My drummer in my upcoming band has talked me into getting another guitarist, I like the idea, I really do, but I keep thinking of the pros and cons.

Pros - More flexibility with creativness, thicker sound
Cons - I'm naturally a bit picky with even the shit I write, it has to pass a certain "test" to my ears, so I'd look like a douche if I knocked down anything brought to the table by the other guitarist . I'm also afraid of a style/sound conflict. I'd hate to get in something like that.

Literally depends on you can work with someone and if your music requires or would be elevated by having 2. I think 2 are always best for multiple reasons towards the creation of the music. be it more ideas brought to the table, more trade offs in riffs and solos that sound better. band sounds fuller. i've mainly been a drummer and I always liked 2 guitarists but never had then in the bands I drummed in except my newest one. When I played bass, only two bands had dual guitarists and it was killer once it came together. when I played guitar in a couple of bands. only once and I would be the secondary guitarist since I came in after the fact and i purposefully wrote to make my presence worth keeping around in songs they had already.

Two guitarists. I once played in a group where I was the only guitarist, and it was quite limiting, to be honest. You have to hold down the fort, and you aren't really allowed to be fancy or do a lot of lead-playing. That band ended up hiring a second guitarist for that reason, and the sound improved as a result.

It all depends on the sound the band is trying to accomplish, and what the approach to harmony/melody is. In an extreme metal context, I prefer having two guitar players, though other styles of music certainly benefit from having a "less is more" approach.

I guess I'm in the minority in that I usually prefer one guitarist, mainly to let the bass player stand out more. I've learned to appreciate and even prefer the raw sound of guitar leads with just a bassist playing under them. They could always kick on distortion or whatever too. I'd also disagree on having another guitarist making things more creative, at least in my case. I've always had issues having to compromise my parts when I bring another guitarist in, either because they're not that good and I have to water down the material or they're up to par but step all over my parts with their own. Now, I'm not saying two guitarists is a bad thing, but it entirely depends on the type of musician and songwriter you are.

I prefer two, because it allows for fuller writing in that you can have a strong melody while you still have the second guitar getting the chord and the bass laying the field everything stands on, Think of it like a strings section with the leads, winds section for the rhythm, and brass section with the bass, then of course drums as percussion and vocals between winds and strings. Synth can be added as a higher brass section as well of course. If you feel it's a wall of notes that are too similar, dissect each chord of your song and apply say the roots to the bass, the 3rds and fifths to the rhythm, then the melody could be the 7ths or an octave up but overall just as long as it is in the key structure.

I've done both. As long as the 2nd guitar player is compatible with you(thankfully I have this now) 2 guitar players is great especially when you both play really tight rythem and both play a little different style of lead.
As for one guitar the best way to be able to play leads is to use a heavily distorted bass tone with lots of high and low mids, and have the bass player play a riff that a guitar player would play. Also to get the full guitar sound put 2 cabs on each side of the stage and mic both and have them slanted to each side slightly. 2 different speaker brands in each cab gives a good effect of dule rythem guitars. The 3 piece I was in i had to play guitar and sing as well so now that I have a great 2nd guitar player who can sing way better than me is a blessing though I still sing a few of our tracks with harsher vocals

Theoretically I'd prefer two guitarists, but in reality as a small band just starting off its preferable to have as few members as possible. However theres two types of bands that would need two guitarists..

- Bands with long drawn out solos who need another guitar to hold down rythym (aka power metal)

- Bands with a more complex twin guitar attack where two guitarists can harmonize with eachother. (Power metal, swedish melodeth etc)

And then theres two types of bands who don't need an extra guitarist...

- Bands that have a more minimalist sound (Sabbath, Venom, Celtic Frost)

- Bands with a more technical sound where a guitarist and bassist can really hold their own (a lot of tech death bands only need one fuitarist)

It really all just depends on your preferences and circumstance though, personally I like being the only guitarist because it gives me more freedom to write my own stuff and not be hindered. My singer was trying to play "rhythm" guitar and it just became a huge burden because I had to teach him all the stuff I wrote, plus on top of that our sound was just a huge wall of distortion, wheras just one guitar was nice and crisp.

We faced a similar dilemma to this when we founded our band. My housemate is a very talented guitarist (better than I am) and we were both in thrash/death bands together when we were younger.

Now the band I founded with my other mate are playing a sort of progressive leaning stoner doom. It's not the guitarists style at all and we were both very hesitant to bring him in as a second guitarist. Part of it was worries about style conflict. Another part was probably ego, i.e. I didn't want to be outplayed by him. The most important bit I think was simply that sometimes less is more, despite what Yngwie says.

Either way, we decided to ask him to join on bass instead and it's been going fine ever since. He still writes and brings in riffs/songs on the guitar which are usually fine. Me and the singer still act as gate keepers of the material though. If your worried about any style clashes etc, just make sure you do the same!

I write everything I do in two guitars, even if that means one guitar is silent for a while and doesn't come in until the end, it offers flexibility and allows you to have different amp settings and effects for each guitar. Now depending on your writing you can fill it in with a looper pedal, but I would recommend a good looper pedal as well as eq pedal so you can make sure the two guitar parts don't flush each other out.

Now as far as playing in a band, I'll admit I've had the musician dilemma of starting a band and it coming down to only you or maybe one other doing all the writing and playing until you just quit the band, so I couldn't really tell you how it goes playing with the other guitarist so much other than maybe either establishing what they will play or having clear communication while writing together.

Two is better, but they have to compliment each other. Been in bands with two guys who didn't mesh and it sucked. Been in bands with two guys who did and it was awesome. IMO, the right two are always (potentially) better than one. That being said I've always been the only one in bands where I played guitar. LOL.

With my first bands we had two guitarists, I was the second. Stuff we played was melodic & metallic hardcore/crust punk so it worked. Now my only active band plays grindcore so it's kind a useless to have second guitarist.

Regarding the two vs one thing, I would argue that a lot can still be done with one.

Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Motorhead, Rush, Alice In Chains, Nirvana, Cream, Grand Funk Railroad etc etc.

It depends on style of course. If you want guitar harmonies then obviously two will help!

I play bass in a 3 piece band and I think I strongly prefer having 1 guitarist in the band, but then again this is entirely because I am the bassist and I can't stand being drowned out of the mix and only having 1 guitarist makes that easier to avoid. I've adapted my bass style to one that is similar to Lemmy's style of bridging the gap between a 2nd guitar and bass. I use some raunchy gain with a Rat distortion pedal and throw in some split chords and black metal chords as well as a few solos and fun stuff like that. So basically only having 1 guitarist in the band has allowed me to explore my bass playing a lot more than would have been possible with 2 guitarists. In the studio, however, we do record two guitar tracks so bass doesn't always come through in recordings the way it does live.

Best option would be to get a guy like Seth in Behemoth: plays live and studio what is told to do so. Live shit sounds way better with 2.

In my case, it would be a relief to not record every single guitar all my myself. It would contribute to the sound and "stereoness" to have another guy. Also, some external input might open new possibilities.

Even if it makes harder the process of live mixing i almost always prefer to have two guitars: i've a soft spot for harmonizations, counterpoint and the possibility to have two lead players with different styles

I've worked with one guitarist and two, and would rather not do it again mainly because I've already done it. More interesting to change things up. I'd rather take part in something with 12-string bassist, two 4-string bassists and two drummers (one traditional kit and one more percussion, kettle drums and the like), playing the most bowel-crushing doom you've ever heard. Maybe throw in a cello on the softer passages.

Fuck it. Go full on Eternal Champion and have three.

Two, easily! I find it more rewarding to play tight riffs in unison with a partner in crime than to play alone. And, as mentioned above, it allows for more options in songwriting.

As a guitarist, I'd rather have another guitarist in the band to fill in whatever void I may leave.

Two. Even if I was the only guitarist, we'd still record two guitar tracks, panned left and right, plus solos. Live, you get better clarity with one guitarist, but for the trade-off of having no harmonising parts, rhythm guitar during solos, and that massive wall of sound.