[Nik]

Every since our asshole drummer fucked over our band, things have been confusing.

So we've found this totally freakin awesome guitarist; he's much better than me, he plays a 7, and we have many things in common. My bassist wants to take him in.

Now, I'm put in a bad spot: I never counted on a second guitarist--I thought it might be a good idea to have a vocalist that plays rhythm guitar, just simple stuff, but IMO the band becomes too big with another totally separate guitarist.

I mean, with a second guitarist, keyboardist, drummer, bassist, and vocalist, our band is gonna end up having 6 (!) members, and I personally wouldn't want it to get past 5. 6 people is a lot, especially when a second guitarist isn't REALLY necessary.

And I suppose maybe it's a bit of an ego thing with me, but I think to a certain extent it's justified. I mean, I've worked my ass off to get my technique to a semi-decent level, I have spent countless hours learning theory to improve my songwriting abilities, and I have written virtually all music in the band, and I guess I just want some recognition for that and that's why I feel like it'd be hard for me to share the guitarist spotlight.

Maybe I'm putting too much thought into this, but he's better than me and so when we play live, I'll be labeled as "the shitty guitarist" even though I do 90% of everything in the band.

And again, that's really just an aside; really, I'm just opposed to having too many members in the band, because then it becomes a less intimate environment, it becomes harder to coordinate our playing, and much harder to find a jam date that everybody agrees on...

Am I more selfish and egotistical than I realize, or is there some basis in these emotions? Do you guys think we should take him in?

[Leon]

talk to the guitar player about it. let him know that you've written a lot of the music, and have put together this band as a way for you to play out that music, and to better yourself as a musician, and that you wouldn't mind hearing what he might have to add to the experience as a whole.

ie, go for it

[Korbain]

i'd take him in, doesn't matter how many people are in it, aslong as it sounds good thats all that matters.

[metalfiend666]

Follow Leon's advice dude

[Nik]

Thanks fellas!

[NickCormier]

What I would do in that situation, is just keep doing what you do, double the riffing parts and divide the solos up live, etc.. and if this guitarist is trying to take over the band.. then you can either ditch him, or just say "Ok, We just wont play my material" and play whatever shit you guys together can come up with, then when you feel ready with your material, just go out without the guitarist and play your shows alone.

He really shouldnt be trying to change the format of things since he is the one being invited in, but if he wants to contribute and write stuff, you can let him, but I understand how you want to be "leader".. so just change the name of the band and write different songs, because experiance is the key in live shows, get the experiance with him with shitty songs so when you play your own stuff without being altered, you are pretty far ahead, in popularity and experiance.

Thats my two cents, and what I would do. basically I write my own stuff, but if I have to colaborate with a band, I just dont give any of my really good ideas, and when I get better off with a good band who will follow my lead (trying not to be a dictator but its hard when you have a sound in your head and want it exactly like that) to play my stuff.. Maybe you guys could do like, 2-3 of the songs YOU wrote, and 2-3 of the 2nd guitarists songs, and then 2-3 of band made songs.. That way you're happy, their happy.

[InTheRavensName]

Two words

Iron

Maiden

[Durero]

Yah there are definitely great bands with 6 players - Soilwork comes to mind. You may be surprised, but with more players you might find that individual egos may be less of a problem - each player can settle into their own role to support the music as a group, instead of worrying about who's in the spotlight. With 6 players I highly doubt anyone in the audience is going to be thinking "oh that guitarist is way better that the other guitarist." It's like watching an orchestra; you don't sit there going "Man, that violinist in the 3rd row of the second violins really sucks!" You just listen to the whole band together.

[rogue]

Originally Posted by Durero

Yah there are definitely great bands with 6 players - Soilwork comes to mind. You may be surprised, but with more players you might find that individual egos may be less of a problem - each player can settle into their own role to support the music as a group, instead of worrying about who's in the spotlight. With 6 players I highly doubt anyone in the audience is going to be thinking "oh that guitarist is way better that the other guitarist." It's like watching an orchestra; you don't sit there going "Man, that violinist in the 3rd row of the second violins really sucks!" You just listen to the whole band together.

haha perfect!

[Nik]

Originally Posted by Durero

With 6 players I highly doubt anyone in the audience is going to be thinking "oh that guitarist is way better that the other guitarist." It's like watching an orchestra; you don't sit there going "Man, that violinist in the 3rd row of the second violins really sucks!"

Actually, in the book "Hannibal", that's EXACTLY what Hannibal Lecter says, and then he kills the guy

But yeah, I see what you guys are saying. Thanks!