Looking for advice

[LBS-bass]

Singer 1 has complained that singer 2 doesn't harmonize when singer 1 is singing the lead (while singer 1 does harmonize when singer 2 is singing the lead). I blame my ignorance for not understanding his complaint. Thank you again for you input on how vocals should work.

Harmony is another skill that people either have or they don't. I've been in bands where I was told "everybody sings" only to find out that when I'm singing a harmony everyone wants to only sing what I'm singing and can't find the third part. So I have learned I have to be very careful about how I ask people about their singing skills and get very specific in asking if they can harmonize, not just sing.

 

[Turbo Sparky]

This will be a very long read, as I'm trying to give as much detail as possible to get the best possible advice.

Background: I'm in a 90s hard rock cover band that consists of 2 singers, a guitarist, a drummer, and myself. It's my 1st real band (other than playing at church). None of us really have much (if any) experience in being in a band that plays gigs.

There was a blow-up between the two singers this past Sunday. The guitarist, drummer, and myself are going to meet tonight to discuss. I have a strong feeling that this will be the end of the band.

Here's the soap opera details. At one point the band consisted of the drummer, the guitarist, and myself practicing on Sunday nights in the drummer's garage. Then we added singer 1. After jamming with singer 1, we talked about adding another person that could do backup singing, backup guitars, and backup keyboards...just fill the spots that are needed. The drummer suggested his best friend. So, singer 2 came in and practiced with the band. On his own I thought he was an ok singer, but when the two of them sang together, I thought is sounded really powerful. The drummer and the guitarist agreed.

So then starts the experiment of trying to get the two of them to sing together. Singer 2 was all for it. Singer 1 hated it. Singer 1 said he wanted to hear a recording of it before he would completely agree to it. Singer 1 never seems to be able to get along with singer 2. In situations where we'd joke with each other, if singer 2 said something about singer 1, singer 1 would take it super personal and get angry and nasty. I blame myself for not trying to put a stop to this/saying something. Singer 2 seemed to just ignore it, so rather than confront singer 1 about his behavior, I thought it was growing pains and it would get better. Sometimes when it got too heated, one of us would speak up, but we never really addressed it properly. After time the aggressive nastiness seemed to go away, and was replaced with the occasional snippy comment.

We started getting more songs down, with the weak link being singer 1 still needing to read some of the song lyrics on his phone (not having them memorized at the pace of the rest of us). We moved from practicing in the drummer's garage to having our own rehearsal studio ($300 a month split amongst the band). Pretty much from the beginning of being in the studio, singer 2 would come to practice with alcohol. At first I thought it was just because he was excited we were in our own studio, but then noticed it became a habit. At one practice, he was very obnoxious and disruptive, to the point that the drummer (his best friend) was calling him out on his behavior. He apologized at the next practice, and I thought we all moved on.

We went to an open mic night and recorded it (), and things seemed to be progressing well. Then the next practice after that open mic night, singer 1 states that he doesn't like the two lead singer format. He said he listened to the video a lot, and he's just not a fan of it. So the 5 of us discussed it, and decided that we'd pretty much split our song list in half, and each of the singers would take turns being on stage (singer 1 gets set 1, singer 2 gets set 2, singer 1 gets set 3, singer 2 gets set 4). We decided that the two singers could decide that in the coming week, and that we'd just practice songs as normal for the rest of rehearsal. The last comment on the picking of songs was, if there's a disagreement on who sings what, then they each take turns picking songs.

So that brings us to this past Sunday. The guitarist wasn't there, as his wife just had a baby. I knew the two singers would not have communicated during the week, so I brought two list printouts and two pens. The four of us arrive, and singer 2 shows off a small bottle of Jack Daniels. He offers some to the rest of us. Singer 1 and myself decline. The drummer has a little bit. Then the singers are both "now what?". I hand them the pens and paper, tell them to go outside and figure it out. The drummer and I start practicing, but about 15 minutes later the singers are back. There's confusion. Singer 1 has chosen 2/3 of the songs. What? Oh, he was on a completely different page from the rest of us. The whole split the song list in half just went over his head. He brought up how singer 2 was invited into the band on the premise of backup singing, backup guitar, keyboard, and how that never happened. How it just became "he's a lead singer, too". Singer 1 said he was still processing this. The drummer and I talked about what was discussed at the previous practice, how we specifically said that if they couldn't decide on songs then they should just take turns picking songs. Singer 1 was just sitting there dumbfounded. So we said, ok, we don't need to do the whole list tonight. Each of you pick 12 songs, and we'll start with that.

So, each of them picked a handful that were definitely "their" songs (ones that both singers agree one did better than the other, or ones that one of them didn't want to sing so by default the other one did). Then it came time to do the drafting. Singer 1 picks a song. Singer 2 picks a song, and singer 1 spends about 5 minutes complaining that singer 2 picked that song. Finally singer 1 picks another song. Singer 2 picks a song and singer 1 spends about 5 minutes complaining that he won't get that song. This continues until they each have 12 songs, and the Jack Daniels bottle is empty.

Now we're finally going to practice. Singer 1 picks a song, and we play it. Singer 2 picks a song, and we play it. Singer 2 turns down the volume on the mic before handing it to singer 1. Singer 1 complains about that, implying that singer 2 is trying to sabotage him. Singer 1 picks a song, and we play it. Singer 2 picks a song, and we play it. Singer 2 turns down the volume on the mic before handing it to singer 1. Singer 1 complains about that, implying that singer 2 is trying to sabotage him. After a couple more cycles of this, singer 2 gets really angry and points out that he's just taking care of the equipment (which is not theirs but belongs to the guitarist), and that loud popping can blow a speaker, and that singer 1 is ignorant if he doesn't understand that.

Tangent: while playing with just singer 2 I realize that for the most part I'm not happy with him as a lead man. I think his singing is just ok, and that he's not really lead singer material. I'm not relishing the thought of playing a whole set where he's the lead.

The word "ignorant" was deeply offensive to singer 1. Then begins a circular argument of singer 1 saying: singer 2 is wrong, there's no popping, and calling him ignorant was really disrespectful...singer 2 saying: there is popping, he's doing the right thing in protecting the guitarist's equipment, but not saying anything about the "ignorant" comment. After that goes on for awhile, singer 1 says, "I'll see you next week", and leaves. I decide I'm ready to leave, too, so the rest of us pack up and leave. On the way out the three of us comment on how singer 1 is a bit hypocritical as he's talked so disrespectfully to singer 2 in the past, but the first time it's done to him he flips out.

On the way home, I call the guitarist to fill him in on what went down. We decide singer 1 needs a day or two to cool down, and then we'd call him. I also find out that singer 2 has been calling the guitarist every few days just to chat, and they are starting to develop a friendship. After I get off of the phone with the guitarist, the guitarist sends me a text saying (effectively) "To be clear, I'm going to call singer 1 and give him an ultimatum - split the songs 50/50 or take a hike." I tell him that an ultimatum is a bad idea, and that he should just call singer 1 and hear his side of it. The guitarist doesn't see the point in that, as it's pretty clear what singer 1's side is, that he wants to be the only singer. He suggests that the 3 of us (the guitarist, the drummer, and me) meet to discuss things after he talks to singer 1. I suggest the 3 of us meet before we make a call to singer 1. He agrees, and we loop the drummer in and make plans to meet on Tuesday at the guitarist's house. I then get a text from the drummer telling me that he and singer 2 won't be drinking at practice any more.

I plan to go into the meeting tonight, listen to what the other two have to say, and then proceed with the following. From the beginning I've been treating this band like a business, and I'm looking at this from a business perspective and nothing is personal. As such, I see the following as the only two realistic solutions.

1: The last time the band was all on the same page was before singer 2 joined. I suggest we roll back to that iteration, and get rid of singer 2. We then talk with singer 1, and tell him that if he wants to continue as the singer of the band, he has to start doing a better job of getting the lyrics memorized so that he's keeping up with the rest of us. Also will mention that when we make band decisions, we'll probably have him verbalize how he interprets it, as we seem to be having communication issues.

2: Get rid of both singers and look for a new singer. Singer 2 was brought on board as backup, and I was fine with that. If singer 2 auditioned for the lead spot today, I would vote no, so I don't want to keep him as the lead. Singer 1 seems to have a lot of drama attached to him, and while he's a great front man, it's not worth the price. We now have a better idea of what our band goals are, and it will be easier to communicate them to potential new singers.


If you read all of that, thank you. Are there other options that I am overlooking? Do you have any suggestions?

IMO:
Business?
Opt. 2; dump 'em both.
They don't sound like they're Johnny and June, nor fill in the blank.

...unless the drummer is willing to pitch in with both singers for couple's counselling.
Way too much drama for too many notes.
Hell, you affirm S1 can't/doesn't remember/know the lyrics to covers...covers.
S2 has alcohol issues already etc.
Flush 'em both.
Good luck!

 

[buldog5151bass]

1. Neither vocalist has the talent.
2. They don't sound good together.
3. You should come to a rule about alcohol. For me, no drinking until the music is finished.

IMO, start with a new/better vocalist.

 

[mrcbass]

Harmony is another skill that people either have or they don't. I've been in bands where I was told "everybody sings" only to find out that when I'm singing a harmony everyone wants to only sing what I'm singing and can't find the third part. So I have learned I have to be very careful about how I ask people about their singing skills and get very specific in asking if they can harmonize, not just sing.

This is spot on.

Many people think that just because someone can sing lead and maybe even very well, they can also harmonize, which is just plain wrong. They are different skills - they use the same instrument, but have different roles. Very much like lead and rhythm guitars.

I don't get it really - I've always gravitated towards the harmony parts when I sing along with the radio - I even sometimes create my own. I can carry a tune, but am not a great vocalist by any stretch - but I can throw some pretty good harmonies with anyone who can carry a tune. (Singing and playing is often a different story.) In my previous band, we had a main lead vox who could kind of harmonize and another part time lead who just could not sing harmonies - at all.

 

[DirtDog]

Two singers - recipe for disaster. Kinda like the keyboard’s left hand stepping all over the bass.

Even worse if they are both co- front persons. Both are vying for dominance and one might be acting like a diva.

Go back to one singer and the rest of you sing backup.

 

[Ostie]

Im gonna be brutally honest. The two singers thing doesn't work for me. Adding a second voice into the mix improv ed nothing.

As for the drama, thats yours to figure out if its worth it.

 

[LBS-bass]

Im gonna be brutally honest. The two singers thing doesn't work for me. Adding a second voice into the mix improv ed nothing.

I think much of this is a question of putting yourself in someone else's shoes. How would most of us feel if a BL brought in another bassist and asked that person to play exactly what we are already playing? Wouldn't we wonder what the point of that would be, and whether we were being replaced?

 

[redwingxix]

So it's the guy that DOESN'T drink that can't remember the words?

If you think singer 1 will work on his own and won;t be constantly worried that he is going to get half his songs taken away then I would probably go that route if possible, but the best option is to get one new, decent singer. The adding one additional lead vocalist idea never works. Everybody knows it's HALL and oates, SIMON and garfunkel. (okay the Dead managed it well, but that's definitely the exception)

If you're dead set against playing with singer #2 then yes I 'd start looking around. Good luck.

 

[wintremute]

Two singers - recipe for disaster. Kinda like the keyboard’s left hand stepping all over the bass.

Even worse if they are both co- front persons. Both are vying for dominance and one might be acting like a diva.

Go back to one singer and the rest of you sing backup.

Sounds good in theory, but I can't sing at all, I don't think the drummer can, and the guitarist is just ok on backup. In a pinch, we may use him. I think if we go with one vocalist, there will rarely be any backup vocals.

 

[wintremute]

Im gonna be brutally honest. The two singers thing doesn't work for me. Adding a second voice into the mix improv ed nothing.

As for the drama, thats yours to figure out if its worth it.

I'm here for the brutal honesty. I want to make things better.

 

[wintremute]

So it's the guy that DOESN'T drink that can't remember the words?

Yeah, LOL.

If you think singer 1 will work on his own and won;t be constantly worried that he is going to get half his songs taken away then I would probably go that route if possible, but the best option is to get one new, decent singer. The adding one additional lead vocalist idea never works. Everybody knows it's HALL and oates, SIMON and garfunkel. (okay the Dead managed it well, but that's definitely the exception)

If you're dead set against playing with singer #2 then yes I 'd start looking around. Good luck.

Thank you.

 

[charlie monroe]

(okay the Dead managed it well, but that's definitely the exception)

This is a first for me. Never saw a GD reference in a good vocals discussion

edit: Also, fire them both.

 

[QweziRider]

Do you have any suggestions?

Option 2. There's no need for the entire band to implode, and there are more than plenty great singers in that town to put up with crap from either singer 1 or 2.

 

[bherman]

Video doesnt work for me at all. Honestly, if I came into a bar and this was the band playing, I'd leave. Two mediocre singers singing the same thing?!? Both trying too hard and definitely looking like they're not having any fun? Forget it.

My vote, ditch them both and find someone better. In my book if you are going to have a dedicated singer (ie someone who doesn't also play an instrument) then they'd better be really good - like really really damn good, and they have to have good moves on stage. Neither singer has either. Musically you sound fine, but singing not so much.

 

[The Bass Clef]

The video sounds awful, just being honest. The band was good, so I don’t mean you sound awful, but if I walked into that bar, I woulda done a quick about face at first sight of the 2 lead singers in unison. IMO, you guys did singer 1 wrong by letting singer 2 even get to the point where he was singing any lead vocals (beyond maybe a couple songs in a night maybe, just to change it up if singer 1 was cool with it). Singer 2 should have always been a “utility guy” in your band or nothing... singing HARMONIES and playing 2nd guitar, keys, a shaker, something (whatever fits each song best). If he’s not capable of this, there’s no reason to have the extra member, especially when you’re dividing up the pay!

If you want this band to succeed without having to find a new singer and start over, I suggest you apologize to singer 1 for putting him through this whole silly experiment, and tell singer 2 it’s the utility position + singing harmonies, or you’ll need to find a different utility guy that can do it. Even just the absence of singer 2 would be an improvement over your current situation IMO. Also, explain nicely to singer 1 that he needs to put the time into learning/memorizing the songs better or there may be future issues.

If singer 1 had some solid backup harmonies behind him in the right spots, as well as another guitar or something else to fill up the music (if/when it’s needed), it would actually make singer 1 sound much better, even though his voice is the same. Judging from the one song I’ve heard, you might not even necessarily need another instrument, but it gives the backup singer something to do when he’s not singing harmonies.

Did I mention HARMONIES? Never do unison leads again unless it’s the whole band and the crowd all belting out an anthem together... ala, “We will, we will rock you!”.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Sounds good in theory, but I can't sing at all, I don't think the drummer can, and the guitarist is just ok on backup. In a pinch, we may use him. I think if we go with one vocalist, there will rarely be any backup vocals.

Then find a rhythm guitarist or keyboardist with backup vocal abilities. Neither of those two you have can sing harmonies. Singing unison melody adds nothing (even if they managed to sing on key).

 

[wintremute]

The video sounds awful, just being honest. The band was good, so I don’t mean you sound awful, but if I walked into that bar, I woulda done a quick about face at first sight of the 2 lead singers in unison. IMO, you guys did singer 1 wrong by letting singer 2 even get to the point where he was singing any lead vocals (beyond maybe a couple songs in a night maybe, just to change it up if singer 1 was cool with it). Singer 2 should have always been a “utility guy” in your band or nothing... singing HARMONIES and playing 2nd guitar, keys, a shaker, something (whatever fits each song best). If he’s not capable of this, there’s no reason to have the extra member, especially when you’re dividing up the pay!

If you want this band to succeed without having to find a new singer and start over, I suggest you apologize to singer 1 for putting him through this whole silly experiment, and tell singer 2 it’s the utility position + singing harmonies, or you’ll need to find a different utility guy that can do it. Even just the absence of singer 2 would be an improvement over your current situation IMO. Also, explain nicely to singer 1 that he needs to put the time into learning/memorizing the songs better or there may be future issues.

I have belatedly come to this same conclusion.

 

[The Bass Clef]

I have belatedly come to this same conclusion.

I hope this can still be done and it’s not too late.

 

[wintremute]

I hope this can still be done and it’s not too late.

We will see tonight.

 

[Eminor3rd]

If I was Singer 1, I'd be weird about it too. You say you're bringing in a backup singer, and he instantly becomes a... doubled lead singer? And when the incumbent is understandably confused, the solution is to take him out of half the songs? ***?

I have no idea why you brought the second guy in in the first place, and if he's the worse singer and also maybe has an alcohol problem, the solution is simple -- get rid of the second guy. You never needed him.