#1
My current band (guitar, bass and keyboard, with Hydrogren-generated drums) is considering a merger with another band (2 guitars, bass and drums).

In the current arrangement, I play bass. The guitar player and I work on riffs, arrangements and what scales to use for lead bits. The keyboard player mostly just follows the sheet music we give him, though we're always willing to accept his input on things.

Under the possible new arrangement . . . . I don't know. It will be nice to have a real drummer, and even a second (sometimes third) guitar player to work with. But a second bass player - I don't know. What do you do with a two bassists? I play a 5-string, he plays a 4.

Add to all this, we're considering taking on a second keyboard player. This kid is exceptionally talented, writes a lot of his own material, and would be a real asset to the group, I think.

On thing that we're discussing is simply tripling each role with each instrument: Rhythm guitar, bass and keyboard. Lead bass, keyboard and guitar. Drums. And a third guitar, moving from rhythm to lead duties, lending itself to whatever serves the song best.

I should note that I also have an electric organ, which one of the keyboard players might end up using, while I take over one of the more synth-based keyboard roles at times.

I'm kind of imagining a sort of rock/metal symphony, capable of creating a wide range of sounds while staying true to a sort of basic concept: Loud, dense and heavy.

Anyway, I'm just curious as to what anyone would think about even trying to accomplish something like this. I'd appreciate any sort of feedback on the idea, especially criticisms.

Thanks for reading.
#2
Make Prog Rock. That's the only way you can have more than 5 people in a band. Serious.
Gear
Epiphone Les Paul Standard
Washburn Acoustic
Jay Turser Bass
Panasonic SX-KC211 Keyboard
BOSS DS-2 Turbo Distortion
BOSS AW-3 Dynamic Wah (Fixed!)
Roland Micro-Cube
Randall RB30XM Bass Amp
Tascam DP-01FX Digital Recorder
#3
If all you guys can get it to work good, then that would be awesome.

Quote by emad
jthm_guitarist
Warned for trolling!


Quote by metal4eva_22
Didn't you say that you had a stuffed fox that you would occasionally fuck?

Quote by Axelfox
It's not a fox,it's a wolf.
#4
Well, it could go two ways. One way, you could be an amazingly revolutionary band on other hand you can get ready for an epic PHAIL .

In my personal opinion, if you should as objectively possible, get rid of the 3rd guitarist if possible and unless your a decently talented, using two basses can often "muddify" your music. Also, I don't know how two keyboardists would work, especially if one all ready writes his own parts (He may have pre-conceived notion of the song, which would anger him if it wasn't met). Two keyboardists could often collide in their musical parts, although you could end up getting amazingly intricate harmonies between them out of nowhere, if their skilled enough.

Also, in a band with this many lead players its KEY to have a strong rythmn sectin (At least if your grounding yourselves the way a standard band does) This means two basses maybe be helpful if the 2nd bass is a lead/rythmn player i.e. arpeggiates chords and possibly throughs in fills. Remember that it is very easy for music with this many intracacies to become a jumble of noise so try and remind your friends to play for the music (Shouldn't be necessary if there good musicians)
Quote by soccermom
The only epic thing about the bass forum is Pete Wentz penis. Its Epic. Epic penis.
BASS, MT, AND PIT JUNKIE


#5
go for it. try and stick with it the best you can, my guess is that the less talented people with feel shoved to the back and decide to quit.
my gear:
gibson les paul classic
epiphoen les paul standard
fender standard fat strat
peavey valveking 112
boss me-50
crybaby original wah
#6
The third guitar is . . . . yeah, probably more than is really needed. There are some songs that do have more than two guitars layered together, however, and I'd like to try to add some of that studio-level depth to a live performance. Even if it's just by playing the same chord in a different position, or adding some sort of harmonic effect.

As for the two basses - yes. I am concerned about the muddy effect. Very much so, in fact. As such, they would almost never play the same thing. If they did, it would be in different octaves or something, to give the song a fatter, heavier sort of sound.

Keyboards - two, possibly three going at a time, playing different elements and adding still more to the overall sound. If one were playing the organ, a second adding a string synth, and the third doing some sort of glass harmonica or other higher-octave sound, it could prove interesting. I'm thinking of it more as an "ivory section" than just having a couple of keyboard players.

Anyway, thanks for the input thus far. I look forward to more. Hopefully.

Quote by jhjps
go for it. try and stick with it the best you can, my guess is that the less talented people with feel shoved to the back and decide to quit.

As much as I would hate for anyone to feel "shoved to the back," I realize the likelihood of that happening. It's a serious concern for me, because I've always hated the idea of someone always getting pushed out just because they aren't "good enough." Ideally, everyone would get their moment in the spotlight.

Ideally.
#7
I...just don't see that as a good idea. However, if that's really what you want...are you atleast better then the other bassist? You know, just in case?

Can anyone play any other instruments? It might be worth having a bit more variety in instruments, if nothing else.
#8
Just take a few members from each band. Otherwise it'll will take lots of effort to sound good.
#9
^I have to agree. Do any of you play any other instruments? Some woodwind or brass could be a good addition. I hate to tell you to kick out the least talented members. Three guitarists might work if you're really heavy and one of them sings. Two keybordists might work if one plays piano stuff and one plays string ensemble/synth/organ stuff, but it seems like a little too much. I really don't see a need for two bassists.
#10
Quote by Freunleven
because I've always hated the idea of someone always getting pushed out just because they aren't "good enough." Ideally, everyone would get their moment in the spotlight.


It depends how serious you want to take things. If you want to take things seriously maybe take things to a more professional level everyone has to meet a certain criteria in playing. Thats the reality, at that point you'd really need to look at it almost like a job, if someone can't perform to the level he or she needs to, when they need to, than they'll get the boot. It's a bummer and no one likes it, but its a matter of how you want to do it. Perhaps calling it a merger doesn't make sense, because it sounds like you just want to form a band with members from both parties.

I will tell you, the more people you have to deal with the harder things get. Keep it simple.
#11
All righty, then . . . . having taken everyone's advice here seriously, I'm making some cuts to the lineup. There will be only two guitars, one bass, two keyboards (one more piano-based, the other my synth-driven) and drums. Plus vocals. That's only seven members total - not too extreme, when you take Slipknot and the current incarnation of Korn into account.

There might also be some odd instruments from time to time - harmonica, violin, ocarina,
and so on. Those won't be permanent members, however.

So, it's just a matter of having the three guitarists and two bassists determine who wants it more. The third possible keyboard player decided he doesn't have the time to commit, so that was relatively easy.

Drink will flow and blood will spill, ya'll.
#12
since it looks like some people are against the third guitar can any of them play slide? that would definately be cool to have a rhythm, lead, and slide. Then have the 4string bass really hold down the rhythm while 5 string does the same basic stuff an octave higher + some fills. the two keyboards could work two as long as you make sure their sounds are disctinct and different. good luck to you make sure to post some stuff when/if you record
#13
Quote by Ramblin'_Man
since it looks like some people are against the third guitar can any of them play slide? that would definately be cool to have a rhythm, lead, and slide. Then have the 4string bass really hold down the rhythm while 5 string does the same basic stuff an octave higher + some fills. the two keyboards could work two as long as you make sure their sounds are disctinct and different.

That was kind of what I was going for in the first place - but I'm having some doubts. I'd like to make a go of it, maybe for a rehearsal or two, but it's quite likely that I'll have to strip the band back a bit to make it functional.

Quote by Ramblin'_Man
good luck to you make sure to post some stuff when/if you record

Definately.
#14
Use 3 guitars, that way you can have harmonies and rhythm..... It's a pain in the ass for me at least in the little 4 peice Im in to have to play the bass pasrt to cover all of the rhythm....
#15
Any of those guitarists willing to learn mandolin, ukulele or banjo?
Maybe you or the other bassist could pick up another instrument as well.

Like guitar x 2, drummer, keyboard, banjo, harmonica and bass. Maybe people could alternate as well, different vocals, etc.
I made you a cookie but I eated it.
#16
Do it, it's worth a try. Maybe with 3 guitars there'll be a need for 2 bassists, I often think Iron Maiden could use 2 bassists now that they have 3 guitars. And if it doesn't work out you could always just split into the two bands again.

Really, do it. Give it a try, at least. It might phail, but it could also make something awesome, and you can always turn back if you want to.
I'LL PUNCH A DONKEY IN THE STREETS OF GALWAY
Last edited by whalepudding at Sep 14, 2007,
#17
The more, the better. You could do some really good sounds. Try some experimental rock, you've got bunch of stuff.
"The end result - the music - is all that counts"
#18
can any of you guys sing? one of you should just drop your instrument and do the vocals. btw with to many members good lucky making any money at gigs this a lot to divide up, especially to some guy you don't even need up there. btw what is a hydrogen generated drum?
#19
Dude.
The Only.
Yes. The only solution to this..
Is.
to
START A SKANKIN' GOOD SKA BAND!!
Yeah, it would suit the instruments you have aswell.
But just a thought.
#20
"Hydrogen is an advanced drum machine for GNU/Linux. It's main goal is to bring professional yet simple and intuitive pattern-based drum programming." (http://www.hydrogen-music.org/)

Today, I spoke to one of the guitar players and the other bass player. They'll be jamming with myself (on guitar for the day), a drummer and one of the keyboard players later this week. If that goes well enough . . . . we'll see about the rest. We have a prospective main vocalist lined up, as well. Heavy on the prospective. He hasn't committed to anything yet, but is interested in the spot, and I'm interested in having him on board.

Incidentally, it's funny for me to play guitar now. As I'm used to my monstrous low B string on my bass, finding the high E string on a guitar is entertaining to say the least. I'm almost afraid I'm going to break the guitar itself sometimes, it feels so small and delicate.

Hip-hip-hootinany.
#21
Quote by Purnin
Any of those guitarists willing to learn mandolin, ukulele or banjo?
Maybe you or the other bassist could pick up another instrument as well.

Like guitar x 2, drummer, keyboard, banjo, harmonica and bass. Maybe people could alternate as well, different vocals, etc.



I don't think he's looking to start a bluegrass band.


but yeah, some stripping would be necessarry, or have one of the basses or keyboards play percussion half the time or something like that.

I'd use The Mars Volta as a reference, they're up to 9 people now and it still sounds uncluttered and awesome
They say good things come in small packages. You know what else comes in small packages? Unrelenting pain and horror.