One or Two guitar players in band?

[BigMac5]

What are the pros and cons of having one vs. two guitar players in the band and which do you prefer?

[scootron]

We have two (sometimes three), which is way too many in my opinion. I think one is the ideal number, unless you can have two that know how to complement each other and not compete with each other. You just don't need two guys playing full chords on most of the songs we play (actually none of the songs we play). How do you get the 'rhythm' player to just sit back every once in a while?

I think having one guitarist, if he or she is really good, can give you a good, clean sound and open up a lot of sonic possibilities. I think it is also easier to learn new songs and to get into jams with just drums, bass, keys and one guitar.

[coolrunner989]

one guitarist if they are good. get them a loop pedal and you're set. Otherwise you have to get a rhythm guitarist and that just gets complicated/overkill sometimes.

[BigMac5]

Originally Posted by coolrunner989

one guitarist if they are good. get them a loop pedal and you're set. Otherwise you have to get a rhythm guitarist and that just gets complicated/overkill sometimes.

Good point!

[Passinwind]

Where's the poll option for none?

[Sneckumhaw]

I generally like to play with one, I need some space. But I love to listen to bands that use multiple guitars well (i.e. Moby Grape who had 3)

[BigMac5]

Originally Posted by Passinwind

Where's the poll option for none?

[tycobb73]

I hate when all the midrange drops out during solos. I demand 2 guitar players in my bands, not negotiable.

[Jeff Moote]

I've come to like my band's setup: 1.5 guitars. The singer plays on some songs, and not on others - sometimes only sparingly. It's great because when we need more, it's there, but there's no obligation to have 2 parts at all times.

[Texas Ed]

Our "2nd" guitar player is also our keyboardist, and plays sax and flute and vocals. We only utilize the 2nd quitar when necessary.

[lpdeluxe]

Unless you have a keyboard player, I think a band really needs a rhythm player, although this depends on the material, too.

My band has a rock-solid rhythm player who is also the lead singer, and that frees our lead player to go to places he couldn't if he were the only guitarist.

[HollowBassman]

I prefer one guitar player.
If you had one that played rhythm only, and had the other one only play during the solo, then it might work.

I'm currently in a duo and we fill the sound out just fine(even during solos!)
But we are looking for a drummer. It would make some songs easier.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by BigMac5

I'm dead serious, I greatly prefer keys and/or horns to guitar. But bear in mind that I'm not a rocker in any way, shape, or form either...

Anyhow, I vote less is more. If you gotta have 2, don't use 3, etc.

[Texas Ed]

Originally Posted by Passinwind

I'm dead serious, I greatly prefer keys and/or horns to guitar. But bear in mind that I'm not a rocker in any way, shape, or form either...

Anyhow, I vote less is more. If you gotta have 2, don't use 3, etc.

Love your hat Passinwind.

Check out this thread man......

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showth...83#post4471283

[Dan Molina]

I play in metal bands and two guitars is a must.

[jackcregg]

I voted for one

I think a band is much simpler and easy to write songs and jam with just one

and i know about the whole thing about the md range dropping out
but an ampeg overdrive pedal that adds a higher octave back in and gives you lots of distortion/mids

this only really works though if you are in a rock type setting

i doubt many funk bands could use this idea

[Moreno_IV]

I play in two bands and both have two guitarists and one has three when the keyboardist feels the need. None of these guys fight or compete with each other and it works really well. They know how to complement each other and make it sound really good.

Having more than one guitarist allows the band to be a lot more creative than you can be with one guitar. Plus, having two guitars sounds so much bigger and badder than just one.

[theshadow2001]

I think two is generally better than one. Especially where a lot of solo's are concerned. It can be quite difficult for the balls not to drop out of a song when a lone guitarist goes for a solo.

Although I do like this looper pedal idea. The only catch being you need a guitarist with a sense of rhythm and there's about two of those known to man kind.

In terms of writing music I find one is better since it allows me to breath a little and be more creative with my bass lines. Sometimes I find I have to scale them back a bit to leave space for another guitar, which can be unfortunate

The main disadvantage that I can see in having two guitarist in your band, is that you have two guitarist in your band

Radiohead use three guitarists and are a good example of how if done tastefully and right it can work very well. Granted three guitars aren't used on every song.

[Jeremy Crockett]

Two, unless you're in a Power Trio.

[Jazzin']

One or zero.