Originally Posted by Pollyanna
I know what you mean. I usually prefer more variety of sound. The way Jack and Meg play means the focus is heavily thrown on the lyrics, the vocal expression and the overall vibe ... there's not much else to be found but it works because those three things are always happening.
There'd be some good things about being in a two piece band as a player, though ... fewer egos, personalities and itineraries to juggle, compact and easy to organise, less gear and very easy to have a cohesive and clear direction because only two people's tastes need to be catered to.
The worst thing is it would be hard to make it work.
I used to play with this one guitarist who possessed an Octave pedal and was able to fatten up his sound by adding an octave below what he was playing, so we used to do these duets in a bar when we weren't playing along with MIDI sequences. It was very cool, but it's hard to duplicate if the guitarist doesn't play very well. The guy I played with played great, he just didn't sing very well.
And there's this "cheap factor" vibe I got when I saw only two people playing. When someone says "I've hired a band", I expect to see at least three people on stage. Two people are just a duet. And if one of them is playing drums, there doesn't need to be a whole lot of communication going on - one is supplying beats and the other this din
. It could be totally made up on the spot and nobody would know. Having at least a bass player at least gives us root notes to hear and helps to complete the chords that are flying from the midrange guitar.
For some reason, when I see the Police headlining arenas, that seems correct. If it was just two people, I don't think it would ever go beyond a big theater, eh?