Me and my friends have been in a band together for 6 years now. We recently kicked out our one guitarist due to some creative differences (he wanted to play prog metal when we were a punk band). We tried it, it didnt work so we're back to the way things were.

But other than the few months when we played prog metal, it seems like i do EVERYTHING. I book our shows, write our music, do merch stuff, update our websites, and all that other crap. The thing is, i've wrote our music for 90% of the time we've been band and i feel like they might feel left out or something. It just anytime we've tried writing together we churn out some piece of crap hahah. This is cause our bassist is influenced by like Motley Crue and Metallica, our rhythm guitarist likes everthing from old funk music to Bring me the Horizon, and our drummer never really gives his inut but he's into like Foo Fighters and Incubus and stuff.

Should i just keep my mouth shut and keep "ruling" the band or should we maybe discuss this as a band?
Guitar Rig:
Fender Telecaster
Martin GPCPA5
Orange Rockerverb 50

Bass Rig:
Squier Vintage Modified Jazz V
Hartke HA3500
just start giving the others some responsibilities

there are quite a few great bands who work with a leader (radiohead, tmv) and others that have a democracy (rhcp, led zep) both can work
Discuss it as a band. Get their input. If they don't mind, keep doing what you do.
Besides, the differences in styles might bring out some damn good music. It'll be more unique
In order for a band to work well, IMO, everyone needs to be on the same page and share the workload. For my band, it's all about how we compliment each others playing and how we all mesh together. Simply put, if it works, then it works. It's really up to you how you approach it, though. You know the guys better than we do, so, you really just need to decide how you're going to bring it up. I do believe you need to talk about it with them because you won't get anywhere with this situation if you don't.
James Hetfield wrote almost all of Metallica's songs for years and they're amazing songs and a extremely successful band. Of course in the end it did almost end up tearing the band apart but it sure worked well for like 20 years so hey that aint bad.
Discuss it with your band. I mean, there are some people that just like to play, and really don't care for writing. I've been in bands where I was the musical director, especially when I was the only one who knew theory. So I was writing bass, drums, keyboard, and guitar parts. It didn't last very long, because I didn't like it as much.

But if you like writing everything and stuff, then just make sure it's cool with your band, then keep doing it. If not, just try and work stuff out democratically.
Someone posted somewhere a while ago, there are two types of bands - Democracies and Dictatorships. Both are perfectly okay, but problems only come up if band members disagree on which the band is.

If anyone remembers who I'm paraphrasing, then a cookie to them, and to the original poster! ... Cause I don't
Rotten Playground
Listen to me and Jameh muck about on a podcast
as if you have anything better to do.

Quote by Reverend_Taco
Grass stains on my dicks

Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Pfft. Gay? Nah, gay is the manliest sex that exists.
i've come up with a way to do things pefectly, i'm a total dictator with my band but i offer my help in band member's other projects in which they get to boss me around in return. if everybody is a great musician and has similar visions/goals in mind democraces can work out (doesn't necessarily mean they need to be into the same music, when different people's tastes mix it sounds awesome, at the drive-in for example), but usually leader/backing-band is just a better format. music is a type of art, musician's are artists, and an artist's vision is important to get out and shouldn't be compromised by things like disagreeing band members. and that sounds selfish and mean, and it kind of is, so thats why i tell my band members ill help in their other projects. in my first band "projects" were just songs, my songs would go my way, their songs would go their way. in my current band we all like different stuff, so i'm leading with an iron fist (i'm the type of guy who listens to full albums and doesn't care much for the individual song, so i'm not letting their own songs come into the mix), and when they want to do something solo or with a different band or whatever, i make myself available to play whatever instrument they need that i know how to play.
If the members are fine with it, and the band is functioning as a band this way, there's no problem. You're the engine, but everyone else is needed too, so don't worry about it.

Democracies can be problematic too, I should know since I'm in that kind of situation.
I wouldn't necessarily say that's a dictatorship lol. Your fine in this case. In every band there will arise a leader. Someone who's going to be at the front of doing the things you listed, booking, writing, etc. Not to say nobody else can't do those things, it just means it's you've taken it on as your job. Having a definitive leader is a good thing IMO, and if everybody agrees that the leader is always doing what is best for the band than there shouldn't be any problems.

Give them a promoting job or something, or let them help with booking shows. Always listen to their song ideas when someone brings something to the table, but be firm and criticize it intensely to get the best you can out of the song.
Last edited by scguitarking927 at Apr 17, 2011,
I would get the bands input, personally. I like Democratic bands, but I treat mine like a... I don't even know

I typically write all the parts and have an end result in mind when I show it to them. I even go "I was thinking X and Y for the bass, and Z for the drums". But if they go "Hey, I wanna try this and see what it sounds like" or "Try changing this note in the riff" we try it out and go. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

If it's working for you now, ride it out until it doesn't and then face it then.