Democracy in a Band : Its Importance and Relevance, No Matter the Situation

 

You've probably already read my previous blog where I explained the most recent incident which got me thinking about the importance of determining what type of leadership you want in your band, and why it's important to be upfront about your expectations, along with making sure your bandmates do the same. Which brings us to the concept of "democracy" in a band.

As bad as it sounds, I have to admit that years ago when I went from being a control-freak about my band at the time (mind you, I was a very young adult at the time), and let things become more "democratic", that's when progress started to halt, the gigs started waning and the group lost cohesion in some ways. So sometimes there's truth in the need for someone spearheading the direction and providing the motivation to a group. Whether it was in my first "serious" punk band in high school, or my long-running alt-country/Americana outfit that followed, in both instances I can look back in hindsight and see exactly when things went from being strong and productive to falling apart piece-by-piece. Said hindsight also shows me where being too staunch OR too lax created unnecessary tension and counterproductivity. You have to have that middle-ground approach.

Now, being a "leader" in a band doesn't mean being an unjustified, unqualified diva, nor does it mean taking credit for your bandmates' hard work. It also doesn't mean denigrating their contributions when they are in fact literally propping you up. However, it DOES mean being assertive about your band's direction, choice of material, performance quality and being the soul of a band. It doesn't mean some dipshit singer should take all the glory for a band if he/she is only contributing an occasional barely-usable lyric or because he/she is the most visually-noticeable member because they're able to prance around with a microphone while you're busting your ass playing instruments providing their background music. It often means the person writing the majority of (or all of) the material is the creative center, and probably should be the de facto "leader" of the band. Someone who is a "leader" should have actual ownership in a group, and can enforce, incite and intervene when necessary to facilitate progress. But that doesn't HAVE to be "one person", especially when you're a band just starting up and there are no "rockstars" in your group. Never forget that if you're "starting a band" all over again, nobody gives a flying fuck about your achievements and accolades (real OR in your own head), and your street-cred is absolutely meaningless. There is no "seniority" in an upstart band, whether you're 15 or 55. If you disagree, I implore you to stop for a minute and ask yourself how that current project is ACTUALLY going. Told ya' so.

I think a "driving force" is a must when it comes to groups focused on original material. Not so much with cover-groups, where your band doesn't "own" the art/material in question, and I've found that cover-bands are much more fun to be involved with when there's more of a democratic mentality. At least, that's how it SHOULD be. Anyone who's been paying attention, or has known me, knows I've had to whore myself out in cover-bands during artistic lulls, in between finding bandmates for original material, etc., and I've unfortunately seen that the majority of the cover-bands I've ever encountered have had a strange sense of entitlement and completely unwarranted elitism about them. I have witnessed both from the outside AND inside the horrors, and it's silly when a bunch of breathing jukebox components take themselves too seriously. I like to address the "cover-band quagmire" when talking about this subject, because in a cover-band, you are literally just another player, despite some folks holding themselves in higher regard than deserved.

While some cover-band gigs have been pleasant, stark in contrast from other tours of duty (or doody) with cover acts, I can say that in most instances, it's been miserable. I'm currently doing hired-gun work with a "private events band" that is largely covers, some originals, and even is letting me bring in some of my own original material, much like when I played with my "adopted family" in The Oath (a well-known party band in the Upstate) during their final 5 years. With this situation, I find myself receiving a fair cut in compensation, some say in choice of material, a general sense of being appreciated for my work, and I don't feel like I have to watch my back. It's very "business-like", and not very personable at times, but there's respect there. In a cover-band I had played in from 2016 till 2020 or so, we eventually had to fire our "singer" because he was a drunk who'd embarrass us every show; we carried on as a trio, but ran into local drama because "Big Ben" decided he'd make sure everyone knew we were "assholes" to him for kicking him out, conveniently leaving out the part about "why", and he never seemed able to recollect that last show where he literally passed out on a table at a gig. And around a decade ago, I left a scenario wherein there were basically 3 little grumpy old men who were at odds to control the band from different angles: Power-chord Jamey had certain "local celebrity" connections, a rehearsal space and a Marshall half-stack he didn't even know how to dial-in. The drummer (Dave, whom I dubbed the "Boston Buttroast") had a few adequate booking connections so despite obvious technical deficiencies, so he remained harder-to-dispose of than the other sidemen. The frontman owned the bulk of the sound reinforcement gear, lighting, the trailer and had a buddy who would (for a cut, of course) "run sound" (arguably speaking). In their minds, as long as their lead guitarist and bassist kept their mouths shut and just did their job carrying the load like obedient pack mules, things were kosher. As you can imagine, that took its toll. And despite having stuck around for over a year and a half (more than three times my originally-agreed-upon stint), I never felt trusted, or "part of the band", so when the opportunity arose in a moment of unnecessary tension and histrionics, I had to leave. I am fine being a gun-for-hire, but don't expect me to swear undying loyalty to your band if you're not earning it. And especially, don't treat someone a certain way and then act surprised when they're not as committed as you'd like them to be. Cover-bands and even "tribute" bands are barely one step above karaoke, and are literally some of the easiest gigs you can play. You are doing shit you didn't have to write, and audiences are very "flexible" (some would say "have incredibly, annoyingly-low standards") so you don't even have to be any good in most cases. Most AREN'T, if we're being honest. If you're paying appropriately, a player should show up, do his/her job, collect a good compensation and then "see you next time". No hassle. No drama. No bullshit. "Rehearsals" really aren't necessary either, everyone should know their parts, and I shouldn't have to waste my time standing around while other people work on "learning" songs they were supposed to learn on their time. When the compensation stops making it worth the headache to show up, you can have a discussion, or you can just quit. Which one of those will work for you is something only you will be able to decide. Go with your gut. Always.

Bands that do original material are a little more complex, in more ways than one. This is why I will say that one of the most important things, if not THE most important, is transparency, from day-fucking-one. From the moment you first utter the famous like "hey, we should start a band" or when you post that Craigslist or Facebook ad looking for people to play with. If you aren't willing to invest in others' creativity but expect them to dedicate time, energy and creative power into YOUR art, my opinion is that there's something wrong with you, but if that IS your modus operandi, have the balls to be honest and upfront about it. You can't expect everyone else to invest into your work if you're dismissing and disregarding theirs because you feel yours is more worthy somehow, but for God's sake, at least be forthright if this is what you are looking for. This is why many remain unknown in a sea of other unknowns, and will remain so until they learn to be transparent with future associates or change to a less-narcissistic mindset. Be honest with your intentions. Don't even have one initial rehearsal/jam/practice/etc. if you haven't been crystal-clear about your expectations, aspirations and boundaries. 

Part of the reason I used my examples was to demonstrate what happens when you've been given false impressions or have no idea what exactly you just signed up for. And that's the lesson I want you to take away here. Don't lure musicians into what they believe is going to be a "band" only to turn around and tell them they are just there to polish your turds. Pulling a bait-and-switch like that is a colossal dick-move. And if you AREN'T a raging egomaniacal narcissist and want to co-author and collaborate, just make it a point that everyone who's helping you create art gets their proper recognition. Unless you take a vote on it and pick someone who's going to be your mouthpiece, figurehead or "rep", share the privileges AND responsibilities. For folks who insist on being the one in complete control creatively, and want "yes men", you have to make that clear before you start asking people to play with you. Because when you say you "want to form a band", you're not being honest. You mean to say that you "want a backing band". Most people aren't going to want to hop on board just to play your same shitty songs you've been trying to get recorded and performed onstage with a band since the 80's, and you might be better off just grabbing that acoustic guitar to go do some more open-mic nights and coffeehouse gigs. The older you are, the more you probably need to hear that the reason you're rebooting YET AGAIN is because your old habits are toxic as fuck, and you need to humble yourself a bit for some good reflection and reconsideration. Just BE HONEST about what you want, what is acceptable, where you will/won't compromise and your goals. Ask the same of your would-be bandmates so that before you ever waste each other's time and energy, you know exactly what awaits. No, that's not going to help you with personality conflicts and other dangers of interacting with other human beings, but it can definitely mitigate your problems and most definitely can prevent you from dealing with certain annoyances down the road. So above all, BE TRANSPARENT!

Do I believe there should be some leadership in a band, regardless of whether you are an "artist" or just a covers-musician? Yeah, of course. But there is no one-size-fits-all solution, so you have to treat each scenario with the same respect and scrutiny. As mentioned in the previous blog, if it's all done honestly and properly, you can delegate duties and become a well-oiled machine. You rely on each member to make it work, and unless you signed up specifically to be someone's support musician for their "solo" vanity project knowing they will receive all the recognition and you'll never be more than their henchperson, then no one person is a "star" in a band. In cover-bands, there is no need for hierarchy. It's just a band. No writing credits. No publishing rights. Just booking and playing. Just going through the motions. Just a bunch of uncreative people mimicking others. It's as easy as it gets. When we do those gigs, we're just playing. And if we're smart, the minute it stops being fun enough to be worth our pittance, we stop and go do something else. But if you are an artist/songwriter, or are in a band where you're backing one, you need to know where you stand with the person you're propping up, or the musicians who are helping you bring your music to life. By all means, if you are an original artist, take your art by the horns, and own that shit all you want. If you put together a band, however, make sure they know upfront how much input they will (and WON'T) get, and let them know the boundaries. If you are a songwriting team, same applies. Just be honest with your bandmates about what you need them for, and trust me, they'll either stick around for the ride and provide you the backbone you need, or they'll excuse themselves respectfully and save the drama of clashing with your ego. Win/win. Regardless, just please, for fuck's sake, DON'T TAKE YOURSELF TOO SERIOUSLY. Just have fun with it, find like-minded musicians and remember that whether they're YOUR songs or not, they wouldn't exist without your bandmates, at least in a performance scenario. And never forget: it's ALWAYS 100% voluntary for all parties involved.

Democracy? Mos def. Unless you've made it clear that's not how you roll and the other participants are cool with it. But there are no "benevolent dictators". And if you're starting up a new band for the umpteenth time because you can't keep people on board when they find out you're wanting sole control and will settle for nothing less, it's time for YOU to make a change if you want to keep the next group together.

Mic...dropped....

H

Too Many Chefs in the Kitchen? : Do Bands REALLY Need a "Leader"? How to Split Duties and Credit...Or Just Split

One constant source of disdain and struggle with most bands who don't have their shit together is: just who is in charge of the band?

Often, it depends who you ask. A lot of crowds misinterpret a vocalist/frontperson as the band's leader, while others may think the band follows the flashy lead guitar player who seems to exude more confidence/cockiness than the others. In reality, it's different for every band, and in many cases I've seen (or even been involved with), even the band members themselves may be confused about who's actually calling the shots. Who really IS in charge? Does ANYONE really need to be the "leader"? How do you pick this leader? What happens when the power goes to their head or they do not efficiently handle the responsibilities, or you find yourself working as a yes-man for an egomaniacal narcissist? Well, let's see what I've learned over the years...

First off, you've probably asked yourself a time or two whether your band needs a bona fide leader. The answer, in short, is yes. But it's not that simple, and what's important---no, CRUCIAL to remember is that the role doesn't have to be filled by one person. In fact, it might be better if you split leadership into different roles. Plus, it shows not just commitment FROM the members, but TO them as well. Keep in mind that I'm coming from the angle of an unsigned, independent band who are either just starting out or relegated to their region/scene. It really depends on a few factors, but the most important ones are:

1) A representative for bookings/decision-making - this person is the go-to person when it comes to making contact with venues or booking persons, receiving calls for bookings, keeping up with the members' individual schedules to prevent scheduling conflicts, negotiating terms (and NOT just accepting ANY booking he/she is offered), confirming dates (both with the venues AND the other band members) and handling promotion for shows and events. It's fine if other members contribute to bookings too, but it works better if all the bookings are being funneled through one member, and gives off a more professional, organized vibe.

2) A fan/media representative - this person serves as the Q&A guy for the band (and should NEVER answer a question he or she isn't sure about), and not only handles first-contact with media/press representatives but also would serve as the first-line defense when the band is approached by fans. This person should be not only knowledgeable but personable as well, for obvious reasons. You don't want a drummer or guitarist who doesn't even know the lyrics to the songs, for example, trying to explain the "message" therein. And likewise, you don't want some douchey vocalist who doesn't even play an instrument talking about the "creative" process (that he only has to provide some "words" and a halfassed performance for), the elements involved in any of the instrumentation, or the inspiration for the sound of a song someone else wrote every other part for aside from the "poem" that would become the lyrics. This person (if they're up to speed and doing their job right) should also be the one taking the lead for handling the social page/webpage and responsible for keeping all the information updated. 

3) The onstage leader - this is the person who kicks things into gear onstage and makes it fun. Keyword: FUN. The person who helps everyone recover when the drummer fucks up a song, or who turns a certain way to show his fretting hand in order to remind the other guitarist/bassist the note they should be playing. The person who initiates and demands crowd responses/interaction. Often the most entertaining person to watch onstage, the one who most has his shit together performance-wise and the one people will talk about the next day. Sure, your "vocalist" might be upfront, but maybe your bass player is more fun to watch because he's getting into it, or you have a guitarist who does interesting parts that don't sound like someone wanking around in the guitar store trying to impress people. Those are the people your band needs to make sure are visible.

4) The creative leader - this is the chief songwriter/arranger of the band (for original music) or the guy who serves as the final say/set-list writer (for cover-bands). This is pretty self-explanatory in most cases, but in the case of original music, just like copyright credits and album credits, this person must be given proper credit for being the musical director or the pen behind the new art. A "lyricist", for example, is not necessarily a "songwriter", I've learned. In a certain project I was in for about a decade, someone else wrote "lyrics" (and really didn't want anyone else's ideas in that regard), but the "music" was always written by other members. At first everyone contributed, but as the project aged, members left and I was the sole creator of the actual songs, barring a cool bass-riff that our bassist played that I arranged into a song on one or two occasions. Part of the reason I have a bad taste in my mouth about that "band" was because I was never really treated like a partner, even when I was contributing 98% of the actual musical compositions, and it started becoming more like a vanity project for a "vocalist" who was not really pushing himself and had no real range vocally, and who was also not writing relatable or hooky lyrics to boot, causing many of my songs to feel shortchanged. So make damn sure you're ACKNOWLEDGING and paying proper respect to the creative power in your group.

Again, this all could be handled by one person, but in a relatively-busy working band it's highly unlikely, not to mention inefficient and insufficient, and definitely not recommended. An active band member probably should only hold one (MAYBE two) of these positions ever. Any more than that, and I promise, you will have to deal with booking fuck-ups, inconsiderate behavior, people burning-out quickly, information getting botched and eventually infighting that can lead to a shake-up or member loss. It goes without saying that you should choose who does what by not only their eagerness to do it, but also their competence to do it. The last thing you need is your flaky-assed drummer who half-listens to anything anyone says handling bookings, especially when he's made it clear he'll play every weekend, anywhere he can book regardless of your commitments and schedule. You also don't want your Lynyrd Skynyrd-obsessed rhythm guitarist picking your set-list. And you definitely don't want the stoner in the band representing you to fans or media giving off the wrong impression. Pick duties based on strengths, and if someone sucks at it, you have a responsibility both to yourself AND your band to tell them so, and to put someone more capable in that position.

There are going to be other struggles as well, I will warn you. It may be a member who doesn't contribute anything to the band insisting on admin rights to all the band pages you have put the time and effort into creating and moderating just so they can post their own drivel/insight and do other things that demonstrate a lack of experience and make you look like a high school start-up band, or worse, boot the other band members from admin-privileges and hijack everything altogether. I've also had self-medicating bandmates use the band's page to covertly try to score good weed and constantly drop covert drug references that make the band a liability, to venues and to themselves. Yes, nonsense like that actually happens. 

Also keep watch when a member's significant other who doesn't do anything "musical" handles all the bookings and money, and gets all Yoko on you with everything ranging from song choices to wardrobe to skimming "admin fees", pulling "rank" at every turn. Just learn the power of "no", and don't become a victim. If you cannot handle all the duties mentioned in the confines of band membership, do yourself a favor and get an outside, neutral party/manager to help out. That way no one will end up blaming someone on mishandling money or swaying band decisions based on cronyism/favoritism/nepotism.

Most importantly, if ANYONE who plays any of these roles, inside or outside the band, starts power-tripping, abusing their position or simply just isn't doing the job, redistribute it and relieve them of the duty. You might even have to relieve them from the group as a whole if it gets nasty. DO NOT HESITATE. Find someone else to do it immediately. Letting it go on for weeks, months or more will only create more tension, and will result in counter-productivity, not to mention it will make mortal enemies out of band members. And you will soon find yourself starting all over again with a new group, worrying about what to expect from them as well.

So yeah, your band should have "leadership", so to speak, but there should be no one chieftain if it is a BAND, because if your band members are all contributing their part you are all on the same ground, and no one is higher up the totem pole than the others. Choose wisely, because you have to live with your decision, at least for a while.

In another blog, I'll discuss what happens when you sign up for a band under the ruse of a democracy or "team" mentality and then find yourself dealing with the old bait-and-switch from someone wanting to essentially have a crew, not a team, with no intention of allowing true contributions or shared "artistic control" over what happens in the band. This is something that hits close to home, having reared its ugly head yet again in my life just last month, and I feel the subject deserves its own blog because it can cross both professional and personal boundaries like few other things. Stay tuned for that one, it'll be a doozy...