Bands With Multiple Songwriters

[imonthestereo]

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, given the situation I'm in with my new band.

What do you guys make of bands with two or more songwriters/lead singers? Obviously, some classic bands like The Beatles have created a distinctive sound that blends well between different people with different styles.

However, I can't help feeling like the occasional Spiral Stairs or Lou Barlow (with Dinosaur Jr.) song brings me out of the album experience. Don't get me wrong; I enjoy Passat Dream as much as the next guy, but it just seems sort of randomly tossed in. I think it also has to do with the ratio between the songwriters; a lot of those Pavement albums have like a 10:1 Malkmus/Kannberg mix.


Does this matter to anyone else? Or does it only bother me?

[Bellyheart]

Kill the ego and play

[kbit]

The whole removal-from-an-album-experience thing is one of the reason I haven't really gotten into Fugazi yet.
Which isn't really an exuse, but whatever.

Brand New has been doing this more with their last couple albums and I think it compliments the band as a whole when mixing Jesse & Vince's songs.
You may be able to tell the difference between the writing, but they're never so opposite that it takes away from a concrete vibe.

[dubkitty]

i think it really depends on the quality of the additional songwriters' work and whether it, for lack of a better term, goes together with the main writers' work. with e.g. the Peter Prescott songs in Mission of Burma they work despite the stylistic dissimilarity to Roger and Clint's songs because they chose songs of Peter's that worked with the band's overall approach. by contrast, Stewart Copeland's songs on the Police albums never made any sense at all next to Sting's because Stewart never even tried to write towards Sting's or the Police's characteristic styles. i think the songs, or the songwriters, should be working towards the same general artistic objective...when i think of great bands with multiple front persons, these individual's songs lent themselves to a similar and musically congruent style of playing and arrangement. i'm not a Pavement or Dino expert, but from my knowledge of them they've always seemed to be on the borderline in terms of whether Lou and SS's songs belong or not or whether they're exercises like Ringo's Beatle songs or the Graham Coxon tunes on the last couple of Blur albums. i'm not really a fan of the "here's a song from the bass player because they're the bass player" track, you know? if my songs aren't as good as the other guys' songs in the band, we shouldn't play my songs and i should do a solo release. it's not about you or me, the individuals. it's about the band being the best band it can be. they only gave Keith Moon lead vocals for 40 seconds in the Who's career.

[coldbrightsunlight]

if my songs aren't as good as the other guys' songs in the band, we shouldn't play my songs and i should do a solo release. it's not about you or me, the individuals. it's about the band being the best band it can be.

Totally agree with this. That said, there are bands who make it work, like Broken Social Scene. AFAIK the way they record is more like solo songs with various people from the same rotating cast playing on each one than it is a set band, but they've made some cohesive albums out of it and are a great live band.

[snipelfritz]

Supertramp

[Bassus Sanguinis]

Good luck for Your new band. Never mind the number of band members writing stuff, I think that's irrelevant.

I've never played in band that had one guy only composing it all, AND calling all the shots, I guess... Well maybe once. Or twice. It can be horrible, as I've witnessed from if there's a guy who thinks he's a next big singer songwriter, a gift of god to the band members with all the golden ideas that are going to make the band big or at least him a star.

Usually there's the guy/guys who write most of the material but the other band members contribute, even if they don't write whole songs: THAT's what makes a band. And that way all the creative ideas are put to test before they are put to production, so it benefits the the songwriter, too, if he is in the right group. And bands test the songs onstage before recording them to make up if the arrangement really works.

Also, sometimes arranging the parts can radically change the nature of the whole song, and - for example - the drummer can make a suggestion the song writer at first detests because it isn't what he wanted in the first place, but what fits the band better.

[imonthestereo]

Hey Bassus,

I definitely agree about all of the band contributing, even if they aren't literally writing lyrics and melodies. I think that's one of the best parts about pairing a strong songwriter with a band: having creative and intelligent people to filter your ideas and edit them. I mean, look at some solo projects from guys who were in strong bands, then lost the "chemistry" that made their songs great in that context.

Bellheart: It's not an ego thing; it should always be about the music. But the music suffers if you don't deliberately think about making a cohesive body of songs and sounds, which can suffer when you have multiple songwriters with very divergent styles. I get what you're saying here, and I think one guy calling all the shots can be a nightmare for bandmates. However, that's not necessarily what I'm talking about.

[Ghost Hip]

I think if you have multiple song writers but the whole band contributes to the song and works on songs together they should be relatively cohesive. However if a song writer has the whole thing figured out before band practice then it's going to sound like his song you know what I mean?

In my second band we all switch instruments and two of use so far contribute to the vocals/lyric writing. We just finished three songs for an EP and they sound pretty cohesive. One song is me on lead and the other two are my bandmate, Pat. However I sang back up on his as well, and he's not as passionate about effects so I controlled the fuzztones in the songs. I mean loves playing with my board, but he said he just picks a fuzz pedal on my board each practice and sticks to it.

But being a Pumpkins guy I know the feeling of sitting through an album and all of a sudden James Iha has a track thrown in. As much as I like his songs they did not fit in with Billy's in my opinion.

[dubkitty]

I very much agree about the entire group contributing to the arrangements and the general concept. not only does this result in a more coherent sound and make everyone feel included, it almost always results in some great arrangement ideas you as the composer wouldn't think of on your own.

and i prefer having multiple composers. for one thing, i'm not exactly prolific as a songwriter, and i don't have enough songs to fill out a long CD much less a whole night's worth of gig. for another, it gives you more than one aspect for people to latch on to: The Beatles and CSNY are obvious exemplars here, as are Burma, Husker Du, who were much more likeable due to Hart's songs than Mould's subsequent solo projects, and the multiple music writers in R.E.M.; note how the latter became more one-dimensional after Berry left. but the songs have to be of comparable quality, or it's just going to be a drag for everybody to slog through or wait through the lousy ones respectively.

[GardenoftheDead]

I don't think multiple lead singers or lyrics writers is a big problem cause I don't really see vocals as special from the rest of the band.

It's only really annoying when a member has a distinctly different musical style and they contribute that one song that just destroys the flow of the album. Like Kim Deal and Richie Ramone.

[dubkitty]

that's why i specifically mentioned Stewart Copeland. i'll never forgive him for "Miss Gradenko."

[Fuzzy Fred]

I guess it depends. If they are different, that's good. If they are too different... well that's a different story. I mean, my other guitarist writes some songs, and they are kinda different from mine, but I still do vocals on it as well as writing the words. Almost all of the songs I come to the band with are chords, riffs and words with open room for everyone else to come up with their own stuff. I usually have a sound in my head, but I'm not always stuck on how the song should sound, and it transforms over time with additions by everyone.

Not sure if that helps, but I don't see other people in the band adding in songs as a bad thing