Band members in other bands

[12stringbassist]

It only works when the people who run two bands can pull the others in when required and those other people are doing nothing else.

 

As a person who prefers to have one band and nothing else, I have always found that if someone is in two bands, their availability is compromised and so is their attention span and ability to absorb and devote time to learning new material. It very rarely works and there is always going to be conflicts over which band gets first dibs on dates. It's just a nightmare.

The people who elect to be in two bands (but don't run diaries) always think they can make it work. They of course, are not the ones tearing their hair out over broken gig schedules and aren't the ones going back to venues saying 'oh I'm sorry, x is suddenly not available'.

[acidbass]

Probably been said already, but it sounds like a professionalism issue on the part of the musicians who don't bother to commit to the idea.

[Lozz196]

I find it amazing in this day & age, where everyone carries a calendar with them (in their phone) all the time, that it takes some so long to reply with availability. Look at calendar, reply, not the hardest task of the day.

[chris_b]

1 hour ago, 12stringbassist said:

As a person who prefers to have one band and nothing else, I have always found that if someone is in two bands, their availability is compromised and so is their attention span and ability to absorb and devote time to learning new material. It very rarely works and there is always going to be conflicts over which band gets first dibs on dates. It's just a nightmare.
 

 

Deps are not a negative scenario. Deps make gigging more flexible. Pick the right deps and you can have a lot of fun.

 

You don't give your band members much credit for their ability to learn sets for 2 bands.

 

You don't want band members to be in multiple bands, I get it, but your whole outlook on the subject is very negative.

[TimR]

I have been in 3 bands several times. 

 

However, it is down to the individual to recognise if they have time to commit equally to all the bands. 

 

In my case the bands didn't each rehearse each week and gigs were few and far between in each of them.

 

Which was what led me to find another band/accept an offer. Plus I would do dep gigs.

 

So if these members are too busy to play in your band due to the workload from the other bands, then they really need to have a conversation as to whether they really do have time to be in multiple bands.

 

Were they in your band first? ie is it lack of gigs that's made them look elsewhere. 

Did they join your band because you offered them gigs?

 

OR do they just want to turn up and practice the tunes at rehearsals and are not that keen of gigging.

 

If you're getting frustrated then speak to each one separately away from rehearsal and ask them what are they expecting from the band. Find out if you are aligned. 

 

If not, start auditioning new members and make it very clear what you're trying to achieve with the band, and what levels of commitment you want, how often you want to gig, rehearse and that you expect people to have *bare-boned the songs before coming to rehearsals.

 

*Don't expect people to learn tunes at home and for the tunes to work straight away. Rehearsals are to iron out the arrangements. 

[Lozz196]

46 minutes ago, chris_b said:

 

Deps are not a negative scenario. Deps make gigging more flexible. Pick the right deps and you can have a lot of fun.

 

 

My old band, who I’m currently standing in for have just done a mini tour of Belgium & Germany with a dep. I said when I agreed to stand in no touring - plus I was meant to be working this weekend anyway. The dep was based in Germany so had no rehearsals with them yet the gigs apparently went well. Dep success story backing up your point methinks Chris.

[bassbiscuits]

To echo some others on here, I think it’s a case of being clear from

the start what the expectations are from bands so people can decide if it’s something they can / want to commit to, whether that’s paid gigs, how often, rehearsals and goals overall. 
 

Personally I think most generic function/wedding/pub covers bands all play at least 50% of the same material anyway so it’s not actually rocket science for an experienced confident match fit player to step in given enough notice. 
 

I love playing in multiple bands. I find it a bit unrealistic for any one band to fulfil all my musical aspirations and needs. Some are better payers, some do loads of gigs, some allow more creative expression. It’s all good. 
 

[Mickeyboro]

I’ll just re-state my original question, as it’s three pages back…

 

Can a band thrive if most of its members have other, clearly more interesting/lucrative interests? If so, how do you manage/motivate them?

[Stub Mandrel]

12 hours ago, Burns-bass said:

A blues band audience probably wants the songs played the way they were on the record.

 

I'm not sure of that... most of our repertoire we haven't played the same twice.

[Stub Mandrel]

12 hours ago, Burns-bass said:

Totally agree with all this. Jazz musicians (and any improviser really) exists at the intersection of inspirational genius and absolute failure.

 

I love playing improvised music, but the audience at a jazz gig buys into it and understand the challenges. A blues band audience probably wants the songs played the way they were on the record.

 

Without wanting to be elitist, jazz musicians are typically operating at a higher level of musical understanding, too.

Almost every problem can be solved by chatting. I auditioned for a gigging band recently and the band leader said they don’t rehearse often (err, ever) but expect me to learn the songs, play properly and not to be flakey. I can introduce some personality into parts but ultimately stick to the songs as recorded. Do that and I’ll get paid and rebooked. 

 

 

You second and third paragraphs appear to contradict each other! 😁

[bassbiscuits]

17 minutes ago, Mickeyboro said:

Can a band thrive if most of its members have other, clearly more interesting/lucrative interests? If so, how do you manage/motivate them?

Yes: as long as you’re all clear from the outset what the expectations / level of commitment is. 
 

Motivation for most gigging musos would be regular paying gigs, input into set lists / songs, maybe make use of their skills for example singing lead on some songs etc. Basically get them involved in a band that’s doing stuff.

 

And once up and running don’t be afraid to use good deps to cover those times when those other band commitments might prevent your usual line up from performing. More gigs you do, more people will get to know what you’re about. 

[Stub Mandrel]

7 hours ago, 12stringbassist said:

 I have always found that if someone is in two bands, their availability is compromised and so is their attention span and ability to absorb and devote time to learning new material. It very rarely works and there is always going to be conflicts over which band gets first dibs on dates. It's just a nightmare.

 

 

The bands I'm in all have clear aspirations for how often they want to gig.

 

I have well over a hundred songs in my recently rehearsed/performed repertoire and many more I can play either from memory or brush up quickly. 

 

The whole reason I'm in multiple bands is because of my appetite for learning new material.  It's incredibly satisfying to struggle with a song and use it as a way to rapidly improve my technique.

 

I know bands that have one setlist and barely ever change it. I couldn't cope with that.

[Lozz196]

19 minutes ago, Mickeyboro said:

I’ll just re-state my original question, as it’s three pages back…

 

Can a band thrive if most of its members have other, clearly more interesting/lucrative interests? If so, how do you manage/motivate them?

I think it can, out of my gigging band I think it’s the least payer for the others as we don’t take any money aside from expenses.
 

Maybe it’s because we don’t play that often that keeps us motivated, I don’t know exactly but there’s never a problem with any band members not being prepared/rehearsed. 

 

[Stub Mandrel]

24 minutes ago, Mickeyboro said:

Can a band thrive if most of its members have other, clearly more interesting/lucrative interests? If so, how do you manage/motivate them?

 

To throw the question back at you, if your band is really less interesting and less lucrative, why does it motivate you?

 

Is it that your less committed band mates are going through the motions and you need to replace them with people more interested in the band's music?

[TimR]

45 minutes ago, Mickeyboro said:

I’ll just re-state my original question, as it’s three pages back…

 

Can a band thrive if most of its members have other, clearly more interesting/lucrative interests? If so, how do you manage/motivate them?

 

What came first? 

 

Have they drifted off to other bands, or were they in other bands and your band is an extra or a side project? 

 

If it's the first, then you have to ask them what is it you're not providing for them to be looking for extra.

 

If it's the second, what did you promise them, and are you delivering that? 

 

 

What do you mean by thrive? How many gigs are you planning? Have you booked those gigs? 

 

In my experience, I lose a huge amount of interest if the band leader is waiting for the band to be gig ready, and waiting, and waiting... And probably a failing on my part, I'm not going to be putting loads of effort into a band that has no gigs on the horizon.