I played in one band that had a rhythm guitar. I didn't like it. Call me crazy, but I like that difference in the sound when the guitar player drops out to solo. It just feels better to me.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Odd question: how many bands here have rhythm guitarists?
- Thread starter Fassa Albrecht
- Start date
Yeah we got a rhythm guitarist. It's cool cuz he doesn't always just double what the lead is playing, they play the same chords and everything but most of the time, one of them is playing them higher on the neck, like an octave up, than the other. It really helps fill in the sound, gives the music some depth, with highs, mids, and lows covered at once.
Pretty much every band I've been in that had two guitarists neither was rhythm or lead specifically. Even the current, both solo. And both trade off who's doing the harmony or the melody over the other. It's nice having people that are proficient either way.
ALL that we have is a rythm guitarist. Wish we had a lead player.
I play in a classic rock 3 piece. he plays just enough lead type licks / solos to make it all work, but he's 90% rythm guitar.
There's no rule that says the first guitarist is lead, and only when you add a second guitarist is one of them rhythm. At least I don't THINK so.
I play in a classic rock 3 piece. he plays just enough lead type licks / solos to make it all work, but he's 90% rythm guitar.
There's no rule that says the first guitarist is lead, and only when you add a second guitarist is one of them rhythm. At least I don't THINK so.
i kind of agree... i'm not really a fan of bands with a designated 'lead' and 'rhythm' player. i much prefer it when each player does something that helps the song along in an interesting way - not just barre chords with a widdly high part stuck on top.
then again, i generally dislike guitar solos
Both the bands I'm in have rhythm guitars. The cover/bar band has a rhythm guy who plays some lead, and a lead player who plays some rhythm. Sometimes I feel bad for the rhythm guy, driving all that long distance to strum chords....
The praise band has three guitarists, one strictly rhythm, and the other two mostly rhythm with some lead each. It's a little much rhythm guitar.
The praise band has three guitarists, one strictly rhythm, and the other two mostly rhythm with some lead each. It's a little much rhythm guitar.
2 guitarists in my band. they both play leads and rhythm. quite often they play counterpoint type stuff against each other.
When I am playing drums or bass I like having a good rhythm player on an acoustic guitar. It can be like having another percussion player who happens to be melodic (best example I can think of is Richie Havens). And as I editted above, a good one has always been hard to find.
In my alternative-rock cover band we have a rhythm guitarist, and it's extremely important for rocking out. The only bad thing is during songs when there's just the bass playing he sometimes crunches out power chords. Occasionally I stop him, but really, live it often sounds better that way.
In my punk-rock cover band we only have one guitarist, but I know it'd sound a thousand times better w/ a second guitarist, because we'd have more meat.
You're right though, finding a truly gifted rhythm guitarist is increasingly difficult. I bet most bassists would do well as rhythm guitarists.
In my punk-rock cover band we only have one guitarist, but I know it'd sound a thousand times better w/ a second guitarist, because we'd have more meat.
You're right though, finding a truly gifted rhythm guitarist is increasingly difficult. I bet most bassists would do well as rhythm guitarists.
"That's when you get a guitarist that doesn't suck and can do lead and rhythm"
Hrm, maybe it's different elsewhere but here, if you're the only guitarist, you are rhythm *and* lead, it's a given, you're expected to be able to do both.. (assuming a 4 piece combo of bass, drums, guitar, singer that only sings)
The way I read the original question of Who has a rhythm player? was "Who has an extra guitar player devoted to rhythm"? Believe me, rhythm players are great additions and give the other guy a chance to breathe.... and most of em can take some leads also.
Hrm, maybe it's different elsewhere but here, if you're the only guitarist, you are rhythm *and* lead, it's a given, you're expected to be able to do both.. (assuming a 4 piece combo of bass, drums, guitar, singer that only sings)
The way I read the original question of Who has a rhythm player? was "Who has an extra guitar player devoted to rhythm"? Believe me, rhythm players are great additions and give the other guy a chance to breathe.... and most of em can take some leads also.
I play in a Surf Band so we have two guitarists - the "lead" plays lead about 70% of the time; the "R-guy" handles lead about 30%. We also have a Key/Sax guy who "blow's and "tickles" according to the song.
My band has only one permanent guitarist, but he's always described himself as a rhythm guitarist. He is much more interested in the creation of riffs and song arrangements than soloing (he does solo occasionally, though he's not into shredding). He and I both handle vocal duties in the band (we decided lead singers were more trouble than they're worth some years ago).
I like having two guitar parts. Makes for a thicker texture that I can do more with songwriting in.
I agree. For our stuff the rhythm guitar part is often much more essential, providing the chordal and riff framework. The "lead" guitar parts are just higher guitar lines, not necessarily more important ones.
