<< ....the only thing that would drive me crazy is recording jam bands....i cant understand why they would want a recording of them jamming since they wont play the same way the next time they do it...has anyone ever recorded that? >>
i suppose you could call my band a "jam band", although we really bristle at that label. we're a rock band, but one can't ignore our (obvious) influences from the dead, neil young, the allmans, etc. one of the things we like best about our music is that we DON'T play things the same way twice. it keeps the music fresh for us (god, how boring playing the same songs the same way every time?!?) and the audience digs it b/c they never know exactly what's coming.
as for recording us, it's pretty easy. we're a 5 piece--rhythm and lead guitars, bass, drums and harmonica. mixing is also pretty easy. rhythm panned right, harmonica panned left (although neither is hard-panned), lead guitar, bass and vocals are in the center. i play drums in this band and always mix drums from my perspective.
originally i panned the guitars left and right with the harp in the middle, but i've found that the harp and the rhythm guitar really play off each other timbrally, as our harp player fills more of the role of an organ player. switching the position of the harp and lead guitar REALLY opened up the middle for the bass, too, which kind of surprised me, as well as allowed the rhythm guitar to cut through better.
but as for jam bands in general......ever listened to any allman brothers? how cool is it to have one guitar on each side, playing off each other, echoing each other (call and response), etc? i love having a guitar panned to each side, both handling rhythm and lead chores. really spices it up from the regular separate "rhythm and lead" guitars. however, if the "standard" roles are the case, then i do a rhythm track on each side with the lead overdubbed in the middle.
YMWV,
wade