#1
Hey everyone, my bandmate, our singer, thinks im too bossy, for example, he went to texas for a couple months and while he was gone, i said, ok to our rhythm,bass and drummer, lets decide covers etc. our band goes by the vote system, so its based on majority. No one else in my band takes action, i mean, they just want to "follow the singer" (except my bassist) so me and him take action, and im the only one to actually stand up to my singer, am i doing the right thing or does it sound like i act bossy.
Poop.


Yes, poop.
#2
So wait did you take a vote when he wasn't there? Ya that sounds pretty dick. What exactly does "take action" mean, deciding on songs, writing?
#3
Well i talked to him on AIM, and give him the options on voting, and it wouldn't of mattered anyway, 3 of us voted Yes or No, and that ended majority, and by take action, i mean booking shows that are limited in time answering back to the booking agents, deciding on songs, deciding on ideas, but he wasn't there, so what, were we supposed to go on hiatus for 3 months? I didn't think we had to wait for him to get back to continue doing stuff.
Poop.


Yes, poop.
#4
There's usually a natural leader in all bands.

I guess your other bandmates think of your singer as one since he's the "frontman." I personally don't think you're doing anything wrong to be honest. How does your singer normally act? Is HE bossy?
Originally Posted by evening_crow
Quoting yourself is cool.


WARNING: I kill threads.
#6
it's the singer's job to be a dick.

buy a gun.
Quote by Oligarchy
SGRocker0791 and Raijin.xiii are ass holes in case anyone was wondering.

Quote by jimmyjimjim
try not to be such a dick

Quote by jdotp
thanks to the ignorant prick
#7
its just sounds like ur commited to band and you dont wanna fuk around, you just wanna play, which is a good thing. As for the vote systems i'd say get rid of it, theres no point in playing songs of half of the band wants to and the other half doesnt. You need to get them all around and discuss this sort of thing as a band and get everyone to say something
#8
Quote by Raijin.xiii
it's the singer's job to be a dick.

buy a gun.


or get him really depressed and maybe he'll just buy a shotgun and lock himself in his greenhouse for days.


also just try to get your singer more involved. be like, if you want to make the decisions then YOU have to do the work. if he is too lazy to have the initiative to do anything himself, he's going to have to be fine with the way other people do things for him.
#9
Quote by Veritas69
its just sounds like ur commited to band and you dont wanna fuk around, you just wanna play, which is a good thing. As for the vote systems i'd say get rid of it, theres no point in playing songs of half of the band wants to and the other half doesnt. You need to get them all around and discuss this sort of thing as a band and get everyone to say something

That's what i was thinking. For some reason i'm guessing the other guys were friends with the singer before knowing u huh?

As for the voting thing i think it's good. What you should do is have everyone give suggestions for songs and write them down (some 20 in total?) in a notebook. Then pass the notebook around and have each person rate them from 1-3 (1 being lowest and 3 highest in wanting to play it). Get the ones with the most votes and then COMPROMISE in choosing them. You wanna make sure that everyone agrees to wanting to play the songs and not forcing them into it because their votes were outnumbered.

That might work a little better than just a yes/no democracy. It worked better when i was in my last band. First time we did covers i was forced into playing At The Drive-In's "One Armed Scissor" and i hated it. Second time we did it that way and we ended up practicing SOAD
Originally Posted by evening_crow
Quoting yourself is cool.


WARNING: I kill threads.
#10
Quote by MattAnderson111
Well i talked to him on AIM, and give him the options on voting, and it wouldn't of mattered anyway, 3 of us voted Yes or No, and that ended majority, and by take action, i mean booking shows that are limited in time answering back to the booking agents, deciding on songs, deciding on ideas, but he wasn't there, so what, were we supposed to go on hiatus for 3 months? I didn't think we had to wait for him to get back to continue doing stuff.

It's different giving someone a text saying "Hey we took a vote and now we're gonna play... is that cool with you?" than actually being there to discuss the song choices. I wouldn't say go on hiatus, but I wouldn't make any huge decisions when he's not there without talking to him about it first. I think he also needs to realize the situation, that he's not there and that things may happen without him.

It sounds like you want to be the manager type person in the band, which is fine. Does everyone agree though, is everyone cool with you booking all the shows, does the singer or someone else want some part in this?
#11
Yeah, the democracy thing can be a bit problematic. There are some things, IMHO, that should be a unanimous front. Those things that are important enough to require everyone to feel good about the decision.

Should we be covers or originals or both?
If one of us can't make a gig, how do we feel about booking the show with a fill-in?

Issues like that can be really divisive, and if one person isn't on board with it, they'll be gone sooner than later.

Other things can be a little more flexible. Do we want to play Paralyzer? Well.... those kinds of issues can't be looked at only in isolation. If everything is always democratic, it can be the same person or two people or whatever that keep getting out-voted. Once or twice, you suck it up. After a while, it starts to look like a pattern and then they're gone.

Excellent example above about the SOAD compromise. That is EXACTLY how it should work. You're a partnership... a team. If you want everyone to stay, and more importantly, invest themselves in the project, EVERYONE has to be happy.

Keeping in mind, of course, that EVERYONE needs to recognize that they need to 'take one for the team' every now and again, knowing that everyone else is expected to do so from time to time too.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#12
Do you write the songs?

Because in my band, the decisions are normally taken by myself and the lead guitarist, as we write the majority of material. The drummer and bassist are perfectly welcome to say no or to forward an idea, but as they generally don't, the leadership naturally falls upon myself and the guitarist.

If there is somebody in the band with control, make sure you have faith in his/her decisions, you need to be able to trust their choices.


GAS
Throbak Stonebender | Fulltone Deja Vibe | Catalinbread Semaphore
#13
I think what we have here is a conflict of egos.
One person wants to be the band leader because he's the singer, the other wants to be band leader because he simply wants to get thing done, and it's become a competition between the two.
Add to that the fact that as soon as the singer goes out of town for a while, he sees the other band member apparently trying to make decisions while he is away. Even if he is kept in the loop, he's still gonna distrust his direct competition for band leadership, it's human nature.
MattAnderson111, you haven't done anything wrong particularly, you're just trying to get the band to work more productively, but you didn't take into account the frictional situation that already exists between yourself and the singer.
What you need to do is to try and work closely with the singer, as joint leaders. Maybe you can handle some aspects of band leadership while he handles some different aspects. But first you need to have a quiet talk with him about your situation and try and get it across to him that if you two work together, you'd be a damn sight more productive than you are while you're working against each other.
#14
You could point out to him that 'band leader' and 'frontman' are very different things, and that he might not be helping the band by wanting to do both.

However, it's important to remember that everyone in the band has to be happy with the way roles are divided up for it to really work. So, if he's set on being in charge, and you're set on being in charge, at some stage there's going to be serious problems.

As someone said, the rest of the band has to be able to trust whoever is making the decisions. If he doesn't trust you, of course it's not going to work well.

I have to say, deciding on covers when he wasn't there was a bit of a ****ty thing to do. I assume you said 'let's learn 10 covers' or whatever, then sat down with the other members and decided what those covers were going to be. That way, he got no feedback into what to do. Regardless of how the vote turned out, he could have made suggestions, put forward new (and possibly better) ideas, and have influenced the other members.

Basically, you told him what he was going to do in the band. And *nobody* likes that.
#15
Quote by Samzawadi
You could point out to him that 'band leader' and 'frontman' are very different things, and that he might not be helping the band by wanting to do both.

However, it's important to remember that everyone in the band has to be happy with the way roles are divided up for it to really work. So, if he's set on being in charge, and you're set on being in charge, at some stage there's going to be serious problems.

As someone said, the rest of the band has to be able to trust whoever is making the decisions. If he doesn't trust you, of course it's not going to work well.

I have to say, deciding on covers when he wasn't there was a bit of a ****ty thing to do. I assume you said 'let's learn 10 covers' or whatever, then sat down with the other members and decided what those covers were going to be. That way, he got no feedback into what to do. Regardless of how the vote turned out, he could have made suggestions, put forward new (and possibly better) ideas, and have influenced the other members.

Basically, you told him what he was going to do in the band. And *nobody* likes that.


^ I completely agree with this, well said.
#16
never let singers be in charge of the band unless they also play an instrument in that band
the arsonist had oddly shaped feet...
#17
Huh? Is your voice not an instrument? Is this to suggest that instrumentalists are more valuable than vocalists?

:confused

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#18
singers don't always make bands. if that was the case bands like rush or the smashing pumpkins or the white stripes would never be big because let's face it, those bands rock, but they have what most consider very annoying voices. the first thing you need to look at is the actual music because if that isn't good than the rest of the song will fall through. and of course the same goes vic a versa but i think you get what i'm trying to say.

a lot of singers who just sing are dead weight. now if they're good lyricists, that's a different story. or if they come up with vocal melodies out of thin air. but i don't ever see that.

it might be that i have this mentality because the music scene in tampa florida is the worst one i've ever seen. but you move here, and try and deal with the bull that is tampa. it's gay.
the arsonist had oddly shaped feet...
#19
Quote by axemanchris
Huh? Is your voice not an instrument? Is this to suggest that instrumentalists are more valuable than vocalists?

:confused

CT


That depends whether or not you can tell me that the average singer in a rock band can even read music.
Quote by allislost
I would say that aetherspear speaks nothing but the truth.
UG Blues Group
UG Reggae & Dub Group
Need Professional Mixing for cheap? Need Vinyl to Digital Transfers? PM Me.
#20
Quote by aetherspear
That depends whether or not you can tell me that the average singer in a rock band can even read music.


Huh? Sure, the average singer can't read music, but the average guitar player, the average bass player, and the average drummer in a rock band can't read music either. Whether or not someone can read music does not qualify them as a musician, necessarily, or not.

@stackedxactor - as much as your point has some merit, let us not, as guitarists, fool ourselves into thinking that a band is only as good as their singer. If the average person goes out to see a band where the 'players' are all absolutely awesome and the singer is really mediocre, that person will walk away saying "oh, yeah.... I saw them last night.... they were really only so-so." Conversely, you can have a really mediocre band with a great singer (thinking REM, for instance) and people will eat it up for years.

Sure there are always exceptions, but they are really rare exceptions.

Your bands you mentioned.... annoying voices to you, but not to everyone. I think the guy from Tool's voice is annoying. Same with that guy from SOAD who has now decided to bless us with a solo album. Everyone is different. Those people can all sing, though. They have unique voices, yes, but I think that is also what sort of works to their favour. They don't sound 'just like everyone else.'

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#21
Quote by stackedxactor
singers don't always make bands. if that was the case bands like rush or the smashing pumpkins or the white stripes would never be big because let's face it, those bands rock, but they have what most consider very annoying voices. the first thing you need to look at is the actual music because if that isn't good than the rest of the song will fall through. and of course the same goes vic a versa but i think you get what i'm trying to say.

a lot of singers who just sing are dead weight. now if they're good lyricists, that's a different story. or if they come up with vocal melodies out of thin air. but i don't ever see that.

it might be that i have this mentality because the music scene in tampa florida is the worst one i've ever seen. but you move here, and try and deal with the bull that is tampa. it's gay.

Dude, just because you have a problem with your singer doesn't mean a lot of singers are "dead weight". That is one of the biggest (and most incorrect) generalizations I have ever heard. The singers are usually the frontman which is a huge role, most of the time they are also the lyricist and write the a lot of the vocal melodies. And i like Geddy Lee's voice. And Jack White's. It's nice to know you have an opinion, but if you want to bash singers, go back to the thread you started. But I guess its just because you're a guitarist. They're usually just dead weight. That is, unless they write their own parts and stuff.

Quote by axemanchris
Huh? Is your voice not an instrument? Is this to suggest that instrumentalists are more valuable than vocalists?

:confused

CT


I'd say your voice isn't an instrument, just because it's a part of your body. Not that I think instrumentalists are better, I just don't think your voice is an instrument.

OP/TS:
I wouldn't say you're to bossy, I think that your singer thought that he was the "band leader" and when you took over while he was out of town, be felt threatened and became defensive. I think if he probably doesn't have a real big problem with you doing things, It's just that he didn't know that you were going to do them.
Last edited by voodoochilli499 at Jul 27, 2008,
#22
Quote by axemanchris
Huh? Sure, the average singer can't read music, but the average guitar player, the average bass player, and the average drummer in a rock band can't read music either. Whether or not someone can read music does not qualify them as a musician, necessarily, or not.

Perhaps (I would say at least one member of most rock bands can read music), but getting back to band leader vs. frontman, and staying with the rock band formula, a guitarist or bassist would be able to write for either instrument. It's easy to communicate to a drummer about what you want them to play, or leave them to figure it out themselves.

But can the average rock vocalist name the note they're singing? Can they communicate to the instruments musical terms better than the instrumentalists themselves? Do they know what key they're in?

I'm not saying you need to know how to read music or even know theory to be a musician, I just don't think the singer can communicate musically to the rest of the band better than any of the other members.
Quote by allislost
I would say that aetherspear speaks nothing but the truth.
UG Blues Group
UG Reggae & Dub Group
Need Professional Mixing for cheap? Need Vinyl to Digital Transfers? PM Me.
#23
Hard for me to say what singers know. I'm the only singer I've ever worked with for about the last ten years, for the most part. Prior to that, most of them have just been dumb-asses.

Singers communicate in a different way because their instrument is different. Typically, a guitarist won't communicate his ideas along the lines of, "after I play that G# over the end of that IV-vi-V bit, you need to come back in on the tonic." Even if they did, the rest of the guys would just look at him like he was from Mars. They'll communicate like "after I play this part here....*plays*.... you need to come back in and do something like this....*plays*" A singer might say, "after I sing [sings] all this ti-iii-mmmme [/sings], you wait for the drum fill and come in with *sings riff that player is to come in with*" Really the same ball of wax... just expressed differently.

Philosophically, I believe the voice IS an instrument. Sure, everyone has one, but few people really learn how to play it properly. (almost like guitar!!) Nonetheless, it is "a musical device (though a part of your physical self) which we use to express musical ideas." Pretty good definition of an instrument for my purposes. Maybe if you defined an instrument as "something that you buy at the store that makes music" then your perspective would be different. But then.... would an iPod be an instrument? Or does an instrument have to be "something that requires special techniques and to be willfully acted upon in order to make the music?" Erm.... like a voice?

:wink

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#24
The voice is definitely an instrument. Anybody who has a decent amount of singing experience would realize this. That would be like me saying "Drums? That's not an instrument."

TS, never decide on songs without all of the members. Other than that, I see nothing wrong with what you've done.
My guitar modification blog.
Quote by MuffinMan
Jesus was all like "To those about to rock, I salute you." then he grabbed his mighty axe and rocked the Romans out really hard. Of course they were strict classical music so....
#25
Quote by stackedxactor
never let singers be in charge of the band unless they also play an instrument in that band

Cheeky sod!

So what difference does playing an instrument make to your ability to book gigs and negotiate a wage and arrange transport and talk to press representatives and design posters and tickets and get them printed and make sure they get put up or posted to venues and organise roadies and arrange light shows and book hotel rooms and be the person that everyone goes to when they have problems and be the person who acts as a go between and peacemaker when other members of the band fall out?
Surely it's more important to have a talent for sorting out all these problems and situations rather than for merely playing an instrument if you are gonna be a band leader? How does playing an instrument automaticaly qualify you for handling all that stuff?
I'm not saying a singer would be any better at any of this than any other member of the band, but you cirtainly shouldn't be rejecting him for this roll just because he doesn't play an instrument.

And what difference does playing an instrument make anyway?
Well actualy in a songwriting situation it simply makes it easier for the singer to get his ideas across to his fellow band members, but if the singer doesn't play an instrument, that doesn't mean that he doesn't still have musical ideas. Anyone can think up a tune, regardless of whether they play an instrument or not.

Also, I agree with axemanchris, the voice is a biological instrument.
The word 'instrument' usualy referres to a mechanical device, tool or implement, usualy either musical or medical.
However, if a drumstick can be called an instrument, then so can a human hand because it does exactly the same thing as a drum stick does when it's used to hit a bongo with, and if a human hand can be called an instrument, then so can a human voice. Even more so infact because you can get a much wider range of sounds out of a voice than you can out of a hand.

It is something that is used to make music with, so it's a musical instrument.
#26
Quote by axemanchris
Hard for me to say what singers know. I'm the only singer I've ever worked with for about the last ten years, for the most part. Prior to that, most of them have just been dumb-asses.

I wouldn't call you strictly a singer if you also play guitar. But I agree that voice is definately an instrument.
Quote by allislost
I would say that aetherspear speaks nothing but the truth.
UG Blues Group
UG Reggae & Dub Group
Need Professional Mixing for cheap? Need Vinyl to Digital Transfers? PM Me.
#27
just wanted to clarify that i DON'T hate singers. the only reason i named the said bands i did was because those are the bands that i hear that people hate because of the voices. come over to my house and check out my cd rack. i have every cd by those said bands. and or course the voice is an instrument. i never said it wasn't. and i said the word MOST, not ALL, in the sentence "most singers are dead weight" and i would've written that same message even if i didn't know the singer i've been playing with now. that statement came from 8 years of jamming with a lot of different musicians.
the arsonist had oddly shaped feet...
#28
Quote by axemanchris
Hard for me to say what singers know. I'm the only singer I've ever worked with for about the last ten years, for the most part. Prior to that, most of them have just been dumb-asses.
CT

and it looks like you agree with me about the dead weight thing. you basically made the same statement i did.
the arsonist had oddly shaped feet...
#29
Quote by axemanchris


Your bands you mentioned.... annoying voices to you, but not to everyone. I think the guy from Tool's voice is annoying. Same with that guy from SOAD who has now decided to bless us with a solo album. Everyone is different. Those people can all sing, though. They have unique voices, yes, but I think that is also what sort of works to their favour. They don't sound 'just like everyone else.'

CT


i'm pretty sure maynard has one of the best voices i have honestly ever heard.

edit: if you disagree... http://youtube.com/watch?v=CWRDZwV8jGE
that song is not actually as outstanding vocally as i remembered it being haha but i'm sure you get the point..
Last edited by tona_107 at Jul 29, 2008,
#30
He can sing fine. I just don't like his voice. I like his voice a lot better than that SOAD guy's though, who can also sing, but I HATE his voice. It always sounds so 'put on.'

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#31
Quote by stackedxactor
singers don't always make bands. if that was the case bands like rush or the smashing pumpkins or the white stripes would never be big because let's face it, those bands rock, but they have what most consider very annoying voices. the first thing you need to look at is the actual music because if that isn't good than the rest of the song will fall through. and of course the same goes vic a versa but i think you get what i'm trying to say.

a lot of singers who just sing are dead weight. now if they're good lyricists, that's a different story. or if they come up with vocal melodies out of thin air. but i don't ever see that.

it might be that i have this mentality because the music scene in tampa florida is the worst one i've ever seen. but you move here, and try and deal with the bull that is tampa. it's gay.


Geddy Lee? Annoying? People who think that need to stop listening to their generic radio rock and actually be open to more music.

And the white stripes do not rock. Two year olds could play their music(not to mention they look like two year olds when they play it live.)

But back on the subject at hand, I dont think yall should have decided on the covers without him, you could have at least called him and asked while yall were deciding or something. But you also shouldnt think that he has to agree with everything just because he is the singer. If he doesnt want to do one song but everyone else does, then I think he should have to do it anyways, although he should also be able to do a song he wants to to make up for that. It should all even out, decision making should be split between all the people that really care about the band.
#32
Quote by David_Bowie=GOD
If he doesnt want to do one song but everyone else does, then I think he should have to do it anyways,


I think the singer should be given *some* additional leverage on whether or not a song gets done by the band. My reason is that a singer's voice is dependent on their physical make up. You can't just dial in a certain setting or what-not and all of a sudden get a tone 'close enough' to Hendrix or whatever. A singer has not only his/her range to think about (I can't reach the notes!!), but also whether or not a song suits his/her voice, or if they are able to do it without hurting their voice. As much as I love AC/DC, I couldn't do You Shook Me All Night Long. I just don't have that kind of voice, so I would sound hilarious even trying it, which would make the band look bad too. By 'putting on' that kind of voice, I would risk damaging it. That's something that nobody should be asked to do.

It is up to the singer to not abuse this leverage, though, and as the band gets to know what the singer can/can't do, they should eventually be able to tell almost as easily as the singer can, whether or not they'll be able to do it.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.