Bass: Rhythm or solo instrument?

[skychief]

Do you think the bassist should be a rhythm instrument and hook up with the drummer, or a melodic solo instrument free to venture off the beaten path?

[Kenner]

Depends on what you wanna do....

For me....it's drums with notes....

[MikeBass]

Yes.

[dhsierra1]

can't be an either/or, do what fits the music and works with who you are as a musician, something that should be in a dynamic equilibrium tilted towards serving the music, ultimately.

[Dr. Love]

Other musical instruments are not limited to "only rhythm" or "only melody", so why should the bass? As long as it creates good music, anything is an option.

[James Judson]

None of the above. Bass is a lead instrument. Think about it................the drummer clicks the sticks and goes 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 and who plays the first note. The bass man is leading the band and he better get that first note right.

[Blass702]

Ask any "professional" musician that is in the studio or on the road, and they will tell you that the player that locks in to the drummer and plays a tad behind the beat I the guy who gets the job. With that said, it is always bad-a when you get to see a sweet bass solo by Patitucci, Wooten, or any of those monsters.

[OPBASSMAN1994]

In some settings it's both at once....*coughPROGcough*

[TBAR Shane]

Both

They are intertwined. You can't be a good solo player unless you understand how to support a soloist well, and being a good solo player actually benefits your support playing.

Of course support playing will pay the bills 99.9% of the time. But having that ability to play like a soloist in your bag will only benefit you.

[turbo chicken]

the "instrument" can do both in the hands of a capable player...

I prefer a good pulse/groove over a blazing solo though.

[Infrasonik B.]

As long as it grooves either works

[MatticusMania]

I use it as both. It really depends on the context of the music and who Im playing with.

[Doctor Dirt]

Both for me.
The bass is an intrical part of all the bands I've been in and been involved with. The drummer and the bassists together are the strengths and often times the weakness of a band. Now I say that knowing that those guitarist are to blame the vast majority of the time. When you have a strong bassists and drummer you more than likely find a happy guitarists who does NOT over step the natural boundries in every song.
Man does Jameson come to mind with this question?? Doc.

[slaphappychappy]

Some of what I write is the backbone and main melody of the song, other stuff I write is trying to complement the guitarist which is the first thing I learnt listening to and laborial. Hey said that as a bass player your main job is to compliment the guitarist. But when its called for, it is fun to take over an entire song.

[miltslackford]

well technically both, but it's all about the proportion of each...

[MikeBass]

Originally Posted by Blass702

Ask any "professional" musician that is in the studio or on the road, and they will tell you that the player that locks in to the drummer and plays a tad behind the beat I the guy who gets the job. With that said, it is always bad-a when you get to see a sweet bass solo by Patitucci, Wooten, or any of those monsters.

If you want to debat what it takes to be a professional "working" player yes.

But that's not what the OP asked.

IMO, anyone who limits the bass to a supportive role really is just showing themselves to be limited as a musician.
Know the "role" based upon a given musicial situation or a piece of music in regards to a bass as an instrument.
But do not define the bass as having one function and just a few who can/do take it further are allowed to (as you stated Wooten etc...).

Now, that being said, I model myself (or I should say I atempt to!! LOL!) after players like Will Lee Nathan East and the like. I enjoy playing a supportive role.

But I also like playing my INSTRUMENT and not my "instrument-used-to-only-be-supportive".

I think the role of the bass was shoehorned into popular thinking of being nothing more than supportive by over-zealous control freak producers and songwriters.
And also by the players themselves who could "self produce" enough to hold back or to maybe play lines that are not just machine reproduce-able- ala' sequencers.

Take Jamerson and the whole Motown scene for example.
They played some killer, classic lines that even by today's standards are pretty damn hard to play and hardly boring.
Those days of that type of freedom (at least in popular music) are LONG gone.
Again, IMO with the combination of control freak producers/songwriters and players who over play the song.

You can be busy as hell- Rocco with TOP for example, and it doesn't get in the way of the lyric or attract attention to itself in a bad way.

Again, IMO, one of the last stands, in "popular" music anyway, for players to get out of stagnant waters is contempory modern country.
Might not be your thing, but those guys are playing some pretty sweet lines that are all over the radio.
Yes, you can make that argument for a LOT of music- Jazz for one, and gosple as well, but nothing really on the listener level or record sales/radio rotation near country these days.
I like Marcus Miller, Fred Hammond or Isreal Houghton as much as the next guy. The Roots too, but sorry, the latest dicss by Keith Urban Jason Aldean or Lady Antebellum individually sold more than any 3 combined of those guys (if you use the commonly accepted "Grammy" time frame of one year after release date by example).
There are always exceptions to the above- I know that. I was be general.

The whole concept of what a bass guitar should and/or shouldn't do is SOOOOO massivly subjective based on a given musicians goals it's silly.

It's like thinking or saying a Tele is only good for country.
Tell that to Prince.

[slaphappychappy]

I freakin love teles as lead. Generally, if it sounds right then it is good.

[skychief]

I think the role of a bassist has greatly changed/evolved over the years. 40 years ago you'd rarely, if not never, hear Jack Bruce or Bill Wyman doing solos, yet they were the bass gods of the era (IMHO). nowadays (as indicated in the above poll) its generally accepted that the bassist will throw in a few bars of solo work/.

[Blass702]

Originally Posted by MikeBass

If you want to debat what it takes to be a professional "working" player yes.

But that's not what the OP asked.

IMO, anyone who limits the bass to a supportive role really is just showing themselves to be limited as a musician.
Know the "role" based upon a given musicial situation or a piece of music in regards to a bass as an instrument.
But do not define the bass as having one function and just a few who can/do take it further are allowed to (as you stated Wooten etc...).

Now, that being said, I model myself (or I should say I atempt to!! LOL!) after players like Will Lee Nathan East and the like. I enjoy playing a supportive role.

But I also like playing my INSTRUMENT and not my "instrument-used-to-only-be-supportive".

I think the role of the bass was shoehorned into popular thinking of being nothing more than supportive by over-zealous control freak producers and songwriters.
And also by the players themselves who could "self produce" enough to hold back or to maybe play lines that are not just machine reproduce-able- ala' sequencers.

Take Jamerson and the whole Motown scene for example.
They played some killer, classic lines that even by today's standards are pretty damn hard to play and hardly boring.
Those days of that type of freedom (at least in popular music) are LONG gone.
Again, IMO with the combination of control freak producers/songwriters and players who over play the song.

You can be busy as hell- Rocco with TOP for example, and it doesn't get in the way of the lyric or attract attention to itself in a bad way.

Again, IMO, one of the last stands, in "popular" music anyway, for players to get out of stagnant waters is contempory modern country.
Might not be your thing, but those guys are playing some pretty sweet lines that are all over the radio.
Yes, you can make that argument for a LOT of music- Jazz for one, and gosple as well, but nothing really on the listener level or record sales/radio rotation near country these days.
I like Marcus Miller, Fred Hammond or Isreal Houghton as much as the next guy. The Roots too, but sorry, the latest dicss by Keith Urban Jason Aldean or Lady Antebellum individually sold more than any 3 combined of those guys (if you use the commonly accepted "Grammy" time frame of one year after release date by example).
There are always exceptions to the above- I know that. I was be general.

The whole concept of what a bass guitar should and/or shouldn't do is SOOOOO massivly subjective based on a given musicians goals it's silly.

It's like thinking or saying a Tele is only good for country.
Tell that to Prince.

Don't mean to sound like a jerk, but you definitely didn't read what I said if you think that I was defining a professional musician. You can think what you want about the bass and it's place in music, but don't take what others say and discredit
It to formulate your own opinions. Just answer the question for yourself without bagging on others. It's not cool. With that said, have a good day. :-)

[MikeBass]

Originally Posted by Blass702

Don't mean to sound like a jerk, but you definitely didn't read what I said if you think that I was defining a professional musician. You can think what you want about the bass and it's place in music, but don't take what others say and discredit
It to formulate your own opinions. Just answer the question for yourself without bagging on others. It's not cool. With that said, have a good day. :-)

HUH????
Really??

Whatever.

And yeah, I'll have a good day.