Page 1 of 2

To start, or to join

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:42 am
by Krul
To me, starting a band is like starting a business. Sometimes, you start a joint partnership where somebody takes over the connections end, while the other focuses on most of the song writing. Things vary in circumstances all the time though.

Joining a band is like being employed. You have to prove yourself until you get promoted to more freedom and say-so within the band. What you do from the start depends on your qualifications. You have to gain the band's trust...etc.

So how do you like to go about things as a musician? Do you like a good level of control? Prefer to join something already well established? Or maybe it doesen't matter to you as long as you're playing, and the music is good.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:36 pm
by jimmydanger
I've always been the leader. I run the ads, audition people, write songs, book gigs, produce recordings and fire people when I have to. Never been much of a joiner.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:42 pm
by gbheil
If anything were to happen to our present project ( God forbid ) I would probably want to initiate one of my own.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:57 pm
by Mike Nobody
Having done both, either has their pros and cons. But, I'm getting at a point where I'm getting tired of playing someone else's music and not mine. I may join another band, so I can "borrow" their musicians for mine. But, I want a project that I can work out my own ideas in.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:22 pm
by Scratchy
Ive been involved in both situations. One takes a lot of responsibility, the other takes more diplomacy. As long as you have a realistic personal goal for the project, you'll know when your wasting your time.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:58 pm
by philbymon
Well, I can't seem to find ppl that want to work for me. Like Capt Beefheart, I can't seem to find a drummer that can play a strawberry, for the life of me!

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:32 pm
by Slacker G
I was always a hired gun. But that doesn't mean that my input wasn't appreciated by any group I was working with at the time. I preferred it that way. :)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:25 pm
by KLUGMO
One way or the other. I'm only happy if I'm singing songs that
WOW people. Just being able to sing a song does nothing for me.
No matter the genre, it's gotta be WOW.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:38 pm
by jsantos
Hello, I am new here.

Both situations have their good and bad and neither one is easier than the other. I have found the factors that define how these situations turn out are 1) Dedication 2) Inspiration 3) Patience and 4) Musicianship/Abilities. These attributes should be shared by all members or it wont work out. "Musicians" by definition can adapt and function at any given situation. Being in a band, starting or joining an existing, you have to deal with issues outside of music like: promotion; finance, networking; etc. Again these should be shared by all members. The more experience you gain working with different musicians, you expand your horizons and abilities. At a certain point when you realize that having a "band leader" is a moot perspective and you focus on every individual's strong point.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:01 pm
by Prevost82
Slacker G wrote:I was always a hired gun. But that doesn't mean that my input wasn't appreciated by any group I was working with at the time. I preferred it that way. :)


+ 100000000

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:07 pm
by Sir Jamsalot
jsantos wrote:Hello, I am new here.


:lol:

There's usually one person who actually signs the music studio lease, right? I'd be shy of doing that if I were forming a band, especially if I didn't know the chaps.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:30 pm
by jsantos
SirJamsalot wrote:There's usually one person who actually signs the music studio lease, right? I'd be shy of doing that if I were forming a band, especially if I didn't know the chaps.


Yes. The monthly music studio leases here in Chicago are quite expensive and have the going rate of $400 and up monthly. We are talking about a small closet for that much. The one we rent at Superior Street Studios is $750 monthly and is split 4 ways by the members. So that is somewhere in the $200 a person. We are very serious about the project and are willing to put in money. All our names are on the lease lol.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:34 pm
by Sir Jamsalot
jsantos wrote:
SirJamsalot wrote:There's usually one person who actually signs the music studio lease, right? I'd be shy of doing that if I were forming a band, especially if I didn't know the chaps.


Yes. The monthly music studio leases here in Chicago are quite expensive and have the going rate of $400 and up monthly. We are talking about a small closet for that much. The one we rent at Superior Street Studios is $750 monthly and is split 4 ways by the members. So that is somewhere in the $200 a person. We are very serious about the project and are willing to put in money. All our names are on the lease lol.


oh, you can do a 4 way lease signing huh? I didn't know these types of studios would do that. I suppose that would take some fear out of it for me :)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:40 pm
by jimmydanger
Oh you mean practice rooms. When you said music studio lease I got confused.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:43 pm
by jsantos
In response to SirJam and Jimmy. Yes it is a monthly practice room. They have more than one name on the lease so the establishment can "extract" from any member is one fails to produce $$$. They know how musicians tend to forget the lease money sometimes haha