I said "Would you give the bassist equal songwriting credit for coming up with the idea of playing the root notes of a song you wrote?"

If we're talking Flea or Les Claypool you might have an argument because they're likely to add creativity to what was originally written to the point that it changes the song. When we start talking John Entwhistle there's still an argument but when we start talking Rick Savage from Def Leppard the argument goes out the window.
The vast majority of "bassists" in this world are in it for the pussy and are ****ing useless.
It's a shame because the bass can be so powerful.

And they should have.

As a professional musician for more than 30 years, including as a bass player, I can tell you you don't know shit about it.

Care to explain? I'm curious since you have yet to argue a single point related to this thread.
BTW- please don't assume I'm ignorant. I can play bass better than Rick Savage on his best day, (that's not saying much). I've also met a man on the street who has played the kazoo through his nose professionally for 43 years.

I explained in my first post. Not my fault if you don't understand.

Bass has been my main instrument for several decades. I've played classic rock, alternative, metal, punk, blues, jazz, Motown, funk, country and pretty much every other form of popular music you can think of in that time. Bass is an essential part of all of that music. It creates the groove that makes a style what it is. I can literally change the feel of a song by playing a different bass line.

And about the only styles that routinely play only on the root as you said are punk and some metal. Even Rick Savage doesn't just play on the root, although you are correct, he isn't a great bass player.

Now I'm off my soapbox.

One more thing, you can't always tell how good a bass player is by their recorded bass lines. A good bass player plays for the song. Sometimes that means keeping it simple, because that is what works for the music. Michael Anthony is a much better bass player than he appears to be listening to Van Halen, because in VH he plays it simple to keep out of Eddie's way. That it the job of the bass, to support the song.

I laughed out loud at the "telling Brian hes fired part" LMAO
Posted via Mobile Device

The question I have: Would you expect to songwriting/ publishing money from the work you do when you weren't a contributor to the original chord progression, melody or lyrics or would you accept a standard playing fee along with an equal division of touring money.
P.S. - I know there's no such thing as an original chord progression these days but you catch my drift.

I used to listen to Slayer all the time. I haven't heard any of their albums since Seasons in the Abyss, though. I didn't realize they were still a band.

That depends on the agreement between band members. Some bands give equal songwriting credits to all members regardless of input, others go by who actually wrote. It is a contract issue, not a music issue.

Led Zeppelin shared credit. Lennon and McCartney agreed to have both names on their Beatles songs regardless of which one actually wrote it. Other bands don't do it that way.

There's a huge difference between song writing and song recording. If Lombardo did indeed "write" or "help write" the music, including the lyrics, then he absolutely deserves credit and compensation. If he was just handed the music (based on someone else laying it out or writing it) and then he played according to the direction of the band, that is, he didn't really add anything or change anything then you are correct.

A band like Credence Clearwater Revival got all their music and direction from one guy--John Fogerty. He wrote the music, he played lead guitar, he fronted the band and he was the lead singer. Most bands aren't like this.

For example Fleetwood Mac had several members writing music and bringing the music in to be recorded. Different members of the band brought in their music with the lyrics, and the others basically said "yes, let's do it" or "no, let's not record this song." It was way more collaborative.

I'm not a big Slayer fan so I don't know who the main influences are in the songs. However Lombardo is an original member so he's probably got some kind of legitimate beef as to why he's not making as much as some of the other guys in the band. Especially if he helped write the music and helped define Slayer's style in the early days due to his creative influence. Did he help with lyrics? Did he help with the format of the songs? Did he help when producing the music? Was he in the studio and there when the tracks were being cut, did he have a say about that? Etc.,

JFC does a drummer even play in the shit you think is metal.

Raining Blood cover sans bass. Seemed appropriate.

<iframe width="400" height="100" style="position: relative; display: block; width: 400px; height: 100px;" src="http://bandcamp.com/EmbeddedPlayer/v=2/album=1972284561/size=venti/bgcol=FFFFFF/linkcol=4285BB/" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0"><a href="http://eddiebrockmd.bandcamp.com/album/raining-blood">Raining Blood by Eddie Brock</a></iframe>

I've heard many amazing drummers in metal. Vinny Paul is probably my favorite.
These days it seems like drummers are becoming more dispensable with the technology that's available in even the lowest grade of studio.
Look at Chris Adler from Lamb of God. He could probably be replaced by Richard Christie over the course of a week or so.
In this time and age Drummers are replaceable. A good/creative bass player is far more rare.

FWIW, Lombardo was an awesome drummer. His musical talent stood out to me more than the rest of the band's.

So we agree.:)
Most drummers think the final product is at least partially a result of their "creative" input from their percussive instruments.
Drummers...:rolleyes:

Very few Drummers actually contribute to the fundamental components of songwriting. Those who do are paid. Those who don't demand that they're paid.