Band Leader woes

[BrassaxMan5]

Hi there,
I started my band about 8 months ago, and we had sax, bone, piano, and drums. i got frustrated with the bone player and cut him(out).
Things were going pretty fine with just the 3 of us til this bass player calls me , and long story short, he gets in. Now, I didn't know that he's more of a rocker. Actually, he's pretty much a square. Anyway, we went for about 2 or 3 weeks with him, when he says we should get a singer. Well, about that time I have the last rehearsal for a week, and go on vacation. While I'm on vacation, this little rat decides to get her in. So they rehearse with her a lot, and I'm taken aback when I return, but I go along with it. Then we start playing some rock songs (not my choice, the bass player's dad's ) and then my piano player gets this guitar player. Now, we're no longer the jazz band i wanted. We're more of a rock/jazz/blues band, and I recently talked to the guitar player online, and he says he might quit after our gig (school being a big factor) , so I was thinking around that time I could fire our singer (because I am supposed to be the figurehead of power, being the person who started this whole thing, and the leader of it (at least in my view, I should be)).
What do you guys think?

[bariman]

I think you're right in your feeling as to who should make the decisions for the band. I founded a small jazz group (percusion, T sax, Double bass, Trumpet), and we did get a few pretty good gigs in before we decided to go our serperate ways. As founder of the group, and mostly the one who got us gigs, I always thought it was understood that I called the shots, and thankfully everyone in the band thought so too. I think that adding any more people to a band than what you originally had is a bad idea, unless you want to do a song that only sounds good on a certain instrument nobody already in the band can double on. Adding an unproffesional singer is a big leap of faith as well.

Here's what I would do: (Disclaimer: If you take my advice don't get mad at me if you lose a friend, hurt some feelings, or get cursed at) So the guitarist is leaving? Great. One less person to worry about. Tell your bass player that you want to go back to playing jazz, and if he dosen't like it, the other original members will break off and refuse to accept him as a member of the band. Also tell him the singer idea has got to go, and if you (Brassman5) don't like what the band is playing song wise, than it gets changed. Period. Asert yourself as the leader of the band, and don't back down. If he wants to join you guys and play jazz, than he is welcome to, as long as he agree's to your terms. Discuss this with the other original members, and get them behind you, so if he want's a vote, you keep majority. Let us know how it works out,

Bariman

[saxchado]

I guess the answer lies within another answer: Is the issue more that it's not the type of music/ensemble that you wanted, or that it's not just you making decisions? If it's the former, then I would say that you should try starting over again, or perhaps look for an ensemble that is playing things that you want to do and see if you can join them. If it's an ego thing, then you're going to have to get over it eventually, as it will win you no friends, and get you no gigs as nobody likes a prima-donna.

Please note, this was not intended to be insulting or accusitory in any way, just trying to provoke some self-evlauation. (we all need it from time to time.) I could use some too, if I only knew what my problem is today :evil:

[BrassaxMan5]

I don't know for sure if the guitar player is leaving.
But I like your tips, thanks.
I just don't like it that my authority as band leader has been ignored.
I don't like the direction the ensemble is going. I am not sure if it's part ego, but it could be. But it seems like I should be the one making decisions and getting us gigs not the other members

[bariman]

I think your best next step is to consult the remaining original members and ask who they think is the leader, and who should make the decisions. Also, see what they want to play, and make sure you share a common interest in the type of music; if not, you may want to start a new ensemble, or join a different one. It sounds to me like you had a good thing going, which says the original members were happy, so maybe you should try and get back to that.

Bariman

[Bill Mecca]

If you are truly the band leader, then lead. And I don't mean become a dictator or a primadonna. There are many ways to lead.

You are only the leader if the rest of the organisation sees you as such. I dare say, if you were in reality seen as the leader, these events would not have transpired.

It's funny actually, my band keeps looking to me for decisions, and I want it to be more democratic.

That all being said, this could be a good thing. Playing behind a singer is a valuable technique to learn, and learning some rock and roll is not a bad thing either as it will increase the band's appeal. Book both kinds of gigs, just make sure both are rehearsed as well.

Variety is a good thing.

[Riff]

I would call a band meeting. Just discuss your feelings. Say you started the group as a quartet to play jazz but now you're getting to far away from that. Get feedback from them and find out what everyone wants to do. If the original guys are with you, politely tell the bass player and singer that you won't be needing them on a regular basis anymore but you'd like to keep them on a call list so you can still all play together if a certain gig comes up that requires their talents. They may get ticked off and tell you where to put your sax but that's the chance you take.

If the original members aren't with you anymore then wish them all luck and start over. These kind of situations are all part of the musician's life experience and serve as a learning opportunity. When you start over, you'll run things differently. Just don't be dictatorial, let the other musicians express themselves both personally and musically. There's always a balance that must be achieved in any band so that everyone is happy. When the band is happy, the music is good.

[Frank D]

Somebody else nailed it: is the issue the repertoire (jazz vs. rock) or the fact that you're not in charge?

I'd say go along with the rock thing for awhile. It's hard to put together a group of musicians that "click" in any style, and you seem to have something going here.

Then, you can ask if any of the group would like to get together sometime to jam some jazz tunes, and mention the tunes you'd like to play. That will give you your answer. You may be able to get two groups goind, sort of a band within a band.

I was subbing with a band one time and asked the leader why he decided to play the kind of music he played. His answer was that he put together the best musicians he could find, and then figured out what kind of music they could play together. That's one of the wisest things I've ever heard from a musician.

Put your ego aside and don't miss a chance to play.

[sopsax]

BrassaxMan5: You are lucky to have received excellent advice from all the previous posters. Here's my two cents. If somebody else is calling rehearsals, choosing repertoire, and recruiting personnel, then you are effectively no longer the leader -- by definition. You have lost credibility and authority with this particular crew. Chalk it up to experience and move on.

Wrangling over personnel lineup, musical direction, and internal politics is typical of young bands where ego needs are still high and access to a network of players is limited. We've all been there, suffered, and emerged wiser. Count yourself fortunate to have learned this so early in the day.

A leader is a leader because he or she possesses a combination of musical chops, business savvy, people skills, and personal charisma. Other players willingly follow such a leader, especially one who is fair and generous. They trust the leader's judgment -- because they know that the leader listens to their needs. A good leader is the band's servant, not its boss. Yet when a decision is to be made, players look to the leader for wisdom and direction.

At one point I started a band but found the tasks of a leader overwhelming: musical prep, rehearsals, hustling gigs, payroll, expenses, publicity, travel logistics... When I off-loaded duties to other band members, they wanted more of a leadership role as well. We ended up being a leaderless collective, successful for more than a decade. In a subtle, long-term sense I remained the leader -- strongly influencing the band's musical direction and strategy. In day-to-day decisionmaking, however, everybody had an equal voice and vote. Although inefficient, this worked -- the band stayed together and thrived, sort of. Would I do it this way again? Heck, no -- I'd be the leader. :D

In later years I worked in the corporate world and marveled at some of the goofball decisions my bosses would make. Why would underlings carry out such stupid decrees? I came to realize that often SOME decision is preferable to NO decision. The organization needs forward motion, an end to wrangling. If the leader is ego-free and willing to consider alternative opinions, all the better.

Assert yourself if you have to, or withdraw if you must, but don't burn any bridges. Treat everybody in the band with respect and friendliness, and be particularly courteous to your enemies. Acts of cruelty will haunt you to the end of your days. Acts of generosity will be rewarded.

[vinito]

Talk to anyone who's been doing it a while and they'll tell you a few stories about the different groups they've been in, how they started, where they went, and how it ended. Bands come and go. Every once in a while it clicks and you have a good time. More often than not, it too will eventually fade away and make room for the next thing.

It sounds like the solution may already be occurring. If these guys like what's happening and you don't, let them do their thing and just start a new group with a defined direction that's more in line with your wants. Maybe one of the guys would like to be in both groups. If not, start from scratch.

It doesn't make much sense to me to fire everybody in the band because you as the leader want to go a different direction, especially if you never got to the gigging stage yet anyways.

Start a new group of your own and just jam with the guys from your current band from time to time.

[BrassaxMan5]

well, guys I quit.