These are quotes from the "notation" thread, but the subject has shifted, so I thought I start a new one:
Originally posted by David Kaczorowski
"More Simandl-ish", or formal technique-ish in general is to play shifting up the string, not across. I don't know anything about Buster Williams aside from his reputation and what I've heard on the radio, but I'm suprised he played it across. Playing across the strings maybe more efficient for the left hand, but it's also less musical sounding and more difficult to play in tune. Guys coming from a bass guitar background always want to play across. I did too until after I'd been studying for a while and I realized, while there's a time and place for it, playing across the strings ain't something you want to be doing a lot of. It doesn't sound good and it's bad technique.
Originally posted by Phil Smith
There's more than one way to do something...

I don't think it's any more difficult to play in tune across than playing linearly down the string especially if your lateral playing incorporates the use of open strings, your intonation or lack there of is determined by your ability to hear, your technique and the more subtle vibration of the string under you finger when you play it.

I don't disagree with David at all as to arco playing. Since I began to do more bowing, I've changed a lot of my fingering in just the way he describes: more along the strings, less across. If I bowed the opening phrase of "So what", I certainly would use the fingering proposed by David: all the notes (except the first one) on the G-string. [Actually I wouldn't use the bow because I really hate bowed bass in any jazz that's in the swing-bop tradition.]

With respect to pizz, the question seems less clear cut to me. Here I agree with Phil. My impression is that the main problem with across-playing is not intonation but legato. With my (across-)fingering it would be nearly impossible to arrive at a nice legato sound when bowing. But as "So What" normally is plucked, I feel like defending my suggested fingering (at least as a serious alternative).

It's a pity that we can't hear one another actually playing that tune and using our different fingerings.

Stefan

You know - I changed my mind. All one string (except the first note) is the way to go, I think. I've actually been playing a bunch of Simandl exercises lately, so that may be coloring my judgement, but I think that's the way to go - if you play it across two strings, you are really shifting .5 positions constantly, and it leads to intonation errors. The 1 string method just seems so much more natural - since the highest note is the E on the G string (before the key change, its actually a pretty easy way of doing it.

--> Lawrence

oh by the way - we probably *could* compare fingerings by listening to each other, but for me it would entail carrying a double bass upstairs (very narrow hall), mic'ing it into my multitracker, exporting out to Zip disk, pulling it into my hard drive, and converting to mp3. I guess I'd rather spend the time playing. Either technology is just not there yet to make it easy enough or I'm lazy. You pick.

Is this the difference between upright fingering and electric bass fingering? When I was reading the previous debate mentioned, I was thinking that well , I probably would play it starting on the A string on electric bass, but didn't say anything as I didn't want to take the debate "off-topic"!

I quite often find when I'm playing Jazz on electric bass, that I will go for fingerings higher up the lower strings to get a sound that is closer to upright. It also means to me that I can more easily translate ideas, like little melodic phrases, into any key. On electric, I almost always find myself playing high up the neck now, using the B string a lot, for a darker,warmer sound.

It then feels really strange to pick up books on technique for upright bass where most of the time seems to be spent, either in 1st position or using the upper range of the G string - both places that I unconsciously avoid when playing Jazz on electric bass.

This is one of the reasons I have wavered for so long about moving over to upright after more than 20 years on electric - although I do find that upright sounds better for Jazz in many ways, it would mean a huge shift in technique/philosophy of playing.

Bruce -- I think you're partly right when you mention the DB-BG difference:

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
Is this the difference between upright fingering and electric bass fingering? When I was reading the previous debate mentioned, I was thinking that well , I probably would play it starting on the A string on electric bass, but didn't say anything as I didn't want to take the debate "off-topic"!
[...]
It then feels really strange to pick up books on technique for upright bass where most of the time seems to be spent, either in 1st position or using the upper range of the G string - both places that I unconsciously avoid when playing Jazz on electric bass.

-- but only partly. It works in one direction: Those coming from the BG certainly tend to play more across. But not in the other: Not everyone defending across-playing is bound to have a BG-history. Myself, I haven't. (Actually I only played on a BG two or three times in my life.)

Let's once again look at real arguments for playing along the strings. And let's keep in mind that we are talking about plucked swing or bop lines in eighths. (There's little disagreement about arco playing.)

I think it's no good reason that most books on DB technique favour "along" playing -- because most of these books are about bowing. (Or do you have one book in mind that extends this explicitly to pizz playing?)

Neither can it be a reason -- Lawrence -- that across playing means more position shifts. Rather it's the other way round. An obvious advantage of across playing is less position shifts. The crucial question is whether there are more serious disadvantages.

I'm in doubt about intonation. As I said, I tend to agree with Phil that there's not too much a difference. (At least as long as fast played, plucked lines are concerned.)

In no way can it be a reason that the final note, 'e' is played on the G-string. The question is just about approaching this note along the string or across the strings.

So what remains are arguments about legato feeling or just drive in playing. I'm still interested in hearing your opinions about that.

Stefan

Fingering for arco vs pizz: I'm not in the habit of radically altering my left hand technique one way or the other. When playing pizz I might play some notes across
that I would otherwise shift for, but cetainly no radical change. 99% percent of the time is just sounds better to stay on one string, it's smoother (I don't necessarily mean that in the legato sense); the string is already vibrating, the bass is already vibrating with *that* string. Also, even with a matched and well-balanced set of strings, there are differences in tonal color. The lack of smoothness/evenness and shift in tonal color that are both inherent in playing across the strings, IMO, combine to detract from the musicality of the line.

Fingerings, regardless of whether the phrase is played arco or pizz, have to support and maintain *the integrity of the phrase*.

[Edited by David Kaczorowski on 12-10-2000 at 04:51 PM]

Stefan: I think my thoughts are valid actually, sorry to say. I was trying to explain why that phrase sounded better to me played a certain way. You misinterpreted what I said about changing positions - I think there is much more chance of an error in intonation shifting back and forth between .5 positions than ascending the neck in a Simandlish way - I never said it was because there were more or less positions. At least for me - and it does translate into a difference in the sound of the phrase - if I play it across, I end up with a more mushy legato and less definition/consistency. I am not saying this as an final statement on playing - just my experience playing this phrase. Also - the thing about the "E" - I was trying to explain that you aren't really going that far up the neck, so its not a massive exercise to play it on one string anyway, so I don't see any advantage to playing it across (right now).

1. I just played the line for the first time; did it both ways. Across was clumsy, indistinct, and more work. The shifts ascending and descending are basically 1 to 4 and 4 to 1, easy to keep in tune.
2. If there's a point being made that shifting for pizz is different than shifting for arco, I'm not getting it at all.
3. I had just finished some Simandl exercises in minor keys. Fact is, when I looked at So What, I didn't even think about it. With Simandl on autopilot, I just played it and thought about how later.
4. Bassists don't have frets to save them their fingering inaccuracies.

yeah - I guess I woulda never played it across if I don't go back and forth from the 'lectric so much. However, Stefan, I would say that if you can do it this way and it gives you the tone you like, more power to you. Definitely no final word from me (of all people!) on this issue.

First of all, I'm afraid to admit I have no idea what this "So What" tune is. I'm a bit of a weird cat I suppose - my double bass playing is almost exclusively arco classical playing (which is the bulk of my playing these days) and I also play a lot of rock/blues/country type electric bass. I'm afraid I almost never play jazz.

So anyway, I guess I maybe come from a different perspective from most of you guys on this thread. For me, I virtually never amplify my double bass so perhaps I'm dealing with slightly different issues some of the time. When playing in a big orchestra and having to slug it out against the percussion and brass sections, we are often required to produce a great deal of acoustic sound. The fact is that using the longest possible string length available (i.e. playing in the lowest possible positions) will tend to give you the most volume. I strongly believe this is one of the big reasons for the fact that many traditional classical methods use this sort of approach.

The other important factor to playing in the lower positions in an orchestral setting is that we aren't often able to hear ourselves as well as we would like in a big group so often staying in first position and half position offers a certain amount of security intonation-wise rather than fishing around in higher positions.

Ed: Doesn't the fact that it generates debate mean it's a good topic for this forum? Oh well, just kidding, I see your point. But it is interesting to get perspective, and interesting that there are different preferences for playing the same line. The final answer tho, will undoubtedly be that there is no answer.

I should go back and listen to the 'fast' version and see if there are any clues to how R.C. plays it. My hunch is that he goes up the neck...

Just for the sake of (more)argument, for us proponents of going up rather than across for this line, does the same thing apply when the line moves up a half step? Start out on the Ab on the G string?

lerm: The same fingering by the time you're playing the third note in each line. I'm taking the key for granted - the chart I looked at was D A B C D E C D A, same as the record; the key change makes it Eb Bb C Db Eb F Db Eb Bb.

Rob W: Interesting point about volume/string length, and I kind of agree, but: Every time I'm at my luthier, which is 10-20 times a year, I play on other superb instruments that are there, philharmonic quality. These basses are incredibly even in every respect... tone, volume, etc. no matter where you play. Nevertheless, the players that own these basses accept that the lower you are the better the same note, both pitch and tone. Your point about why intonation is better is implicit in some of the prior posts.
I think the dirty little secret about jazz pizz playing is that the notes are fleeting and not as clear as bowed notes, therefore inferior intonation is not as easily detected. (I don't have an axe to grind, folks; I play both.)

Now I see that there are some serious reasons to prefer playing along the strings instead of across. (Actually there were some of them already posted before my last message -- sorry, Lawrence, I seem to have totally misunderstood what you wrote about position shifting.)

Ed -- you're right: there remains a lot even after this discussion that has to be dealt with in a session with my teacher. But I've always thought of this thread as being about collecting ideas, not about deciding which is the "best" way of fingering.

Rob -- it's a pity that you don't know "So What". Not that it would have made your input in the discussion less valuable. But I think "So What" and also the other tunes on Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" are an absolute "must" for anybody with only the sightest interest in jazz. (On the other hand it is definitely *not* a must to hear that piece badly played on every second jam session. Unfortunately it's hard to play, though - or because? - it's simple.) Are you going to have a try?

I would like know your favorite examples of bowed bass in jazz at the thread bowed bass in jazz (http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=9156).

Stefan

I would agree that "So What" is a "must" - one of the very few standards where the head is played on bass. I also think it must be one of the most heard Jazz tunes ever - it's been on countless "soundtracks" on TV/Films. It was used on a BBC series only last Sunday that I watched and is the defintive "cool" sound for producers.

As to bowed Jazz solos - if you want the latest "hot" album - how about Christian McBride's "SciFI"? It has something for everyone from artificial harmonics on electric, to some lovely bowed upright solos on the 9th track - "Butterfly Dream" written by Stanley Clarke.

I was thinking about picking up sci-fi, I was glancing through...ahem...bass player in the bookstore and noticed that he said he had changed the time sig of the Police's 'Walking on the Moon' - which was enough to pique my interest....

I developed a method of practicing scales and arpeggios on both the upright and electric where you first play from low to high across the strings and then up and back down the same route. On the next pass play up the E string one position shift then cross up. Next time go two position shifts, then three etc. till you run out of E string. This gives you all the possible routes from point A to point B, trains yer ears to how the same note sounds in different places (assuming you're listening to yerself) and is helpful to "unstick" the tenancy to play only one set of fingerings. Where you play something is very closely related to how you play something and everything you play needs to serve the music rather than the limitations of your abilities.

hey all,

this is a great thread with lots of good points made. But in jazz there is no right way. I believe that paul chambers played "So What" the up the string method. But Ron Carter played it across.
But everyone needs to check the original recording again 'cause the melody starts on an E natural.

Chris

Originally posted by jeffbonny
Where you play something is very closely related to how you play something and everything you play needs to serve the music rather than the limitations of your abilities.

This is essence of the arguement for building as much technique as possible.

Originally posted by merrill_chris
But everyone needs to check the original recording again 'cause the melody starts on an E natural.

What about the rest of the phrase? A-B-C, etc.? Or is that
wrong to?

Many times the most elegant fingering is something a-la-Rabbath, where any oppotunity to play across the strings is bascially used.
I would NEVER want to *sound* like Rabbath, but I am familiar now with his edition of the Bach suites, and many of his fingerings sound excellent (when the bow is used well) and play very naturally.

What is playing along and what is playing across the strings? Playing 'A B C' on all G string,playing 'A' on D and 'B C' on G string.Which is which?

Originally posted by altugbas
What is playing along and what is playing across the strings? Playing 'A B C' on all G string,playing 'A' on D and 'B C' on G string.Which is which?

Playing along the string would be playing a scale, for example, straight up a string, or as much on one string as possible, where playing across is staying in one "hand position" as much as possible and playing nearby notes on nearby strings rather than shifting around.

Well, here's another data point: I've found that the move up the G string on the opening of the Marcello Sonata 1 seems longer (!) on bg than urb. I think part of it is the difference in position and possibly also the difference in sound, but while I can play this just fine on urb, it falls apart on bg. If I were to refinger it for more across than along playing, it would probably become more tenable on bg.

They're different instruments with different techniques.

And yes, I'll do some stuff across on urb, but it's much less common/appropriate under those circumstances.

-dh

I would like to voice my support for the most legato-ish (if that's what you're going for) fingering approach. When I was/am doing the Bach cello suites, I at times found that going across sounded extremely choppy and clipped in certain parts, and that going along the string sounded stacato at certain parts as well. I tend to favor a combination of the two, as some times certain phrases scream GO ACROSS, while others might scream GO ALONG. You pick the ones that sounds the bestest. ^_^

Ron Carter put out an instructional book many, many years ago, and he advocated the across method.

Both methods seem to have their pros and cons - when applied in different contexts, one may be better than the other. So why not become proficient at playing along and across the strings?

If you have more options for creating a sound that is notated on paper or heard in your head, then isn't it easier to create the sound?

Why does my tongue always start bleeding whenever I read this thread?

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
Why does my tongue always start bleeding whenever I read this thread?

Don't bite your tongue, say something!

Give me a minute to change into some asbestos drawers first.....

Ahh, much better. Okay - admittedly, I'm not an orchestral player, and I'm also coming from a jazz piano background, BUT....I don't see what the whole aversion to across the string playing is all about. For certain types of passages - arpeggios spanning more than an octave, for instance - playing across the strings seems to be a total no brainer, especially when you have to move quickly. I'm not sure what I'm missing here, and I don't want to start WWIII, but this whole "don't play across the strings if you can possibly help it" vibe doesn't make any sense to me.

Yet. Do I get points for saying "yet"?

I think kpo touched on an excellent point, that being that the across/along debate must take the bowstroke into account as well as the shifts. Sometimes the phrasing and bowing lends itself to an across the string fingering, or vice versa. Sometimes either may be a desired effect and used interchangably. I don't think there's a set rule for either, really.

I think also there's some things that I've just learned a certain way, and have a difficult time approaching them otherwise. Mozart's 40th is an excellent example. For the licks in both the 1st and 4th movements, I always shift up and down the G string, even if it means doing so at a frenetic pace simply because they just don't sound right to me any other way.

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
this whole "don't play across the strings if you can possibly help it" vibe doesn't make any sense to me.

I just reread the entire thread. I don't sense any "don't play across at all cost" vibe. What I got was "select the fingerings best for the music."

That said, in the last couple of months I've done some reevaluating of things due to being chronically dissatisfied with everything about my playing, particularly in jazz. I just wasn't getting some ideas from my head to my hand; especially when tyring to play arco. As a result I've been going across a little more often than I used to. Despite the extra string crossings, it seems like it's making improvising w/the bow a little easier.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski


I just reread the entire thread. I don't sense any "don't play across at all cost" vibe. What I got was "select the fingerings best for the music."



You're right. I'm doing what my wife calls "Projecting" onto this thread. I hear a lot of "don't play across the strings" from a lot of DB sources, and I must have gotten this particular thread confused with another source (I had read it when it first came out, and then forgotten about it until it was dug up just recently). My fault...

Clearly, what's best for the music is the best fingering, but like Ed says, what's best for one person might not be best for the next. In addition to my regular lessons, I take lessons whenever possible from guys coming in town to play jazz concerts. I've had the experience of having lessons from some "heavies" who shall remain nameless just a couple of weeks apart, where one guy will rip me up and down for playing across, then the next guy compliments my "pianistic" approach to harmony and line building and says that the previous guy needs to chill out and realize that different conceptual approaches require different physical approaches. The guys who are against across the strings playing have come off as really negative, pedantic, and bitter, and I guess I was attributing some of that to this thread. Next time an old thread gets dug up, I'll refresh my memory first.

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
I've had the experience of having lessons from some "heavies" who shall remain nameless just a couple of weeks apart, where one guy will rip me up and down for playing across, then the next guy compliments my "pianistic" approach to harmony and line building and says that the previous guy needs to chill out and realize that different conceptual approaches require different physical approaches. The guys who are against across the strings playing have come off as really negative, pedantic, and bitter.

Maybe one day I'll understand what "pianistic approach" means. I've heard that before and remain clueless.

When those cats rip you for playing across, what do they say? What's their reason?

Thinking on some phrases I've had to work out, what I want to minimize is 'reversals' of either the left hand position or the bow angle. I.e., in crossing, an ascending or descending phrase may require both up and down shifts. I'd rather do all my shifts in one direction (getting back to Ed's teacher's concept of the "elegant" solution). It just feels smoother. Same thing with bow angles. I prefer to make all my string crossings in one direction. But sometimes a crossing fingering pattern requires the bow to reverse, i.e., the line is descending, but it requires an upward bow crossing in the middle of things. This can be messy when the reversal involves an interior string (A or D).I don't know if I'm making this clear. It's just another factor I consider when analyzing how to play a line.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski


Maybe one day I'll understand what "pianistic approach" means. I've heard that before and remain clueless.

I'm not completely sure what people mean by that either, but I have a few ideas which I'd be happy to share (later, when I'm not on my way out the door) if you want. Of course, they could be completely wrong, but...

When those cats rip you for playing across, what do they say? What's their reason?

Mainly the complaint has been that I'm trying to play lines that are not at all "idiomatic" for the bass, which IMO is a really stupid reason not to play something. I remember one time when I asked one of the "nameless bunch" how I could best finger a passage like (go to the piano and play a basic horn type bop line which included arpeggiating 1-3-5-7-9 and then became linear)...and the answer was, "why would you want to try to play a line like that on the bass?". I answered, "well, because it sounds so good on the piano". His reply was, "yes it does. But you're not playing the PIANO now, are you?" then he goes off on a big rant about how if I'm hearing lines like that, I need to reprogram what I'm hearing because I'll only end up playing across the strings playing those types of lines, yadda yadda and they don't fit the bass yadda yadda, and if I play across that much my intonation will be sh*t yadda yadda....

Ok, I was venting a bit. But you get the idea. My point is that to me, music is music, and you should play what you're hearing. And if you're hearing something that's hard to pull off on your instrument, then you just need to practice and develop a technique that works for you to let you get the music in your head out of your instrument.

DOH! I'm late! See ya later...

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald


and the answer was, "why would you want to try to play a line like that on the bass?". I answered, "well, because it sounds so good on the piano". His reply was, "yes it does. But you're not playing the PIANO now, are you?" then he goes off on a big rant about how if I'm hearing lines like that, I need to reprogram what I'm hearing because I'll only end up playing across the strings playing those types of lines, yadda yadda
Happy to say that's not my problem.
Michael Moore wanted to let me know of his low opinion of something I had played. He said: "You sounded like a bass player."

I must say it does a body good to hear that a couple more highly respected teachers have open minds about soloing. My own teacher isn't a jazzer, so he never really gets to hear me improvise....therefore, most of my "jazz input" comes from folks on their way through town. Sometimes (like when they are grouchy primadonna jack*sses) that's a good thing. At other times - like when I get a really good, helpful lesson from someone who understands what I'm trying to do - it's enough to make me crazy when they leave. Not that you guys don't already know it, but you're lucky to have such great teachers. Someday......

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the tone of the string in question also a factor? I mean, and this may have already been said, that sometimes I opt for a more difficult fingering because the notes sound more appropriate for the line. Its actually very similar on "toy" bass - I'll opt for higher areas of the lower strings for a thumpin' booooooty grabber, but go down lower on the high strings for a little more punch and brightness...I guess what I am saying is this translates into different fingerings not based upon what is easiest or what my theory is of across vs, along, but rather based on what I hear the part as. Maybe that's what some of you are saying, the coffee's not done yet ;-)

Ok. As usual, you do a search on something at TB and you will find that it has been addressed at some point by someone. Perhaps this thread is a hairball that was better left alone rather than coughed up on the kitchen floor of tb land. But as a young and impressionable lad, I had to ask.

Here's the deal, I have somehow been conned, convinced or otherwise manipulated into actually putting on the black, breaking out the bow and attempting to be an Orchestra bass player for this holiday season. The stuff we are doing is a bit of pops, traditional Christmas music and some classical excerpts from Handel's Messiah and others.


My teacher, an SO player, is up to his ears with the same kind of thing on a larger scale, so I'm not working with him right now. I'm on my own.

So, being such a noob to this sort of thing, I have been woodsheding to the point that my children head outdoors as soon as they see me within 20 feet of my bass. And, as I work through this stuff, this very issue of along the strings verses across them is coming up over and over.

At first, I had an experienced player I know mark up the sheets with the fingerings. He did it in the traditional Simandlish kind of way.

When I started playing through it, I thought I sounded like cheese. My intonation was poor and I struggled keeping time well.

Over the past couple of weeks, I have re-marked more and more of the passages to be played across the strings with less shifting. I have found that I have much BETTER intonation and by playing in 4,5 and even 6th with closed strings, the overall arco tone, although not as loud, is MUCH sweeter.

This does make for more crossing with the bow. But, for some reason, crossing hasn't really been that tough to get used to.

I guess the real question is, "Am I setting myself up to hit a wall by taking this approach?"

I know my teacher will freak when I talk to him about it. But at this point for this season, I need to play in tune and in time, and I'll worry about the consequences later.

I'll throw some more wood into this fire...I don't knock the Simandl approach, however others of the czech school, such as Hertl, took a more moderate attitude. It's important to remember the state of bass in Simandl's time:set up and string quality wasn't as exacting as our era. Can imagine if Simandl had steel strings that speak as well as what we have available, as opposed to inconsistent gut that often didn't sound that good. Rather than keep our heads buried in the sand, let's explore new directions in the eterenal quest to master the beast...
I'll get off my soapbox now...

Nope. My old teacher once said that just about everything's been tried and there's a reason why certain techniques are used. I did a recording session last month on double bass and there was a line which seemed like it was a natural to play across the strings. I could not get the intonation to sound good. I moved to playing it up the G and intonation was dead on. Of course that's partly also a matter of how I practice, no doubt, but as was noted earlier, it's a lot easier to maintain consistent intonation up the string than across.

Re-reading the thread, it also occurs to me a couple reasons why people might think that there's a better case for across fingering playing arco:
(1) Playing arco, string crossings are more difficult to manage than playing pizz
(2) Pizz players don't hear intonation problems that leap out when you put bow to strings
(3) Get a teacher ;)

Brooklynbassguy brings up a very good point. playing on one string ensured intonation because the strings didn't stay intune for very long. This doesn't by any means lessen the usefulness of along string technique, but offers the theory that Simandl may have used more across string technique with today's strings.

Another factor along similar lines in across string playing is that of equal temperment. A scale played one place in one way may not be the same as the same scale played in a different manner. String crossing technique may sound better when played around the Perfect 4th and 5th areas of each string but not quite as good at other places.

Chasarms also brings up a good topic. If you are playing a lot of fifths down and fourths up (parallely), across the strings is definately the way to go--even 6ths down and minor thirds up.

This is my first time seeing this so I just read it through for the first time and I what I got from it was what Fitzgerald is saying. One shouldn't limit what a kinds of things he should do on his instrument because he can't get it to sound right(or her). Rather, one should learn the technique to do everything he or she can.

Informative thread.

One more point:whenever one school of thought believes things can only be one way, somebody else comes along then a revolution. People used to certain the world was flat...
You might also check out Eugene Levinson's "School of Agility".

I've been thinking about the whole "Along/Across" topic a lot these days as my focus has shifted to simply getting what I'm hearing in my ear out of my bass as simply and naturally as possible. One thing I am discovering is that willpower is an amazing force when it comes to most sounds; if you can really HEAR something strongly and in great sonic detail before you play it, chances are your hands will find a way to produce that sound assuming you have trained them well enough in this practice. I would never argue that physics can be discarded in the face of willpower...but at the same time, even the most perfect physical conditions in the world will not create a beatuiful sound if the person controlling the strings isn't hearing anything worthwhile.

I find myself playing more across the strings for quick, fluid passages these days, and noticing that for the most part, the intonation issue is really just a matter of hearing well and practicing enough. As far as the issue of bowed intontation being easier to hear than pizz intonation, I dunno...I think a lot of that goes back the the individual player and what they're hearing before and as they're playing. My experience so far seems to be that people who tend to play in tune play in tune both pizz and arco, and that those who don't, don't. I also think that strings hava a lot to do with this - I have a helluva harder time hearing the center of the pitch on gut strings than steel, and I find it harder to hear on low tension strings than high tension.

But what made me want to post in this thread was a strange observation: I've been practicing 7th chord arpeggios left and right lately, and I notice that my hand wants to play along the string on the way up and across the strings on the way down. I'm not sure why this is, but my hand is very clear about what it wants to do in these situations. Anybody else notice this, or have any different intuitive tendencies regarding the along/across issue when ascending/descending?

... My old teacher once said that just about everything's been tried and there's a reason why certain techniques are used....

And then along comes a Francois Rabbath and everyone stops and says hey, maybe there is a different way... ;-)

In Gene Santoro's bio of Mingus he talks about Mingus arguing with his bass teacher about fingerings and so forth. There's always another way to do it, I suppose.

First, I don't know what you've been eatin', but you done grown, Durrl. Your clips sound nice.

.But what made me want to post in this thread was a strange observation: I've been practicing 7th chord arpeggios left and right lately, and I notice that my hand wants to play along the string on the way up and across the strings on the way down. I'm not sure why this is, but my hand is very clear about what it wants to do in these situations. Anybody else notice this, or have any different intuitive tendencies regarding the along/across issue when ascending/descending?

I've definately noticed something similar. I think because of the nature of the shifts involved and the direction the hand is moving in certain fingerings are more natural either ascending or descending. I practice everything a few different ways and what ever happens while I'm performing happens, I don't think about my hands at all. (or maybe that's part of my problem :confused: )

Thanks Dave - Long time no see! I've been eating a steady diet of listening, a music related day gig, and fatherhood...lotsa fatherhood. Sound familiar? :D



I practice everything a few different ways and what ever happens while I'm performing happens, I don't think about my hands at all. (or maybe that's part of my problem :confused: )

That's pretty much the same as I'm doing, only now the first part of my practice routine involves "performing" each piece I'm working on and recording it, then deconstructing the rough spots. What's nice about it is that I get to follow my intuition and then try to refine it. Most things make perfect sense in retrospect, but things like this ascending along/descending across don't have a neat explanation.

Good to see you back around, bro. :)

I feel that both aproaches are perfectly valid, depending on the needs of the phrase. I also feel that these decisions are much more complex when you are talking about bowing, especially in the orchestra, where the all the articulations are marked.

As to which approach contributes to better intonation, I think that depends on the technique you were taught and how well you practiced it. Right from the start I embraced the Simandel technique because that's what my teacher believed in, and it appealed to my sense of logic and structure. However because of this, I am certain that under any circumstances, my intonation is always better across strings.

My teacher who has fast hands an excellent intonation, thinks nothing of ripping up and down on one string, even at really fast tempos, because he feels that at those tempos, it is much harder to deal with cross string bowing, than keeping
the lightning shifts in tune. Myself, as a less confident player with less speed and less perfect intonation, tend to opt for the cross string approach, because, when the tempo gets real fast, I have better odds at getting all the notes out in tune and in time, when I play across as much as possible. But is certainly is harder for me to then get a nice clean articulation.

I am sure that all this will change as I advance, so that eventually the only factor in choosing one approach over the other is the musical phrase.

The only "bad" technique is undeveloped technique. To shift up the string might be the best option for a particular bassist to produce the sound, but a well executed string crossing can sound just as fine if it has been well practiced. Many times we find a comfort zone and then want to insist that it is the only place to be. Musical facism, I think.

Remember one thing, bass players: you get different sound from different areas of the bass. An Eb played in half position on the D-string will sound different from the same note played on the A-string, etc. Playing across the strings can be very efficient and sound good when you get used to it. And you might want that "thick" sound you get from player higher notes on lower strings, depending on the music and your own personal style. Personal style is what it's all about, fellas. And girls.

While it may not be directly related to the up vs. across debate, I can certainly agree that there are times in orchestra music where an open string, however perfectly in tune and easy to achieve, will simply not cut it, tonewise.

I am thinking of the opening bars of "Finlandia", as just the latest example, since we just did that. Those C# to D notes certainly only had the desired quality when kept on the A string.

So I'm three years late to this thread. As one who has been self-taught and recent on BG (for practical considerations. Interest in jazz brings me to DB forum), this thread has been informative and reinforcing. Whether I start playing along or across, 1234 or 124, it seems that the bass line or passage has a different idea and 'dictates' the fingering. Where either along or across works equally well ('technically') they each present with expressive or groove-related differences worth considering. This seems to be the consensus of this thread, no?