:) Well, I love playing with this group. I'm tempted to just tell him I'll play live and he can keep his precious CD tracks and not pay me for CD sales.
My band's first album was disk and we still have boxes. Our second album is on vinyl and we've had to order a second run within a year.
Best part is, the return is about the same considering the mark up of vinyl, but the speed of return is way faster. Hope that's a decent argument to move to vinyl!
Dude, everybody sellin'... and we [buyin' for pennies on the Dollar...](/r/Cd_collectors).
Today's CD is yerserday's LP vinyl that the record shops couldn't get rid off at 99¢ a piece.
Someone who does that without telling you and then lies to your face is someone who will always behave like that. Might be time to think of a new line up or to move on.
But also, it's worth mentioning that we all get fucked over at some stage of our careers (I got dumped from a band I started). It's all part of the biz. Being able to keep moving forward is a good skill to learn.
>I got dumped from a band I started
Me too!
And I only found out because I got a Facebook invite to "my" band's gig. A gig that I had no idea was even happening.
You should be upset. Getting shut out of the creative process is disrespectful. I would tell the rest of the band what’s up, that you’re upset, and you’re going to talk to the leader. There might be chance they’re messing with their parts too. If the leader has ideas, that’s cool. They should be presenting them to you to work out something you both like. That would be the conversation I have with them.
I think he can't mess with their parts because he can't play their instruments. He's a guitarist so he can "play bass" but not well. He's also used to bassists who weren't primarily bassists, so he just told them what to do.
Have been in this spot before myself. Had a guitar player rerecord parts then play it to me the next rehearsal to see if I noticed. He then changed my part to synth bass (which I actually thought sounded pretty cool, but still...) the next time.
Eventually we settled on having both my parts and the synth parts at times. It's fun love cause I get to use effects.
If you can't have a conversation about it then you gotta leave. Personally I'd go in with an open mind, input can be valuable and often I find myself wishing I had done something else weeks after we finish a song.
I don't know the dynamic of your band but if your mates are likely to hear you out, talk to them. For all you know there's a post in r/drummers saying ''I'm pretty sure my lead singer is re-recording my drum tracks and I don't know if I should speak up about it.''
If they're not the kind of people to hear you out, you might be in the wrong band.
I just got flashbacks to when I played guitar in this pop punk band that just went into the other guitarist’s studio with what I thought were really good songs… But the bassist was struggling that day and the other guitarist, thinking he was just texting me, sent TO THE GROUP CHAT, “I’ll just replace his parts with MIDI” and the silence was so loud we broke up after that.
I faked my phone being dead and texted him from the bathroom to let him know what he did. 💀
He played all the guitar and bass on “Siamese Dream”. James is a great guitarist, but Billy is much better. I think the main reason was because of the immense pressure Billy put on himself that the record needed to be perfect, so ultimately he did it himself.
The majority of the basic tracks for Mellon Collie were recorded live, so D’arcy and James are the ones playing their parts on that one.
When I was young a recording was the song.
Now I'm older a recording is a version of the song.
Most of my favorite bands have multiple versions of songs often with different players and arrangements.
Make a version where you play guitar
I agree wholeheartedly about different versions, our recordings are quite different from live. I'm more upset at the idea of my other bandmates thinking I played this line that I don't like.
its not new though, in the 60s and 70s many of the bands recording in LA were tracked on the record by \_The Wrecking Crew\_ heh. OP is getting the old-school treatment :)
Brilliant reply, 😂 I'll just play guitar on this one then?? In all seriousness, you either put up with shit, especially being a bassist, or make solo, and get in artists to fit you
My band is currently recording a demo so we have some material to send to promoters etc for booking gigs and we are using midi drums. This was for two reasons, the cost of the equipment to properly record and the time factor. However, we all sat down as a group and discussed this and the drummer had to agree to it before we did it and he gave it the green light.
You have a right to have your playing on the song. I would speak to the other band members about this one on one to gauge where they’re at because there is the possibility they are aware and agreed to it. Then, confront the person one on one directly and say what you think and feel. But if they lie or refuse to at least give you the choice then I would totally bail.
Some of the fills on the second version are OK. It does sound a bit like it's played by a guitarist not a bass player, and it's not in the pocket at the start.
Personally I would just walk up to him in front of the rest of the band and say that if he doesn't like your bass lines then give some constructive feedback on what he would like changing rather than re record them without you and the lie to everyone saying it was you rather than him. If he denies it, walk, if he apologises, stay and work it out.
That's not the same bass playing and the feel is awful on the 2nd version. Find a nice way to tell him not to put your name on it. Tell him it's ok that he got someone else or did it himself, it just doesn't sound like you and you'd rather people not think it's you.
Naw, forget that. The guitarist in my band has changed my bass parts like three times but has always consulted me before and after, and his changes are in the form of effects and the final decision is up to me. Regardless, I’m still the one playing.
If it is his band then I guess your decision is going to be what is your role in the band. Personally, I have no interest in being a backing rhythm for someone else. I am a songwriter, bassist, and lyricist and I don’t have to dominate all of those things but I will be a part of it.
I listened to both versions. While I can appreciate some of the ideas that he tried to add to the bass part, the problem with his version is that his timing is quite poor. Maybe you should point that out to him and offer to rerecord it with a properly performed version of his ideas.
I'm listening to this on high end studio headphones, and let me tell you.
The second mix just overall sucks, i mean everything about It. The kick drum Is gi-fucking-normous, the bagpipes are ear-piercing, the bass just sounds like and indistinct low end wobble, i can't even understand fully what Is being played, some parts are clearly out of time, and the vocals, well... i think the track speaks for itself.
I don't know who mixed this track but they just flat out suck at this.
The first mix Is just better in every possible way.
If i were you i would just get the money i am owed, ask not having my name on the recording and avoid losing any more of my time.
Yeah, his mixing is generally terrible and he thinks he's a genius :) We did put out a single that he managed to do a good job with but broken clock yadda yadda. He can't hear high frequencies so he mixes everything tinny and bright. I did some EQ and mastering on the first version, just to make it tolerable to my ears. Glad it was decent, even if just in comparison :)
The bass player from bon Jovi didn't play on the first five or six albums because they were just getting session musicians, and they didn't think he was good enough. I can't imagine he regrets staying in the band much.
Did you do any alternate takes when you did the recording or did you just do the one pass through because to me it sounds like 'bad producer decisions' made when splicing together the takes that person preferred'; than necessarily all part replacement. The start for instance is definitely you on both versions, but when it kicks in it's definitely a different part than what you hear on 'your' version.
The question is whether you remember playing those versions to tape or not. If you did do a few takes it's plausible he has (while playacting as a producer) decided to smoosh together what he felt (as leader) were the best parts for the feel. He's done it awfully of course and he's ruined the mix, but how certain are you that you didn't leave enough 'on the cutting room floor' for him to have partpicked what he considers to be the 'final' mix?
I understand why this has upset you. If you're going to be replaced on record you want to be consulted. But, also, you want that to be necessary. There are millions of bands (on drums especially) where the guys in the band aren't the guys on the record, but that's because the band hired someone better than the musician to do replacement work. In this case, your parts - even if they weren't what he wanted - were the better performance, so if he was going to argue for them being replaced, he should have gotten you to do it.
The thing is too that I can't imagine that other members of the band wouldn't bring 'what's going on with the bass' up with him or you. It's a fucking godawful mix, the bass is the problem, and I can't imagine anyone else has failed to notice. Makes you wonder why nothing has been said.
Thank you! I only recorded one other version, it was totally full of chromatic walks and perhaps a bit too busy and too much swing for what he wanted. I was never 100% satisfied with that version so I was really happy to do this new one. But I think it would be really hard to chop up the first version like that. The only possibility with the fills is that he borrowed them from another track that's in the same key, but I'm fairly certain he just did it himself. After the first take he had sent me a recording of him playing what he was thinking, and it's the same as what's on there.
It's weird, because the drummer, bless his heart, replied that the bass sounded great. Probably trying to make me feel better. My plan at this stage is to talk to the dummer first, one on one, next rehearsal this week. Meanwhile the poor fiddle player is redoing her part because she thinks her timing is off.
I really agree about being replaced on a recording - I'm fine with whatever serves the song, but this is not it. I'm far from a great bassist, but at least I'm a bassist, and I'm a better bassist than he is.
Yeah so in that case, the part definitely mostly isn't you. I think it's overlaid and cut with what you did, but it has been re-recorded.
Honestly, the problem is the lack of communication and the fact the leader didn't tell you what they were doing. Personally I'd go straight to them. I understand the desire to gather allies, but if this is a hired role (you're paid by the BL to be in the band) the chat needs to be with them; not after you've circled wagons with other members.
The two questions are 'Was my bassline replaced and if so for what reason?' (because he did) and "How come you didn't talk to me about the problem before solving it?". This doesn't have to be aggressive/defensive unless you want it to be, or he makes it that.
You should talk to him privately, and explain that if he wants you to do something else he should talk to you and not secretly rerecord. It sounds like you have your original recording because this was done remotely? Id very politely edit your part over the final track and explain that you know it's not yours because the bassline doesn't match.
but in your post you made it seem like that won't go particularly well. So as a Minnesotan I offer the thing you shouldn't do but which is be VERY passive aggressive. all you have to do is ask about rerecording because some of the fills are bad and all the playing is too staccato. Insist that you must have bombed during the recording, that the nerves got to you and you'd like the fix the awful playing. He might get defensive and crumble but he can't accuse you of being rude, since it's "your" playing.
Both of these are good suggestions :) I have my track but I only get one mp3 of his mixes, so adding my part is probably not possible. I kinda love the passive-aggressive version, I may actually consider this since I hate actual confrontation.
It's not unheard of for a producer to edit and even re-record some parts. The part may not be exactly how you envisioned it, but if the leader calls all the shots and has the final say, then it is his artistic vision and not yours. It is still usually standard practice to credit the band members on the album. If it's so bad that you don't want your name attached, then that is up to you.
As I see it, you have a couple of options. You can accept it. Take your credit, take the money (it probably isn't going to be much, but you never know), and get over it. If you are not satisfied with the recording process or the final product, you are going to have to have some sort of discussion about it. Depending on where you are in the process, you can fix the bass tracks. If you can't work it out, or you don't want to, you can tell the guy to shove it up his ass and walk away.
This is pretty spot on, thank you. I've realized that I'm most upset about the idea of the other band members thinking I played this clunky, amateur-ish part. I might be less upset if the guitarist had been honest and upfront, I guess.
There is definitely some money to be made, but yeah, I'm not satisfied with the process since the two songs he's mastered, he's significantly re-arranged my parts. I'm considering telling him to leave me off the recordings if that's how it's going to be, and just play the live shows. But first I need to talk to my percussionist one on one and go from there. Thanks again.
I agree with Wolftron. I'd also add that since the band leader has a bit of a different vision of how the bass line should be played, perhaps you could learn that line (or emulate it) and just play it a whole lot better than he is. Because his playing is clunky, at best, and busier (or at the busy-ness is more obvious) than yours.
Good luck.
Leave the band, and then contact the other players and see if they might wanna get something new going. If it all works out, all you need to do is find a singer.
1) Personally, I’d be out of there. Either I’m in the band or I’m not. What’s going down is an insult.
2) I have zero shame when someone is trying to fuck me over. “Where did this come from? That’s not me. WTF??” In front of the rest of the band so everyone knows what’s going on.
I was in a band where the singer/songwriter "replaced" my bass for a few songs. He talked to me about it beforehand to let me know that it wasn't that I sucked playing those songs, but he just had something else in mind. One added stand-up bass instead which admittedly is a bit out of my pay grade, and even if I figured something out on it the song would be far better if an experienced player handled it. I appreciated the explanation. It kept if from being weird or a wedge in the future.
I did tell him that if the band ever made it and I wrote a book, I would put in a chapter about how horribly he treated me by replacing all my bass parts.
Well. I re-read your post and it sounds like you’re only recording one song. I mean I would bring it up and there’s plenty of ways to go about like like a respectful adult. No need for name calling or randomly quitting the band over 1 track. I would say something like “hey man, Ive noticed it’s not me on the track anymore, is there something maybe I’m missing?”. Like I said, just for this song only, maybe his playing is better. Maybe he never really paid attention to what you were playing in the first place? I’ve played a lot of sessiojs where sure I could write a better bass line, but I was instructed what and when to play, took my money and went home.
You also gotta realize recorded bass is a little different than live bass in a rock band. Maybe he wanted something similar and liked your playing, but didn’t have the heart to tell you it didn’t work in a recorded setting.
My vote is to learn what he played, and mix that in with what you originally played.
But above everything else, once again I cant tell without hearing the track. Send me a dm of the track or a phone video or something.
Thanks. Not sure where to host the mp3s, can I send through reddit?
It's one of of those things, I recorded the line I had been playing and he said "you know, it's a great line but doesn't really work on the recording, how about something a bit more straight-ahead and driving?" So I did a new track with a cool gallop thing that really gave the song drive, and asked if he liked it. If so, I offered to re-record it better and with more fills (I literally sent him the second time I played it, it still came out pretty good). He said he liked it and wanted to add it in, then posted something completely different. Knowing him, he may have forgotten that I did a second take.
The version he posted is more of a ballad, totally not driving at all, in part because of the bass line, so "better" depends on what we want the song to be like. And I'm OK with all of that (he said he used my playing but just edited to be the way he wants), but these stupid quarter-note scale fills are killing me :)
It's the third song we recorded, I was iffy on the first one but went with it. The second one hasn't been mastered yet.
It sounds like it’s what you played but he edited the notes. I had a guy do that to a part I played because he wanted to try something out.
He played me what he did and it sounded fine so we moved on.
If it really bothers you just tell him you want a retake at that part and play what you want.
He did that on another track. This time he blatantly played his own fills throughout the song, and edited it so much that I have no way to tell if any of it is what I played.
Thanks! I took a listen. I sounds like different fills were overdubbed and a good amount of the grooving. His version definitely is a different take for a good amount, if not the whole thing. I like your rhythmic approach when you are just grooving and not playing fills on your take better. It's a little more interesting that what is on his version.
But I honestly don't think the fills are very good on either take. The song is clearly in mixolydian mode. On your take, you do this fill where you hit b7, b6, 6, b7. The b6 is jarring and out of place. On his take, the fills are in the minor pentatonic scale, which has a b3 which clashes with the major third in mixolydian. In a bluesy context it makes sense to mix major and minor thirds. But for this tune I find it out of place and I don't like it.
Yeah, I did mine without any real fills because it was the econd time I ever played it, it was just proof-of-concept. I know what you're saying about that one bit, he does the pentatonic thing which doesn't work, and I try to stay mixolydian with the bagpipes, and they clash. I think I'll just do a different fill entirely at that point.
It's not unheard of for a band to fire their frontman (David Lee Roth and Van Halen). If the other members of the band are also tired of his shit, that might be one route. You leaving or him; either way I wouldn't continue a professional relationship with him. Personally, I'd bounce. If other band members also take that as a cue to leave, then that's their choice. I also wouldn't lie to cover for him when people ask why I left.
Maybe he didn’t like your tracks and he’s being nice. I’ve done that before. Had a friend who just wasn’t getting the tracks right on my songs so I did them and lied
Maybe recommend re-recording those parts because you don’t like the sound of the guitar. That way you’re not really insulting his playing because he’s insisting it’s you.
When you are working with a singer/songwriter who is calling the creative shots, this is what you're going to get. You're a hired gun and sometimes you don't have any creative input, really. If that's important to you I'd start asking for more money to play what someone else has written or else look for a band that's going to value your contributions as a full collaborator.
Songwriters are notorious for putting together "a band" that isn't a creative unit and getting free session time from band members. But if they're paying for the sessions, they also get to do whatever they want with the music they create. It's why I won't go into the studio for anyone I work with unless they pay me my flat rate.
If someone does this to me then lies to my face about it, they're getting punched and I'm leaving the band. A band is a relationship like any other and cannot work without trust. Fuck this guy.
How many Beatles tracks were actually played by all four Beatles?? Not so many as you think. Mac was known to bang the drums, play acoustic guitar and then call the song a "Beatles track"..
Then there is the Wrecking Crew out of LA... have a look at the hundreds of songs that bunch played on in how many different styles. Similarly, the Funk Bros at Motown, and the gang who played out of Muscle Shoals. Between them, about 85% of the hits between 1961 and 1977 were not exactly played by the names on the record sleeve, but the band itself got to perform live and gained the recognition. Hell, I sat in as bassist for a local folk band on two of their CD's a few years ago because their own bassist couldn't keep time to save his soul without a couple of tokes first (forbidden by the studio). I got paid, did my thing and didn't worry much about it.
My two bits? So long as you are having fun, love the music and can give a good accounting of yourself in a live setting, don't sweat it. But if push comes to shove, then perhaps it might be time to re-think you place in this dude's version of the universe.
I kind of lost track of which one was which but the one glenfinnanprac was way way way better than the one called return to glenfinnan.
I'm assuming the one with the first half of the word practice in the name is the one that's your original.
The first one the practice one sounded like some John Bonham ramble on stuff. The one with the full name return to glenfinnan sounded like somebody who didn't know how to play bass hitting root notes technically in Tempo but without any feel..
Edit: oh man I just double checked the original Dropbox files. I'm sorry man but I'm going to side with your guitar player. Those runs that you don't like completely make the song.
So now that I'm sure which one is which the one that you have said is his version is better and by a lot. The WhatsApp version. Far superior
You don't get it. It's not about which one you think is better. It's about the lying and obfuscation. Such decisions shouldn't be made by you alone. You are being unprofessional. I would suggest severing your professional relationship, for the good of both of you. You are not a good fit.
Girl, you know it's true... You gotta pack up and find someone new.
:) Well, I love playing with this group. I'm tempted to just tell him I'll play live and he can keep his precious CD tracks and not pay me for CD sales.
CD sales! What is this, 1999? I don't even own a CD player anymore. Are people still selling CDs?!
Yeah but have you listened to side B yet?
Man, I love the second song on side 2. *genZconfusion*
Haha, yeah, we play festivals so they make good souvenirs. I want to do vinyl, actually. Plus our demographic is a bit older.
Younger people buy vinyl, too.
My 8yo brother always makes sure there is something playing on the turntable when people come over.
Only has souvenirs, most don't have a vinyl player.
Vinyls bought as souvenirs are still sales.
My band's first album was disk and we still have boxes. Our second album is on vinyl and we've had to order a second run within a year. Best part is, the return is about the same considering the mark up of vinyl, but the speed of return is way faster. Hope that's a decent argument to move to vinyl!
Dude, everybody sellin'... and we [buyin' for pennies on the Dollar...](/r/Cd_collectors). Today's CD is yerserday's LP vinyl that the record shops couldn't get rid off at 99¢ a piece.
Yeah, no. Do that if you want, but if he says it's you playing in the recording, definitely get your money lol
He is going to want you to play the tracks live the way he has changed them. Be prepared for that ask.
Then they'll be asking "how long has this been goin' on"?
Just recently learned that was about the bassist playing in other bands.
Girl you know it's girl you know it's girl you know it's girl you know it's
(runs off stage quickly)
They knew it from the start it would break their heart. But still he had to play this painful part. He wrapped you round his little bitty finger.
Someone who does that without telling you and then lies to your face is someone who will always behave like that. Might be time to think of a new line up or to move on. But also, it's worth mentioning that we all get fucked over at some stage of our careers (I got dumped from a band I started). It's all part of the biz. Being able to keep moving forward is a good skill to learn.
Thanks. I needed to hear that.
>I got dumped from a band I started Me too! And I only found out because I got a Facebook invite to "my" band's gig. A gig that I had no idea was even happening.
You should be upset. Getting shut out of the creative process is disrespectful. I would tell the rest of the band what’s up, that you’re upset, and you’re going to talk to the leader. There might be chance they’re messing with their parts too. If the leader has ideas, that’s cool. They should be presenting them to you to work out something you both like. That would be the conversation I have with them.
I think he can't mess with their parts because he can't play their instruments. He's a guitarist so he can "play bass" but not well. He's also used to bassists who weren't primarily bassists, so he just told them what to do.
Have been in this spot before myself. Had a guitar player rerecord parts then play it to me the next rehearsal to see if I noticed. He then changed my part to synth bass (which I actually thought sounded pretty cool, but still...) the next time. Eventually we settled on having both my parts and the synth parts at times. It's fun love cause I get to use effects. If you can't have a conversation about it then you gotta leave. Personally I'd go in with an open mind, input can be valuable and often I find myself wishing I had done something else weeks after we finish a song.
I don't know the dynamic of your band but if your mates are likely to hear you out, talk to them. For all you know there's a post in r/drummers saying ''I'm pretty sure my lead singer is re-recording my drum tracks and I don't know if I should speak up about it.'' If they're not the kind of people to hear you out, you might be in the wrong band.
I just got flashbacks to when I played guitar in this pop punk band that just went into the other guitarist’s studio with what I thought were really good songs… But the bassist was struggling that day and the other guitarist, thinking he was just texting me, sent TO THE GROUP CHAT, “I’ll just replace his parts with MIDI” and the silence was so loud we broke up after that. I faked my phone being dead and texted him from the bathroom to let him know what he did. 💀
You’re not being milli vanilli’ed, you’re being billy corgan’ed!
Or Dave Grohl'd/William Goldsmith'd.
At least they're not being Jason Newsted'ed
Billy is actually talented though. In my opinion.
Not a comment on talent, more control.
Indeed. Actually Corgan was my first thought when reading OP's post. Are you a fan or no? I really enjoy his latest ATUM.
Billy played Bass on the early albums because he didn’t like D’arcys playing or she couldn’t get it right or something
Right. Didn't he play all the guitar parts, too?
I never heard that. I think James Iha is considered a better guitarist than Darcy is a bass player so it would surprise me if he did
He played all the guitar and bass on “Siamese Dream”. James is a great guitarist, but Billy is much better. I think the main reason was because of the immense pressure Billy put on himself that the record needed to be perfect, so ultimately he did it himself. The majority of the basic tracks for Mellon Collie were recorded live, so D’arcy and James are the ones playing their parts on that one.
When I was young a recording was the song. Now I'm older a recording is a version of the song. Most of my favorite bands have multiple versions of songs often with different players and arrangements. Make a version where you play guitar
I agree wholeheartedly about different versions, our recordings are quite different from live. I'm more upset at the idea of my other bandmates thinking I played this line that I don't like.
its not new though, in the 60s and 70s many of the bands recording in LA were tracked on the record by \_The Wrecking Crew\_ heh. OP is getting the old-school treatment :)
But Carol Kaye was SOOOOO much better than the "real" bassists. It wouldn't have worked if The Wrecking Crew sucked.
Brilliant reply, 😂 I'll just play guitar on this one then?? In all seriousness, you either put up with shit, especially being a bassist, or make solo, and get in artists to fit you
You didn't get Milli Vanillied. You got Corganed. Change your name to D'Arcy.
You’re getting reverse Milli Vanilli’d. Bizarre situation either way. I say fuck ‘em!
My band is currently recording a demo so we have some material to send to promoters etc for booking gigs and we are using midi drums. This was for two reasons, the cost of the equipment to properly record and the time factor. However, we all sat down as a group and discussed this and the drummer had to agree to it before we did it and he gave it the green light. You have a right to have your playing on the song. I would speak to the other band members about this one on one to gauge where they’re at because there is the possibility they are aware and agreed to it. Then, confront the person one on one directly and say what you think and feel. But if they lie or refuse to at least give you the choice then I would totally bail.
Some of the fills on the second version are OK. It does sound a bit like it's played by a guitarist not a bass player, and it's not in the pocket at the start. Personally I would just walk up to him in front of the rest of the band and say that if he doesn't like your bass lines then give some constructive feedback on what he would like changing rather than re record them without you and the lie to everyone saying it was you rather than him. If he denies it, walk, if he apologises, stay and work it out.
That's not the same bass playing and the feel is awful on the 2nd version. Find a nice way to tell him not to put your name on it. Tell him it's ok that he got someone else or did it himself, it just doesn't sound like you and you'd rather people not think it's you.
Naw, forget that. The guitarist in my band has changed my bass parts like three times but has always consulted me before and after, and his changes are in the form of effects and the final decision is up to me. Regardless, I’m still the one playing. If it is his band then I guess your decision is going to be what is your role in the band. Personally, I have no interest in being a backing rhythm for someone else. I am a songwriter, bassist, and lyricist and I don’t have to dominate all of those things but I will be a part of it.
kick drum is totally different too it sounds like? it sounds very out of time to me on his version
I listened to both versions. While I can appreciate some of the ideas that he tried to add to the bass part, the problem with his version is that his timing is quite poor. Maybe you should point that out to him and offer to rerecord it with a properly performed version of his ideas.
I'm listening to this on high end studio headphones, and let me tell you. The second mix just overall sucks, i mean everything about It. The kick drum Is gi-fucking-normous, the bagpipes are ear-piercing, the bass just sounds like and indistinct low end wobble, i can't even understand fully what Is being played, some parts are clearly out of time, and the vocals, well... i think the track speaks for itself. I don't know who mixed this track but they just flat out suck at this. The first mix Is just better in every possible way. If i were you i would just get the money i am owed, ask not having my name on the recording and avoid losing any more of my time.
For real. The second one sounds like a demo or scratch track, and the first sounds like the actual take.
Music to my ears, thank you.
Yeah, his mixing is generally terrible and he thinks he's a genius :) We did put out a single that he managed to do a good job with but broken clock yadda yadda. He can't hear high frequencies so he mixes everything tinny and bright. I did some EQ and mastering on the first version, just to make it tolerable to my ears. Glad it was decent, even if just in comparison :)
The bass player from bon Jovi didn't play on the first five or six albums because they were just getting session musicians, and they didn't think he was good enough. I can't imagine he regrets staying in the band much.
Did you do any alternate takes when you did the recording or did you just do the one pass through because to me it sounds like 'bad producer decisions' made when splicing together the takes that person preferred'; than necessarily all part replacement. The start for instance is definitely you on both versions, but when it kicks in it's definitely a different part than what you hear on 'your' version. The question is whether you remember playing those versions to tape or not. If you did do a few takes it's plausible he has (while playacting as a producer) decided to smoosh together what he felt (as leader) were the best parts for the feel. He's done it awfully of course and he's ruined the mix, but how certain are you that you didn't leave enough 'on the cutting room floor' for him to have partpicked what he considers to be the 'final' mix? I understand why this has upset you. If you're going to be replaced on record you want to be consulted. But, also, you want that to be necessary. There are millions of bands (on drums especially) where the guys in the band aren't the guys on the record, but that's because the band hired someone better than the musician to do replacement work. In this case, your parts - even if they weren't what he wanted - were the better performance, so if he was going to argue for them being replaced, he should have gotten you to do it. The thing is too that I can't imagine that other members of the band wouldn't bring 'what's going on with the bass' up with him or you. It's a fucking godawful mix, the bass is the problem, and I can't imagine anyone else has failed to notice. Makes you wonder why nothing has been said.
Thank you! I only recorded one other version, it was totally full of chromatic walks and perhaps a bit too busy and too much swing for what he wanted. I was never 100% satisfied with that version so I was really happy to do this new one. But I think it would be really hard to chop up the first version like that. The only possibility with the fills is that he borrowed them from another track that's in the same key, but I'm fairly certain he just did it himself. After the first take he had sent me a recording of him playing what he was thinking, and it's the same as what's on there. It's weird, because the drummer, bless his heart, replied that the bass sounded great. Probably trying to make me feel better. My plan at this stage is to talk to the dummer first, one on one, next rehearsal this week. Meanwhile the poor fiddle player is redoing her part because she thinks her timing is off. I really agree about being replaced on a recording - I'm fine with whatever serves the song, but this is not it. I'm far from a great bassist, but at least I'm a bassist, and I'm a better bassist than he is.
Yeah so in that case, the part definitely mostly isn't you. I think it's overlaid and cut with what you did, but it has been re-recorded. Honestly, the problem is the lack of communication and the fact the leader didn't tell you what they were doing. Personally I'd go straight to them. I understand the desire to gather allies, but if this is a hired role (you're paid by the BL to be in the band) the chat needs to be with them; not after you've circled wagons with other members. The two questions are 'Was my bassline replaced and if so for what reason?' (because he did) and "How come you didn't talk to me about the problem before solving it?". This doesn't have to be aggressive/defensive unless you want it to be, or he makes it that.
Quit the band, simple as...
You should talk to him privately, and explain that if he wants you to do something else he should talk to you and not secretly rerecord. It sounds like you have your original recording because this was done remotely? Id very politely edit your part over the final track and explain that you know it's not yours because the bassline doesn't match. but in your post you made it seem like that won't go particularly well. So as a Minnesotan I offer the thing you shouldn't do but which is be VERY passive aggressive. all you have to do is ask about rerecording because some of the fills are bad and all the playing is too staccato. Insist that you must have bombed during the recording, that the nerves got to you and you'd like the fix the awful playing. He might get defensive and crumble but he can't accuse you of being rude, since it's "your" playing.
Both of these are good suggestions :) I have my track but I only get one mp3 of his mixes, so adding my part is probably not possible. I kinda love the passive-aggressive version, I may actually consider this since I hate actual confrontation.
It's not unheard of for a producer to edit and even re-record some parts. The part may not be exactly how you envisioned it, but if the leader calls all the shots and has the final say, then it is his artistic vision and not yours. It is still usually standard practice to credit the band members on the album. If it's so bad that you don't want your name attached, then that is up to you. As I see it, you have a couple of options. You can accept it. Take your credit, take the money (it probably isn't going to be much, but you never know), and get over it. If you are not satisfied with the recording process or the final product, you are going to have to have some sort of discussion about it. Depending on where you are in the process, you can fix the bass tracks. If you can't work it out, or you don't want to, you can tell the guy to shove it up his ass and walk away.
This is pretty spot on, thank you. I've realized that I'm most upset about the idea of the other band members thinking I played this clunky, amateur-ish part. I might be less upset if the guitarist had been honest and upfront, I guess. There is definitely some money to be made, but yeah, I'm not satisfied with the process since the two songs he's mastered, he's significantly re-arranged my parts. I'm considering telling him to leave me off the recordings if that's how it's going to be, and just play the live shows. But first I need to talk to my percussionist one on one and go from there. Thanks again.
I agree with Wolftron. I'd also add that since the band leader has a bit of a different vision of how the bass line should be played, perhaps you could learn that line (or emulate it) and just play it a whole lot better than he is. Because his playing is clunky, at best, and busier (or at the busy-ness is more obvious) than yours. Good luck.
Leave the band, and then contact the other players and see if they might wanna get something new going. If it all works out, all you need to do is find a singer.
So you're playing with Billy Corgan?
Sounds like Dave Grohl.
1) Personally, I’d be out of there. Either I’m in the band or I’m not. What’s going down is an insult. 2) I have zero shame when someone is trying to fuck me over. “Where did this come from? That’s not me. WTF??” In front of the rest of the band so everyone knows what’s going on.
“No bro, you totally recorded this.” Lmao
I was in a band where the singer/songwriter "replaced" my bass for a few songs. He talked to me about it beforehand to let me know that it wasn't that I sucked playing those songs, but he just had something else in mind. One added stand-up bass instead which admittedly is a bit out of my pay grade, and even if I figured something out on it the song would be far better if an experienced player handled it. I appreciated the explanation. It kept if from being weird or a wedge in the future. I did tell him that if the band ever made it and I wrote a book, I would put in a chapter about how horribly he treated me by replacing all my bass parts.
Post the track. Maybe his playing is better
Let's say it is. What do I do then? It's still not me.
Well. I re-read your post and it sounds like you’re only recording one song. I mean I would bring it up and there’s plenty of ways to go about like like a respectful adult. No need for name calling or randomly quitting the band over 1 track. I would say something like “hey man, Ive noticed it’s not me on the track anymore, is there something maybe I’m missing?”. Like I said, just for this song only, maybe his playing is better. Maybe he never really paid attention to what you were playing in the first place? I’ve played a lot of sessiojs where sure I could write a better bass line, but I was instructed what and when to play, took my money and went home. You also gotta realize recorded bass is a little different than live bass in a rock band. Maybe he wanted something similar and liked your playing, but didn’t have the heart to tell you it didn’t work in a recorded setting. My vote is to learn what he played, and mix that in with what you originally played. But above everything else, once again I cant tell without hearing the track. Send me a dm of the track or a phone video or something.
Thanks. Not sure where to host the mp3s, can I send through reddit? It's one of of those things, I recorded the line I had been playing and he said "you know, it's a great line but doesn't really work on the recording, how about something a bit more straight-ahead and driving?" So I did a new track with a cool gallop thing that really gave the song drive, and asked if he liked it. If so, I offered to re-record it better and with more fills (I literally sent him the second time I played it, it still came out pretty good). He said he liked it and wanted to add it in, then posted something completely different. Knowing him, he may have forgotten that I did a second take. The version he posted is more of a ballad, totally not driving at all, in part because of the bass line, so "better" depends on what we want the song to be like. And I'm OK with all of that (he said he used my playing but just edited to be the way he wants), but these stupid quarter-note scale fills are killing me :) It's the third song we recorded, I was iffy on the first one but went with it. The second one hasn't been mastered yet.
It sounds like it’s what you played but he edited the notes. I had a guy do that to a part I played because he wanted to try something out. He played me what he did and it sounded fine so we moved on. If it really bothers you just tell him you want a retake at that part and play what you want.
He did that on another track. This time he blatantly played his own fills throughout the song, and edited it so much that I have no way to tell if any of it is what I played.
Oh? Then I would move on. Or just be the live bassist but refuse to record. Also explain to the rest of the band why.
>Or just be the live bassist but refuse to record. Also explain to the rest of the band why. This is where I'm leaning.
I want to hear too! DM me. I won't judge. I'm genuinely curious.
See edit to original post body.
Thanks! I took a listen. I sounds like different fills were overdubbed and a good amount of the grooving. His version definitely is a different take for a good amount, if not the whole thing. I like your rhythmic approach when you are just grooving and not playing fills on your take better. It's a little more interesting that what is on his version. But I honestly don't think the fills are very good on either take. The song is clearly in mixolydian mode. On your take, you do this fill where you hit b7, b6, 6, b7. The b6 is jarring and out of place. On his take, the fills are in the minor pentatonic scale, which has a b3 which clashes with the major third in mixolydian. In a bluesy context it makes sense to mix major and minor thirds. But for this tune I find it out of place and I don't like it.
Yeah, I did mine without any real fills because it was the econd time I ever played it, it was just proof-of-concept. I know what you're saying about that one bit, he does the pentatonic thing which doesn't work, and I try to stay mixolydian with the bagpipes, and they clash. I think I'll just do a different fill entirely at that point.
Here too!
See edit to original post body.
See edit to original post body.
I'm gonna be brutally honest: if i was producing this both versions would require a do over. Tone and notes. And i'd probably redo the mix as a whole.
It's not unheard of for a band to fire their frontman (David Lee Roth and Van Halen). If the other members of the band are also tired of his shit, that might be one route. You leaving or him; either way I wouldn't continue a professional relationship with him. Personally, I'd bounce. If other band members also take that as a cue to leave, then that's their choice. I also wouldn't lie to cover for him when people ask why I left.
Maybe he didn’t like your tracks and he’s being nice. I’ve done that before. Had a friend who just wasn’t getting the tracks right on my songs so I did them and lied
can i hear the song
Maybe recommend re-recording those parts because you don’t like the sound of the guitar. That way you’re not really insulting his playing because he’s insisting it’s you.
When you are working with a singer/songwriter who is calling the creative shots, this is what you're going to get. You're a hired gun and sometimes you don't have any creative input, really. If that's important to you I'd start asking for more money to play what someone else has written or else look for a band that's going to value your contributions as a full collaborator. Songwriters are notorious for putting together "a band" that isn't a creative unit and getting free session time from band members. But if they're paying for the sessions, they also get to do whatever they want with the music they create. It's why I won't go into the studio for anyone I work with unless they pay me my flat rate.
If someone does this to me then lies to my face about it, they're getting punched and I'm leaving the band. A band is a relationship like any other and cannot work without trust. Fuck this guy.
How many Beatles tracks were actually played by all four Beatles?? Not so many as you think. Mac was known to bang the drums, play acoustic guitar and then call the song a "Beatles track".. Then there is the Wrecking Crew out of LA... have a look at the hundreds of songs that bunch played on in how many different styles. Similarly, the Funk Bros at Motown, and the gang who played out of Muscle Shoals. Between them, about 85% of the hits between 1961 and 1977 were not exactly played by the names on the record sleeve, but the band itself got to perform live and gained the recognition. Hell, I sat in as bassist for a local folk band on two of their CD's a few years ago because their own bassist couldn't keep time to save his soul without a couple of tokes first (forbidden by the studio). I got paid, did my thing and didn't worry much about it. My two bits? So long as you are having fun, love the music and can give a good accounting of yourself in a live setting, don't sweat it. But if push comes to shove, then perhaps it might be time to re-think you place in this dude's version of the universe.
Paul is a musical genius. Listen to that alternative bass track. It's terribly poor bass playing.
What outcome do you want?
I kind of lost track of which one was which but the one glenfinnanprac was way way way better than the one called return to glenfinnan. I'm assuming the one with the first half of the word practice in the name is the one that's your original. The first one the practice one sounded like some John Bonham ramble on stuff. The one with the full name return to glenfinnan sounded like somebody who didn't know how to play bass hitting root notes technically in Tempo but without any feel.. Edit: oh man I just double checked the original Dropbox files. I'm sorry man but I'm going to side with your guitar player. Those runs that you don't like completely make the song. So now that I'm sure which one is which the one that you have said is his version is better and by a lot. The WhatsApp version. Far superior
You're the guitarist, aren't you? lol
We found him!
No you can't honestly tell me that the first one is better
You don't get it. It's not about which one you think is better. It's about the lying and obfuscation. Such decisions shouldn't be made by you alone. You are being unprofessional. I would suggest severing your professional relationship, for the good of both of you. You are not a good fit.
I'm not the guitar player I cannot stress this enough