ONE Guitar or TWO Guitars?

[discreet]

I'm in a 3-piece too (+vox). I've never understood the need for anyone to 'fill in' the hypothetical 'void' created by the 'lack' of a second 'guitarist'. The fact that a 3-piece can be sparse is the joy of the format, IMHO. With good, creative musicians there's really no need for a second guitar, OR keys.

Edited August 31, 2013 by discreet

[leroydiamond]

[quote name='martin8708' timestamp='1377971975' post='2194290']
I was in a 3 piece for over 10 years ( guitarist who sings / bass with backing vox / drummer ) and it never sounded thin .
If you have a strong rhythm guitarist the sound will always be full , the only time I have been in bands with a weedy sound is when the guitarist plays continuous lead or solo,s that he's learn't note for note off youtube . There is a definite lack of good rhythm guitarist's around , everybody wants to be a rock-god .
[/quote]
+1 Same as. Currently playing in a covers band covering a wide range of rock genres as a 3 piece The guitarist accesses a wide variety of sounds due to an elaborate pedal board. Just added Van Halen's jump to the set list with keyboard parts being played on guitar and it sounds well good IMO. Agreed that there is a lack of really good rhythm guitarist. Don't here too many guys that can match the groove that Nile Rodgers (Chic) injects into the gig. Now that's one hell of a guitar player.

[leroydiamond]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1377972686' post='2194298']
I'm in a 3-piece too (+vox). I've never understood the need for anyone to 'fill in' the hypothetical 'void' created by the 'lack' of a second 'guitarist'. The fact that a 3-piece can be sparse is the joy of the format, IMHO. With good, creative musicians there's really no need for a second guitar, OR keys.
[/quote]
+1

[Phil Adams]

My band is a 4 piece with 2 guitars. George is strictly rhythm (as Mark Waffler wpuld say) leaving the singer/ guitarist to perform his stuff and play the solos.
No clashes or toys being thrown.
My backside is covered as well letting me "experiment......."

[discreet]

[quote name='Phil Adams' timestamp='1377972844' post='2194303']
My backside is covered as well letting me "experiment..."
[/quote]

What is the nature of these 'backside experiments'..?

[seashell]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1377973019' post='2194305']


What is the nature of these 'backside experiments'..?
[/quote]

I hope it doesn't involve rubber tubing

[discreet]

[quote name='seashell' timestamp='1377973124' post='2194309']
I hope it doesn't involve rubber tubing
[/quote]

WHO GOES THERE - FRIEND OR ENEMA??

[Donnyboy]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1377972686' post='2194298']
I'm in a 3-piece too (+vox). I've never understood the need for anyone to 'fill in' the hypothetical 'void' created by the 'lack' of a second 'guitarist'. The fact that a 3-piece can be sparse is the joy of the format, IMHO. With good, creative musicians there's really no need for a second guitar, OR keys.
[/quote]




Yeah, down with keyboards & stuff!! Unless you're prog rock or something fancy. Piano now that is acceptable . How did Chas 'n' Dave sound so good, with no guitar, at all?

We used to be bass, drums, 1 guitar & vocals. Then the singer started playing rhythm guitar to the extent he does it all the time, I think it's to the detriment of his singing and his , ahem " performance". However , when he occasionally stops playing , it does sound empty to me, but probably just because I'm now used to the extra guitar.

[Phil Adams]

Oi, leave my backside outa this.

[seashell]

[quote name='Phil Adams' timestamp='1377980372' post='2194418']
Oi, leave my backside outa this.
[/quote]

Sorry, we didn't mean you to be the butt of the joke! :-)

[discreet]

[quote name='seashell' timestamp='1377981233' post='2194432']
Sorry, we didn't mean you to be the butt of the joke! :-)
[/quote]

All's well that ends well.

[xgsjx]

[quote name='leroydiamond' timestamp='1377972690' post='2194299']
Don't hear too many guys that can match the groove that Nile Rodgers (Chic) injects into the gig. Now that's one hell of a guitar player.
[/quote]

The problem that I find with guitarists is they seem to think what he plays is boring to play as there's not too much in the way of chord changes. I've tried explaining that it's more about the right hand technique & getting a groove from the guitar as well, but they want to play their complex stuff like Johnny B Goode (I hate that 3 chord pile of overrated turd).

[BILL POSTERS]

Depends what you want, but
with just one guitar you usually do need more aggressive Bass lines to make it work, think Who/Jam/Cream/Slade/Feelgoods etc.

No point being a shrinking violet and trying to hide behind one guitar.

[thebrig]

Thanks for all the interesting and informative comments so far.

Whilst I'm not the greatest or most agressive bassist around, I do think the way I play is strong enough, and busy enough to play with just one guitar.
We play a lot of Dr Feelgood material, so one guitar is perfect, providing the guitarist can nail the lead/rhythm style that "Wilko" was so good at.
Plus we have a blues harp player as well, so we do generate a good overall sound, but there are other songs we want to do that would undoubtedly benefit from an extra guitar.

Anyway, we are auditioning a guitarist this Thursday, and he assures me that we wont need another guitarist, so if thats the case, then we will probably settle on one guitar, and it would make it a bit easier queezing into some of the smaller venues we will probably be playing.

[fretmeister]

It depends on the songs.

Skynryd had 3 and it worked brilliantly. Wishbone Ash, Iron Maiden etc can't be done with 1.

The Police would sound odd with 2.

As it happens when I play guitar I prefer to be in a 2 guitar band. It gives many more compositional options. As long as both players know what they are doing and have different but complimentary sounds and styles it works brilliantly.

[peteb]

[quote name='thebrig' timestamp='1378029444' post='2194773']
Anyway, we are auditioning a guitarist this Thursday, and he assures me that we wont need another guitarist, so if thats the case, then we will probably settle on one guitar, and it would make it a bit easier queezing into some of the smaller venues we will probably be playing.
[/quote]
Of course, if this guy doesn't work out you could always give the original guitarist a ring and get him back in...!

[FinnDave]

I play in a 5 piece with two guitarists, we had some problems initially but we made it clear to the less able guitarist that he played slide only or nothing...he's developing into quite a useful slide player as a result.

[BigBeatNut]

I watched a video of the Killers in concert last night (It's on Virgin On Demand if anyone wants to check). Was slightly surprised to see them using 3 guitars (1 acoustic) and keyboards all the time. I couldn't honestly tell from the live mix what the 2nd electric and the acoustic were contributing, but I could easily see that working on an album mix.

[quote name='thebrig' timestamp='1377950482' post='2193973']
[b]So what do you guys think, should we give in just to satisfy the guitarist's ego, or should insist on two guitars?[/b]
[/quote]

The answer (to me) is obvious. If the music you want to make has clear roles for two guitars, then two guitarists is what you should go for. If you have (or are auditioning) an egotistical guitarist who thinks otherwise, he's not the guy for you, move on to the next (always assuming that's possible).

[JTUK]

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1377955900' post='2194053']
I don't like 2 guitar music or bands. IME, they nearly always turn into a racket, at least when compared to one guitar or guitar and keyboards.

I have spent most of the last 20 years playing with one guitarist and the sound has never been thin. Empty in places, but never thin.

I think you’ve missed a trick.
[/quote]

Pretty much the same...
but then good keyboards players are like gold dust.

If you MUST have 2 gtrs, think about the styles you need.

I think you could pretty much forget 90% of the whammy bar kiddoes as they aren't there for the band, for the most part.

You should be able to suss them out on the song choices alone... and ask them how they would approach the song.
Or.... the easy way...ask what gtrs they have or would bring...

What you want to be hearing from both is... acoustic, strat/tele and Les Paul.
You can then dish out lines/parts as each would have the tools....

If they both turn up with Ibanez triple humbuckers ( lol)... then you have the train wreck..

Massive generalisation ..but it wouldn't be too far off...

I'd want BV's from both as well....

[Japhet]

To have 2 guitars you need 2 guitarists who are prepared to 'back off' when needed. Their gear is important too as they will need to sound different whilst not hogging too many frequencies. Having a few problems at the moment with our (young) rhythm guitarist who uses a Les Paul and is often too loud and all over the mix. Wish he would use a Tele personally. More instruments always means more discipline and knowing what not to play.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='thebrig' timestamp='1377950482' post='2193973']
... Most of the reasons given is, [b][i]"it muddys the sound"[/i][/b] ...
[/quote]
My reply to that would have been something like 'Oh so that's why Hendrix sounds so crap on Little Wing with its three guitars'.

... or some comment about the three guitars on many Motown recordings.

Edited December 31, 2013 by EssentialTension

[RandomBass]

Interesting thread. Our guitarist was always used to being in two-guitar bands (I also played in one of them), and when we started our current venture with him as the sole guitarist he reckoned it would really push him to improve and help his confidence. It did exactly that.

Also, I've often thought our keys guy never really brought much to the table: having had to practise without him once or twice I eat my words. And now he is picking up some of the lead vocal duties with things like Parklife, which he has made his own and the punters love it.

Cheers

Geoff

[thodrik]

Generally I have only played in one guitar bands, for several reasons:

1. One less person to organise in terms of arranging rehearsals and gigs.
2. It is difficult enough to find one good guitarist, let alone two.
3. It often makes for a quicker writing/arrangement process, partially due to reasons 1 and 2.

I have played in bands with two and three guitarists as well and really enjoyed it. What works 'better' depends on the personnel and what you are trying to achieve musically. Generalisations such as 'two guitars muddy the sound' or that 'bands with one guitar sound thin' can generally be ignored.

[Beer of the Bass]

What about having a singer who plays fairly simplistic rhythm guitar, (usually low in the mix) as well as being the main songwriter, and a non-singing lead guitarist for the melodic bits? That would seem to be a fairly classic formula, and is what we do in my band Jen and the Gents. We're relatively fortunate in that neither of them has a massive ego and both are happy to keep things sparse where the song needs that.

[Freddy Le Cragg]

We got two guitarists (who were already "the band" with the drummer when I joined). On the majority of tracks it sounds brilliant as I love the classic rhythm/lead dynamic and there are a couple of doubled lead lines. But, especially when rehearsing/jamming new material, it can fall into them both playing the same chords with the same shapes which muddies it up a tad. ut I feel its worth it once you nail the dynamic.