Who are the Foo Fighters without Dave Grohl? How about Nirvana without Kurt Cobain? Some might argue that Van Halen did ok without Diamon Dave, but I've never liked Van Hagar - to me, Van Halen is only Van Halen when it's with David Lee Roth.This prompts the thought that there are two types of bands that have vocalists: Those in which the vocalist is the star (e.g., Justin Timberlake, Madonna) and those which present themselves as a band of musicians (e.g., Foo Fighters, Vulfpeck).
I know which type of band I’d prefer to be in.
You made the right decision, and I hope you land on your feet and land a great gig.
AC/DC managed without Bon Scott, but they got a heck of a singer who worked really well with their sound when they got Brian Johnson. But how about Queen? Queen tours with Adam Lambert, and he does a pretty good job, but even Adam will tell you that he's no Freddie Mercury. Another case in point is Gloria Estafan. I remember when that band was billed as "The Miami Sound Machine." Then it became, "Gloria Estafan and the Miami Sound Machine," and then eventually it was just "Gloria Estefan." The band was all mostly the same, but who would they have been without her fronting the group?
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that a singer sometimes makes the band. However, that's also in the context of bands who have made it doing their own original material.
This case is different. MUCH different IMO.
Cover bands are different animals altogether, and IMO the singer should NEVER dictate what's what in a cover band. To the OP, I don't blame you one bit for leaving. I'd likely have done the same in your circumstance. I hope the rest of the band wakes up and realizes that this singer is replaceable, and believe me, he IS replaceable.