That is the question. For speed.

When descending (in pitch) from a higher string to a lower string, do you rake upwards with the last finger that played on the higher string, or do you keep a strict alternating pattern going down as well as up the strings?

I have heard that raking upwards is considered a "bad" technique when it comes to speed. I am experimenting both ways now, and it's kinda of a mind**** trying to keep a strict alternation: I can play faster using my raking technique.

I am trying to build a lot more speed here as well as a good tone to go with it. I can see at some point it might be less work for the brain to do strict alternate picking, if you could just put your right hand on "auto pilot."

if you want speed use the Buddha Technique ...

check out the Buddha thread



ps - most pros tell me always use alternation, however i use both, meaning whatever feels natural i guess

I am really strick on alternating fingers no matter what, however, this isn't math and there are exceptions to the rule. Consider what sounds best in what ever situation you find your self working with.

Michael

I always alternate ( when I slap and pop , pick and fingers) . Unless I'm playing a chord .

Alternate. It just makes sense.

I know it's improper technique, but I mainly rake. I tried the alternating technique and just didn't feel comfortable doing it. I just made the raking sound consistent and in time.

proper technique?

this is art, there is no proper technique


....... or is it all proper technique?

Learn to strictly alternate and learn when you can use raking to your advantage. I don't see how using either one exclusively could make you better off.

agreed. You should learn to do both and let the situation dictate what is appropriate.

Strict alternation is an effort to learn if you've spent years raking. Let me tell you!!! I'm still constantly trying to train myself on this one.

There are a lot of threads on this topic. Have you done a search?

I used to rake and didn't even know that it was considered "bad" technique. I was interested enough in "proper" technique to give strict alternation a try.

I spent an entire summer learning scales and other pitch patterns in strict alternation. It really cleaned up my technique and actually helped my speed increase. I could play fast passages while raking, but they seemed a little sloppy (I didn't want to say that at the time).

Now, I use both.

I've been doing a lot of funk style playing lately and raking really feels right in a lot of situations. The rapid 16th note sections work well with strict alternation.

I studied classical double bass in college and I was always concerned with "proper" technique. The electric bass is so different than double bass. It hasn't been around for very long. There are many ways to do the same thing. IMO, what matters the most is your end product. It's hard for me to say that. I want to believe that there is a right way to play, but how can we say that with the electric bass and everything that we are able to do with it?

Joe

I rake.

When I was taught and then subsequently taught guitar to others, we always talked about economy and efficiency of motion - don't move unless you have to and only move as little as you need to.

I then moved to bass and took some technique lessons from a well respected bass teacher, and he said to rake and repeated the same economy/efficiency mantra that I knew and loved so it made perfect sense to me. Now this teacher was originally a double bass player and so some of his technique may have carried over from that, but I'm happy with my style and sound right now.

Having said that, I also practice strict alternation drills to increase my string hopping speed, but when playing songs I rake. The trick with raking is to work on your tone - sometimes you will want it to sound like you are 'strumming' the strings with your rake, and other times you want it to sound like you are playing the next note with the same finger (ie. no deliberate raking, just economy of motion).

Just as for guitar, there is no right or wrong way, and there are extremes of raking/alternating out there too. I went to a guitar workshop by Frank Gambale who specialises in 'sweep picking' which is an extreme pick raking move - and he was one of the fastest pickers I have ever seen.

I rake - not consciously, but that's what my fingers naturally do when going from higher to lower strings. It might not be "right", but it works well for me. Since my finger is already resting on the string, why not use it?

Besides, I play mostly rock and blues, we don't need no stinkin' rules! ;)

I rake.

When I was taught and then subsequently taught guitar to others, we always talked about economy and efficiency of motion - don't move unless you have to and only move as little as you need to.

I then moved to bass and took some technique lessons from a well respected bass teacher, and he said to rake and repeated the same economy/efficiency mantra that I knew and loved so it made perfect sense to me. Now this teacher was originally a double bass player and so some of his technique may have carried over from that, but I'm happy with my style and sound right now.

The problem I have with this explanation for raking is that it automatically assumes that raking is the more economical of motion between the two because you use one finger to play two strings. It isn't always. I find it more economical to keep my two fingers operating in a pattern I'm already familiar with and have been using rather than break that pattern with a rake. It's especially economical when you're playing fast 16th or 32nd notes in a row and skipping strings a lot. Also, it's a lot harder to keep good time with raking. Now and then raking is good for a certain riff, like maybe a Jamerson riff, but SA will make you smoother and faster at skipping strings.

The problem I have with this explanation for raking is that it automatically assumes that raking is the more economical of motion between the two because you use one finger to play two strings. It isn't always. I find it more economical to keep my two fingers operating in a pattern I'm already familiar with and have been using rather than break that pattern with a rake. It's especially economical when you're playing fast 16th or 32nd notes in a row and skipping strings a lot. Also, it's a lot harder to keep good time with raking. Now and then raking is good for a certain riff, like maybe a Jamerson riff, but SA will make you smoother and faster at skipping strings.

I had a strong suspicion that this was the case. After 7 or 8 years of playing, I find I am lacking that clean speed that people have been telling me "will come with time." I dusted off the metronome after quitting my band after 2 years and am tweaking my technique. I haven't decided if I will rake or relearn everything, but I have a good feeling if I practice slowy focusing on cleanliness and smoothness along with the metronome I can increase my speed. Hopefully.

I mean at this point, it might be farther to go back than it would be to continue? The point of no return, as they say.

Nah, that's all a myth. You just have to work through it and see it through. It's like correcting a golf swing...uncomfortable for a while but then you start to improve. Took me about a month to get used to strict alternating. YMMV.

I rake. Not consciously. I just started doing it a few years ago and it is entirely natural. My timing with it is impeccable and you wouldnt even know I am doing it. It is just what I am comfortable doing.

My timing with it is impeccable and you wouldnt even know I am doing it.

That's what really matters.

Joe

PS. I wish I could say that about my timing. My time isn't bad (on most days), but I don't know if I'd say impeccable. I think it's nice that you have that kind of confidence at 18. :)

I rake, but just because that's what feels natural to me.

I use whatever is appropriate. Usually, it means raking but I'll alternate if I have to. Anyone sticking to one technique is limiting him/herself.

I'm not a fan of raking at all. I do it once in a blue moon when there's absolutely no other way. I am not limiting myself whatsoever.

I rake, it is what comes natural to me. I have one fill in a song that I could not do any other way as it is a three string rake with a pull-off in the middle.

lowsound

I was watching a bassist play some descending arpeggios at a fast tempo. I was watching his plucking hand and noticed that he was raking. To make conversation I said something like, "I notice that you're raking those arpeggios" (what a total geek thing to say!).

He gave me a really strange look and said, "No, I don't think I am."

He then showed me what he was doing in super-slow-motion. Sure enough, he was alternating his plucking fingers. I couldn't believe how clean they sounded and how simple he made it look. He said that when he was a teenager, he would practice alternating his plucking fingers 3 notes per string hours each day.

The same thing could have been done while raking, but I was simply amazed at his technique and ability to play across the strings while using strict alternation. It would take me months (or years) to get to that point.

The problem I have with this explanation for raking is that it automatically assumes that raking is the more economical of motion between the two because you use one finger to play two strings. It isn't always. I find it more economical to keep my two fingers operating in a pattern I'm already familiar with and have been using rather than break that pattern with a rake. It's especially economical when you're playing fast 16th or 32nd notes in a row and skipping strings a lot. Also, it's a lot harder to keep good time with raking. Now and then raking is good for a certain riff, like maybe a Jamerson riff, but SA will make you smoother and faster at skipping strings.

As I mentioned in my post, there are a huge range of styles and techniques in guitar, and I'm finding the same with bass as well. And with that comes a huge set of opinions on what's 'right' and 'wrong'. In the end, it's wrong if *you* don't like the sound or *you* can't do what you want. Every other time it's on it's way to right (if you're like me nothing is ever quite right and knowledge is a road constantly travelled)

While I was learning guitar (and I bet it is still in debate), there were whole groups who insisted that strict pick alternation was the only way, then Frank Gambale showed that you could have insane chops and do extreme sweep picking where you tried to alternate as little as possible by making the left hand work harder. Then there were those in the middle who said don't change directions unless you have to. That last camp is where I sit.

It IS more efficient to keep the same finger moving in the same direction rather than change it's direction, and bring another finger into play. But you are correct - that doesn't make it 'right'. Skipping strings is easier if you alternate, but raking tends to be used mostly for adjacent strings, or for string skips where you can funk it up by adding ghost notes by bouncing over the middle string.

Like any technique you do get used to it - if you changed to raking now, you would find it uncomfortable and it would throw you out for a bit but you would get it back. The same would apply for me going to rigid alternation. I have never, ever had a problem with my time - I attribute that to always practicing everything with a metronome.

In the end I think it really is a case of no right or wrong - there are monster players out there that do both, and even wierder combinations. Jamerson and Rainey had very unorthodox styles, Graham was a wacko when he started slapping that bass round like a drum kit, Stanley Clarke slaps a double bass, and the list goes on forever.