everyone will have slightly different takes/ideas, but as long as you all have roughly the same 'big idea' then things should be ok.

That also, this is something you have to accept will happen in bands. No idea you have is ever going to be as it was 'in your head' when you put it in a band stuation, so yeah - compromise is good.

basically being in a band is ALL about compromise. As one of my bandmates said, "it's all about compromise... it's about what you can live with and what you can't live with".

I sometimes worry that a compromise has watered down an idea...but on reflection I've found that it has resulted in the best possible outcome. I don't think anyone in my band has a definitive vision for what we do. So working together we shape things better than we could if one person was calling all the shots.

If you think you have a clear vision of how your music should sound, and feel others get in the way, you should probably be solo artist. Possibly working with session musicians if needs be. Like Van Morrison.

even if you're convinced an idea won't work, you have to try it. sometimes you'll suprise yourself and end up preferring something miles away from how it started, plus it's great fun digging out old rehearsal recordings and listening to how you used to do something....it's usually worse than you remember!

I'm trying to get my head round the idea of writing for a band after years of just me and electronics and it's honestly very frustrating, even when you give a brief and a demo to everyone else of what you'd like to hear and they still don't get it - every time it happens you wonder whether it's them or you doing something wrong and sometimes you have to wonder whether the compromise is worth it to keep the peace. I really like being in a good band though, and i don't have enough time to form another where I can be a tyrant!

because you still end up having the ultimate creative control - therefore everything works together as a 'single voice' if you will excuse the nu-meedja language.

As Mr. Amyblue says though, do you not sometimes think it's worth it to keep the peace?

My band have been going for about four years and we all know each other well- we arrange songs together and individual contributions are invaluable, but what we do has always been my vision really so it often comes back to me to have the final say.

An honest admission though, so fair do's mon ami.

Sulkers really are annoying though. I've only had a few in bands over the years and they tend to cause the most problems...

you should be ashamed! :D actually, you should be more direct and say why you don't think it works, else it's just wasting time. my co-lead tends to sulk and play badly/not at all if he's not into something, he just runs it into the ground...

about that tremelo guitar part i was insisting on doing that didnt fit in any way?

It's how mine works, and so far it's just about held together...

That said, recently members have been prioritising the things they want so they can say "This is the ONLY thing that's important to me, I don't care about the rest" while moaning about the rest as well...

Maybe you have a point...

Most bands that are dictatorships are normally just making do because everyone really wants to be playing something else.

Do Portishead count as a band? How about Trans Am? The Locust looked pretty egalitarian, but maybe it's just hard to know who's in charge.