest, David. If it were between me and your cute (and very talented) lead singer? Not a chance. No one would even vote for me!

Thanks for the compliments but this has never been about comparing you to me or your band to my band. Two different bands/two different markets/two different musical worlds. When I look at YOUR band I'm thinking of similar-type bands playing similar-type material in similar-type venues that I know. Not comparing to mine. Apples and oranges.

 

You keep insisting that the ONLY frontpeople that should exist should be like the ones you are describing because, as you say, "it isn't 1974." And I say I disagree with you. Perhaps in the context of wanting to make the most money and be in a band with people that are the best at what they do, playing the same generic songs everyone else plays...sure, why not? That's not my goal. Never has been. I have a whole different vibe, one I have cultivated over years. I know what songs sound best with my voice, so I sing those. I know what songs I can play guitar well enough on. I play those. And I make sure that people ARE entertained by the passion I put into my playing. Obviously, those two videos didn't capture that passion very well.

 

Fair enough. I haven't seen everything you do. I'm just trying to help out based on what you've said and what I HAVE seen. And all I'm going to say based upon all of that is.....I don't think your (now ex)bandmates were completely in the wrong here. I think they had a point about wanting to make upgrades to the band because, AS YOU'VE SAID YOURSELF, you were doing too much and trying to carry too much of the load. And putting your guitar playing behind a frontman who could sing a wider-range of material than you can probably isn't the worst idea in the world.

 

Just saying. Take it for what you will. It's all too late now for THAT band, anyway. But maybe something to keep in mind in the future.

[tim_7string]

I never said you said you acted exactly like Steve Miller. I was just trying to make a point about the comparisons you were making between yourself and the original singers of some of the songs you cover. You WERE trying to say that since all those songs are done by not-particularly-great-frontman that that made it ok if you weren't so great yourself, right? THAT'S what I took from your comment anyway.

 

Kind of. Basically, I was saying that a lot of the songs I do were done by guys that sang and played guitar. They were all hits on the radio at one time. Many of them are still played. Boring frontman or not, it's the SONGS people get off on. You've said so yourself that nobody gives a rat's ass who actually performed the song to begin with. People want to hear the songs. People wanted to hear the songs from those guys in concert back then. Does that make more sense? I'm not trying to say I'm stuck in a time warp of that era. What I disagree with is your assertion that all people that sing songs in a cover band have to BRING it in exactly the same way.

 

Thanks for the compliments but this has never been about comparing you to me or your band to my band. Two different bands/two different markets/two different musical worlds. When I look at YOUR band I'm thinking of similar-type bands playing similar-type material in similar-type venues that I know. Not comparing to mine. Apples and oranges.

 

At least on this, we can agree.

 

Fair enough. I haven't seen everything you do. I'm just trying to help out based on what you've said and what I HAVE seen. And all I'm going to say based upon all of that is.....I don't think your (now ex)bandmates were completely in the wrong here. I think they had a point about wanting to make upgrades to the band because, AS YOU'VE SAID YOURSELF, you were doing too much and trying to carry too much of the load. And putting your guitar playing behind a frontman who could sing a wider-range of material than you can probably isn't the worst idea in the world.

 

Hey, I'm not saying I was 100% right and they were 100% wrong. We had points on both sides about each other's talents. I stand by my statement that above all, the thing we needed to fix FIRST was the bass player. His playing was not good. If we wanted to get things at a professional level for the sake of the band, the wisest thing he could have done was to leave the band or keep himself on in a manager/soundman capacity. He likes playing onstage way too much to want to do that and I have a strong feeling he would have been just as highly offended as I was at the idea of something being taken away.

 

All *I* was saying is that their ideas about what I *would* do (as in, stop singing lead and just become a lead guitarist) directly conflicted with my own goals of being the lead singer in my band. I'll sacrifice playing solos or even starting the songs on guitar to be the frontman of my own band. That's why I'm naming it after myself. It's pretty much the point. The focus is on me as a vocalist, not as some {censored}-hot guitarist (as Wade would say). You're saying I don't have what it takes. That's assuming every singer that fronts a band or his own namesake band has to be so {censored}ing amazing, you can't help but watch them, shower them with money and go home as if you just got laid. That vibe does not have to be all-encompassing to every single cover band out there. It doesn't.

 

I've done the guitarist-behind-a-frontman thing before. A few times in fact. You know what was surprising? In one of those bands, we played a wedding reception and the crowd really disliked him. I stepped up to the mic to do some Buddy Holly songs and all of a sudden, people were INTO it. Hmmm. Weird. But I'm just a guitarist, right? Should just keep my mouth shut and let the frontman front the band. Yet the crowd chose ME over him.

 

I'm not an egomaniac, David. I'm really not. I have doubts and insecurities like most musicians. If I thought I was some amazing singer (while being the good but not fantastic singer that I am), bragging about all the chicks I {censored}ed and how awesome I was, then your arguments would have some merit. I would be living in a dream world and need waking up. I assess my talents on a regular basis. 20 years ago, the only thing I would have been good at doing is be a bass guitarist/keyboardist/harmony vocalist. That's it. My lead vocals were not up to par, nor were my guitar playing skills. But by my early to mid-twenties, they were at a level where I could actually get paid to do them (sing and play guitar). I enjoy both, I'm sticking with both.

 

Just saying. Take it for what you will. It's all too late now for THAT band, anyway. But maybe something to keep in mind in the future.

 

Maybe. I'll certainly keep things in mind for this new band that wants me to replace *their* lead singer. It will be nice to be appreciated for what I do rather than for what people WANT me to do.

[theficklefinger]

Tim, what I suspect is you will go over this thread and wonder where you went wrong in trying to find some love and support here. All you have to do, is see the post counts on some of these guys to realize that the most important instrument that they play is a keyboard.

 

Head over to TGP, you won't get jumped over there.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Kind of. Basically, I was saying that a lot of the songs I do were done by guys that sang and played guitar. They were all hits on the radio at one time. Many of them are still played. Boring frontman or not, it's the SONGS people get off on. You've said so yourself that nobody gives a rat's ass who actually performed the song to begin with. People want to hear the songs. People wanted to hear the songs from those guys in concert back then. Does that make more sense? I'm not trying to say I'm stuck in a time warp of that era. What I disagree with is your assertion that all people that sing songs in a cover band have to BRING it in exactly the same way.

I don't think that. But I think they DO have to bring it. Like I said, it's not 1974, you're not Steve Miller, "Rock n' Me" isn't a song you wrote, and you're not playing it on the radio. You're covering it in a rock band in a live venue in 2011. Yeah, people get off on the SONG, but you're not a jukebox either. A live performance requires a dynamic front man. What defines "dynamic" varies from singer-to-singer, band-to-band, style-to-style, venue-to-venue etc. But you GOTTA be dynamic if you want to have ANY degree of success, and I'm not sure how much of that I saw in your clip. But hey, it was only one clip. I'm not going to judge you too harshly for that.

 

 

 

. I'll sacrifice playing solos or even starting the songs on guitar to be the frontman of my own band. That's why I'm naming it after myself. It's pretty much the point. The focus is on me as a vocalist, not as some {censored}-hot guitarist (as Wade would say). You're saying I don't have what it takes. That's assuming every singer that fronts a band or his own namesake band has to be so {censored}ing amazing, you can't help but watch them, shower them with money and go home as if you just got laid. That vibe does not have to be all-encompassing to every single cover band out there. It doesn't.

 

 

What do you think a frontman *has* to be then?

 

 

I'm not an egomaniac, David. I'm really not.

 

 

I don't think you're an egomaniac. Not at all.

 

But what I WILL ask you is this, since this doesn't live in me AT ALL so I have a hard time relating to it. You admit you're not the hottest singer or frontman out there. And you're smart enough to know that hot singers/front men make for better (or at least more successful) bands. So, if given the choice between the two, why would you rather be in a lesser band with YOU fronting it as opposed to playing behind a better frontman in a hotter band?

[Vito Corleone]

 

Tim, what I suspect is you will go over this thread and wonder where you went wrong in trying to find some love and support here. All you have to do, is see the post counts on some of these guys to realize that the most important instrument that they play is a keyboard. Head over to TGP, you won't get jumped over there.

 

 

a High post count is largely a function of not getting banned repeatedly. But hey...29! Good going, Tim! That's practically a record for you!

[wades_keys]

 

Tim, what I suspect is you will go over this thread and wonder where you went wrong in trying to find some love and support here. All you have to do, is see the post counts on some of these guys to realize that the most important instrument that they play is a keyboard. Head over to TGP, you won't get jumped over there.

 

LOL.

 

I don't think he wants "love and support". That's not gonna help him get gigs or be happy in a band.

 

You are right about the keyboard though. I type over 120 WPM on a bad day. That tends to happen when you program computers for a living.

 

Peace out, rocker.

[theficklefinger]

 

LOL. I don't think he wants "love and support". That's not gonna help him get gigs or be happy in a band. You are right about the keyboard though. I type over 120 WPM on a bad day. That tends to happen when you program computers for a living. Peace out, rocker.

 

 

Yeah sure you type 120...just like copping the slowest three note Angus run you could find makes you a guitar player.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Tim, what I suspect is you will go over this thread and wonder where you went wrong in trying to find some love and support here.

This isn't the frickin' Oprah show. people don't come here for 'love and support'

All you have to do, is see the post counts on some of these guys to realize that the most important instrument that they play is a keyboard.

 

 

Hmmm what do I have...5,500 posts in a little over 9 years? Hell, you'd probably have nearly that many ALTS over the same period of time. Who is the serial poster here, anyway?

[wades_keys]

 

Yeah sure you type 120...just like copping the slowest three note Angus run you could find makes you a guitar player.

 

"The slowest three note Angus run I could find."

 

Oh, you mean "The Jack". That's actually one of his more advanced solos.

 

Bet you can't play it.

 

Touch typing 120 ain't that hard to do, especially when you have to type for a living like I do. You know, typing classes are available if you're feeling a little inadequate in that area. Talk to your local community college, they'll hook you right up.

[tim_7string]

 

I don't think that. But I think they DO have to bring it. Like I said, it's not 1974, you're not Steve Miller, "Rock n' Me" isn't a song you wrote, and you're not playing it on the radio. You're covering it in a rock band in a live venue in 2011. Yeah, people get off on the SONG, but you're not a jukebox either. A live performance requires a dynamic front man. What defines "dynamic" varies from singer-to-singer, band-to-band, style-to-style, venue-to-venue etc. But you GOTTA be dynamic if you want to have ANY degree of success, and I'm not sure how much of that I saw in your clip. But hey, it was only one clip. I'm not going to judge you too harshly for that.

 

 

Do I pack the dance floor every song, all night long? No. Do I do it much of the time? Definitely, positively, yes. Whether or not YOU think I'm not a dynamic enough frontman doesn't matter if the crowd is sticking around to enjoy what *I* do. Can I improve? Sure, we all can. What I am saying over and over is that I made a mistake trying to go three-piece because there wasn't enough musical backing to make my job easier. I can relax if I know the band is handling things. I can be free. Maybe some "real" frontmen and women can bring it anyway, even if the band is incredibly terrible. I think that's because they are too into their own world to notice or care. I don't ever want to be like that. I'd rather have the confidence of a decent band behind me, knowing that I can now just concentrate on the crowd and the songs I am singing.

 

 

What do you think a frontman *has* to be then?

 

 

To me, a frontman has to be someone people want to watch. That's pretty much it. He (or she) is the "face" of the band. People will remember the band from what that frontperson does. And from what I gather, people really enjoyed the band I just left. Why would they enjoy it if the frontman sucked? Because they like the pretty drum kit or the bass player's goofy dance moves and smile? Doubtful. People dug the band for all of those things, but stuck around because they wanted to see what we would do next. And I was a big part of the reason WHY they wanted to stick around.

 

Apparently, the bass player found someone to play the February gig. He was civil and ended with a "good luck." I texted "U 2, take care." It doesn't bother me at all. What will be interesting is to see how many people will follow ME and how many people will go see them, but realize that the band is completely different without me now. And will they still be popular? If so, then I'm wrong. If the band I'm joining gets a LOT more popular now that I'm in it and their fanbase dwindles, maybe there is something to what I do onstage, regardless of whether or not I'm a "not-particularly-great-frontman," as you put.

 

 

I don't think you're an egomaniac. Not at all.

 

 

Good.

 

 

But what I WILL ask you is this, since this doesn't live in me AT ALL so I have a hard time relating to it.

 

 

And that is exactly why arguing about all of this is pointless. It doesn't live in you at all and you can't relate to it. It's not something you desire to do. *I* do.

 

 

You admit you're not the hottest singer or frontman out there. And you're smart enough to know that hot singers/front men make for better (or at least more successful) bands. So, if given the choice between the two, why would you rather be in a lesser band with YOU fronting it as opposed to playing behind a better frontman in a hotter band?

 

 

Because I'm showcasing different ideas than just "hey, let's get a great singer in and really rake in the cash!" which is what you seem to think every band SHOULD think. My ideas are to showcase my particular talents as a singer, guitarist, singer/songwriter (I'll be playing several of my songs in my namesake band), the songs I play and the way I play them. It's a completely different approach from picking songs everyone likes, realizing nobody in the band can sing them (insert "Don't Stop Believin'" and other songs in here), hiring an attractive and great male or female singer, then watch the band go from a $400 night band to a $1000-1500 night band. That's TrickyBoy's approach. That's wheresgrant3's approach. Valid approaches, for sure. They are happy to let someone else be the frontperson so the band is more successful (i.e. more popular, makes more money) and they can look at it as a second income.

 

I didn't get into music for that reason. I'm having way too much fun doing what I like. If I was completely horrible on vocals, I would say, "yeah, I need a frontman." That's what Blackbird13 did, although his vocals were fine (just not killer). But I don't really think his frontman has killer vocals either. But he's a 'frontman' in the way you are describing. So, by default, that makes the band "better."

 

Only by your predefined terms. There is more than one "better" for bands. For example, it was better for me to be the lead singer singing most of the songs than for the drummer or bass player to do that. Like you said, you don't like to see singing drummers, because they are usually hard to see and are not up front. I think most people agree with you. If the drummer had been doing most of the songs, I don't think our band would have been as popular. He's got a good enough voice, but by virtue of the instrument itself, it would be an odd choice. The bassist was not a good singer and he could barely play while singing, lead *or* backing parts. By default, I was a better choice over HIM to be the lead singer.

 

This MAY very well be part of the reason they wanted someone over ME. They felt slighted that there was someone who could do the job better than they could and more effectively. Perhaps to "put me in my place," they said we should find a frontman. Rather than appreciate what I do, they wanted to just change what I do. It's too bad, really.

[wades_keys]

 

This MAY very well be part of the reason they wanted someone over ME. They felt slighted that there was someone who could do the job better than they could and more effectively. Perhaps to "put me in my place," they said we should find a frontman. Rather than appreciate what I do, they wanted to just change what I do. It's too bad, really.

 

Why automatically assume that with no evidence?

 

That comes off a bit paranoid, really.

 

The more likely explanation is they thought the band could do even better with a "dedicated" frontman. That's the usual reason. You try somebody out, realize after the fact (on the gig) the weaknesses, and you look to try and improve the band.

 

Same as you realized after the fact that the bassist wasn't cutting, and you wanted to make a change.

 

So why would you deny them the same opportunity that you then demand yourself, you know? In other words: it's okay for you to want to get a better bassist, but on the other hand, it's not okay for them to want to get a better singer?

 

I dunno: just something to think about if you're looking to be more in a team environment instead of all this "me vs. them" type of thing that always seems to be affecting you.

[tim_7string]

 

The more likely explanation is they thought the band could do even better with a "dedicated" frontman. That's the usual reason. You try somebody out, realize after the fact (on the gig) the weaknesses, and you look to try and improve the band. Same as you realized after the fact that the bassist wasn't cutting, and you wanted to make a change. So why would you deny them the same opportunity that you then demand yourself, you know? In other words: it's okay for you to want to get a better bassist, but on the other hand, it's not okay for them to want to get a better singer? I dunno: just something to think about if you're looking to be more in a team environment instead of all this "me vs. them" type of thing that always seems to be affecting you.

 

 

No, it's perfectly fine for them to want to get a better singer. They can certainly do that now that I am out of the picture. But seeing from the beginning that I am a package deal as a singer/guitarist (something they originally wanted, by the way), then attempt to extract one part out of me as just a guitarist...well, that's the exact opposite approach I had for them. I was very demanding for quality for them. I wanted them to be MORE. "Play better bass." "Sing more harmonies." They wanted me to be LESS. "Don't sing so much, in fact, someone else will be the singer." "Yeah, I agree with him."

 

See where the conflict is?

 

Now, if I thought like you, "Well, I'll just play bass...maybe sing lead on a couple of tunes," there would be no problem. I would have said, "Yeah, I agree. We'll be a better band." But that wasn't the approach I started with, nor one I wanted to end up with.

 

That's why I thought up the proposed "bassist becomes manager/soundman" "drummer doesn't sing anymore" "we get a lead vocalist/frontman" "I become only a guitarist" plan. I'd be willing to implement such a plan. But I know from working with these guys over this past year that they would not have agreed to it. As I said a couple of weeks ago, I'll give up a part of what makes me happy if they do the same. Telling me to give up something that makes me happy while they get to keep what makes THEM happy...you don't see that as unfair?

[wades_keys]

 

That's why I thought up the proposed "bassist becomes manager/soundman" "drummer doesn't sing anymore" "we get a lead vocalist/frontman" "I become only a guitarist" plan. I'd be willing to implement such a plan. But I know from working with these guys over this past year that they would not have agreed to it. As I said a couple of weeks ago, I'll give up a part of what makes me happy if they do the same. Telling me to give up something that makes me happy while they get to keep what makes THEM happy...you don't see that as unfair?

 

But the problem is: you didn't even try. You assumed it would fail, and then quit. I gotta friend that does things this way: hell of a guitarist, great guy.

 

But damn he just WON'T EVER really come out and say what's up. He let's things fester, and then quits. Like always, always.

 

I don't think I could ever be in a band with him again, despite his talent, because I never know where he is coming from, or when he's going to crap out and leave the rest of us hanging.

 

Don't be that guy.

[tim_7string]

 

But the problem is: you didn't even try. You assumed it would fail, and then quit. I gotta friend that does things this way: hell of a guitarist, great guy. But damn he just WON'T EVER really come out and say what's up. He let's things fester, and then quits. Like always, always. I don't think I could ever be in a band with him again, despite his talent, because I never know where he is coming from, or when he's going to crap out and leave the rest of us hanging. Don't be that guy.

 

 

You're not answering the question.

 

You don't see that as unfair?

 

Just give me a yes or no and I'll see where your head is at.

[wades_keys]

 

You're not answering the question. You don't see that as unfair? Just give me a yes or no and I'll see where your head is at.

 

No, I don't. Because it's hypothetical. You never asked them, so you don't know what they would have said.

 

Like I said, you kinda remind of one of my friends. He tends to do that: assume what the "other guy" will or won't do, and then never even talks about it at all.