Most Effective Form of Fingerstyle?

[The Factory]

I've been lurking on this forum for ages and I've searched high and low for a discussion pertaining to my question, so if this has been discussed before I'm sorry.
I've been playing for about a year now, not long ago I found myself playing with a guitarist and drummer far more technical than I could imagine, which I don't at all consider a bad thing, in fact it's only helped my playing considerably, but one thing regarding standard two-finger fingerstyle has been hindering me, it seems ineffective, by which I mean I feel other fingers or the two fingers by themselves could be implemented more effectively to greatly elevate the speed of the bass player, in my research regarding different fingerstyle methods I discovered a slew, prompting me to wonder which is the bar none, absolutely most effective form of fingerstyle in relation to standard bass playing.
I've seen three finger (R-M-I) four "finger" (thumb-I-M-R) mostly implemented by jazz players, alternating standard (M-M-I-I) much like how alternating picking works on a guitar, and many many others, so in terms of sheer speed, usefulness, and dexterity, which of all forms of fingerstyle (including but not limited to the ones I mentioned) is the absolute best?

[Sir Edward V]

I have no idea.

I use two-finger, and three-finger together. The reason I don't just call it three finger is that I use normal two-finger style, then throw in the ring finger when I want to play some quick triplets or a 1-e-and or sommat.

I like what I do though... I see no reason to change... ever. I tried for a while to be the most technically superior bass player I could be... but I then decided I didn't care for the music people that were so technically amazing were making, so I started focusing more on songs as a whole and writing good bass parts that just sounded good. I don't think I will ever need to be more efficient than I currently am... I can play pretty fast and technical as it is.

I think all methods work well... you just have to practice them.

[Erick Lam]

I keep saying that following a pattern is a waste of time. The most efficient fingerstyle of playing I've come across is Gary Willis' method. It doesn't follow some mindless pattern but focuses on plucking, muting and dynamics. You know, things that are actually useful for playing music. The effiency part is keeping unused fingers on the strings at all time and ready to play, as well as keeping the ring finger one or two strings above the other because that's the most difficult thing to do as far as plucking. I've had lessons in 3 other instruments with longer history and his method is the closest in terms of rigueur. Search youtube for Gary Willis and look at his instructional videos #2-3-4.

[CodaPDX]

Just watched the Gary Willis videos - very interesting. Somewhat like him, I've been using three fingers from the very beginning, and seeing the technique explained in detail like that really does a great job explaining what drew me to it in the first place. It's just so flexible - you always have your ring finger at the ready to take you up a string or pop an octave, and string crossing passages that are really easy to get tangled up on with two fingers couldn't be easier with three.

A neat little exercise I came up with to teach my ring finger to stay high is to play alternating pairs of roots and fifths or roots and octaves, playing the roots with your index and middle and the fifths or octaves with your ring and middle. You end up doing a I-M-R-M sort of pattern, with your index and ring fingers hanging out on two different strings with the middle finger switching between them

[unclejane]

Originally Posted by Sir Edward V

I have no idea.

I use two-finger, and three-finger together. The reason I don't just call it three finger is that I use normal two-finger style, then throw in the ring finger when I want to play some quick triplets or a 1-e-and or sommat.

I like what I do though... I see no reason to change... ever. I tried for a while to be the most technically superior bass player I could be... but I then decided I didn't care for the music people that were so technically amazing were making, so I started focusing more on songs as a whole and writing good bass parts that just sounded good. I don't think I will ever need to be more efficient than I currently am... I can play pretty fast and technical as it is.

I think all methods work well... you just have to practice them.

This was kind of my discovery too. I've ended up not really having a need musically for much more than a traditional 2 finger technique (tho I use the floating thumb now as a refinement of it).

In fact, over the years I've discovered I could barely play worth a #### with just the two so I couldn't justify trying to learn how to use more.
I'd love to be able to play like Billy Sheehan or Gary Willis, but er, I figured first I better just go back to the basics like playing scales and grooves in time first. That's been a long, tough job all by itself already.

Some of my favorite players are 2 finger folks too like Geddy Lee, Bunny Brunel and a bunch of others, they get along fine with just the 2 fingers.

The only other true revolution in my playing I think I could pursue next would be playing with a pick, which I still have wild dreams of learning how to do. But I've already got my hands full so to speak....

LS

[The Factory]

Originally Posted by unclejane

This was kind of my discovery too. I've ended up not really having a need musically for much more than a traditional 2 finger technique (tho I use the floating thumb now as a refinement of it).

In fact, over the years I've discovered I could barely play worth a #### with just the two so I couldn't justify trying to learn how to use more.
I'd love to be able to play like Billy Sheehan or Gary Willis, but er, I figured first I better just go back to the basics like playing scales and grooves in time first. That's been a long, tough job all by itself already.

Some of my favorite players are 2 finger folks too like Geddy Lee, Bunny Brunel and a bunch of others, they get along fine with just the 2 fingers.

The only other true revolution in my playing I think I could pursue next would be playing with a pick, which I still have wild dreams of learning how to do. But I've already got my hands full so to speak....

LS

True, many people get along just fine with two fingers, but for me faster is always better, and one can't go into a discussion about speed without a discussion about efficiency. While you can play quite speedily with two fingers, an addition of more fingers added would mean that the work is distributed more evenly between fingers, ultimately making it easier.

[WillieJ]

Check out this youtube from the recent SMV tour ... Stanley Clarke, Marcus Miller and Victor Wooten.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrav_MSMjNs

These guys play arguably as 'fast' as anyone could want to go. There's alot of chordal stuff, good bit ot slap/pop, but mostly, I see 2-finger. A bit of 3 thrown in here and there.

Around the time of this tour I was fortunate enough to see a clinic held by Marcus, and another with Vic (he was with Steve Bailey-another iconic monster player). If I recall, when Marcus wasn't popping, most playing was 2-finger, with a little 3 thrown in when needed - or more comfortable/natural. And at no point in either clinic was 'speed' the topic. Or a question from the audience, about 30+ players, for that matter. Groove was the theme always. Now how fast, but how 'solid.' How in the pocket. How funky. Food for thought.

[The Factory]

Originally Posted by WillieJ

Around the time of this tour I was fortunate enough to see a clinic held by Marcus, and another with Vic (he was with Steve Bailey-another iconic monster player). If I recall, when Marcus wasn't popping, most playing was 2-finger, with a little 3 thrown in when needed - or more comfortable/natural. And at no point in either clinic was 'speed' the topic. Or a question from the audience, about 30+ players, for that matter. Groove was the theme always. Now how fast, but how 'solid.' How in the pocket. How funky. Food for thought.

This is what fascinates me about the bass both as an instrument and a community, there are so many different ways to attack the instrument. I'm attempting to furnish and refine a lead style much in the vein of Billy Sheehan. As demonstrated here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRuOQtg-pJ0

I'm sure that's been shown a thousand times before here, but that is in essence one of my many goals.

[WillieJ]

If that's where you want to go, it would appear you've had your answer all along, yes? : )

[The Factory]

Originally Posted by WillieJ

If that's where you want to go, it would appear you've had your answer all along, yes? : )

Well, you are correct for the most part, I just wanted to know if there was an even better way, I suppose you could say a way to out-Sheehan Sheehan.

[uethanian]

this comes up once in a while on Technique. here's what i honestly think:

you've only been playing for year, so i doubt you have exhausted the possibilities of standard fingerstyle

you can go fast with two fingers, it only comes down to practice

i can't think of any music (outside of solo playing) that standard fingerstyle would not be sufficient for

although being able to play ridiculously fast is nice, you'll probably never have to do it.

'extremely technical' does not equate to 'fast.'

that being said, i understand where you're coming from. the same thing occurred to me at one point, but then my fingerstyle really clicked and i dropped it. and if you're really talking about the 'absolutely most effective form of fingerstyle in relation to standard bass playing,' i'd have to go with two fingers. the index and middle are agile, strong, and close to the same length. more power to guys who can go beyond two fingers, but i'd say its more work than its worth.

[CodaPDX]

In my experience, being able to use my third finger has benefited my right hand's flexibility and agility far more than it has my speed. Can I play faster with three fingers? Yes, but not dramatically, and definitely not 50% faster. In fact, when I do play fast passages, I almost always use just two for the simplicity and consistency of tone. It's only when the line starts jumping from string to string or incorporating fast triplets that my ring finger starts to kick in and let my other two fingers relax a bit.

[The Factory]

Originally Posted by uethanian

i can't think of any music (outside of solo playing) that standard fingerstyle would not be sufficient for

For solo playing what do you recommend?

Originally Posted by uethanian

'extremely technical' does not equate to 'fast.'

While I don't recall having ever said technicality and speed were analogous a cleanly executed speedy intricate passage is, at least by my definition of the word, technical. Now, I'll agree that varying degrees of technicality can be found at any speed, but the higher spectrum of tempo tends to hold greater challenges in the way of execution, thus creating a greater demand for technicality.

[unclejane]

Originally Posted by The Factory

True, many people get along just fine with two fingers, but for me faster is always better, and one can't go into a discussion about speed without a discussion about efficiency. While you can play quite speedily with two fingers, an addition of more fingers added would mean that the work is distributed more evenly between fingers, ultimately making it easier.

In archery, fast arrows that don't hit anything are pretty much worthless.

Same with fast but crappy plucking - I see and hear a lot of cases of this from players who try to go faster by trying a 3 finger technique long before they've gotten good at 2 or even 1.

Rare is the player I've heard who has insisted he just can't get the job done with 2, tries to switch to 3 or 4 and really does end up sounding a lot better at higher speeds.

Count me in to that group too. I tried 3 for a while only to discover I still sucked at just 2. I've been back working on 2 fingers ever since.

A pick is another option if very high speed is desired, though that could be almost as much work as learning 3 fingers. I've been trying off and on for years to learn pick style to no avail, but I sound better with that than I do trying 3 fingers!



LS

[HaVIC5]

About a year ago I spent about 4 months of serious study in developing three finger technique 3-2-1, and I got pretty good with it. Speed was improved slightly, but only just so, over 2-fingers, but I found I could do neat effects very easily and very articulately such as triplets in a sixteenth note funk or triplet patterns up and down the strings. I focused intensely on developing a completely independent strictly alternating style with my right hand, something I'd never really done with two fingers, and day after day I would just practice groups of two on each string going up and down, which would force my right hand to really "feel" the 3-2-1 alternation at all times. I was able to play very steady sixteenth note-stream lines at faster tempos.

And then, I came to the realization that for all of the work that I had put into developing a clean 3-finger technique, it wasn't worth it. I had seen videos of NHOP, the upright bass player, play with three-finger technique on upright and the lines he were playing were ungodly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yI-1sq5dFD4) Amazing! But I was slightly turned off by two things. It was too articulate. With three fingers you have the ability to pluck every note you play quickly, and so you naturally tend to want to do that. NHOP obviously had this in mind when he shed his technique, but it definitely isn't what I want from my playing. Two, there were too many notes. NHOP is notorious for playing steady streams of 8ths notes at a billion miles an hour, likely because he can. They're good lines, and they're a nice logic to them, but man, I just never "heard it".

After this realization I went back to two-fingers, and immediately noticed two things. How much more lyrical and legato my lines turned out to be, one, and two, how much steadier and cleaner two-finger technique was. I spent so much time on getting a clean three finger technique down that I simply didn't need. I could do pretty much the exact same thing, but far better and more precisely with two fingers. Imagine what I could have done with that time if I was cultivating two finger technique! Now I play with two-fingers exclusively, and I would never go back. It was too much work for no payoff, and it led to a style of play that I just didn't like or need.

[EADG mx]

Originally Posted by HaVIC5

Now I play with two-fingers exclusively, and I would never go back. It was too much work for no payoff, and it led to a style of play that I just didn't like or need.

+1

RMI, IMR, TRMI, TIMR, I've tried it all. Two is the standard and it works just fine for my needs. It really is rare that you're ever going to need more. Like HaVIC said, sometimes limiting yourself can be a good thing. In my case, I find it forces me to play more tastefully instead of inserting random, showy flourishes just because I can. That said I will play around with the ring from time to time but I know I'm no Matt Garrison and I don't want to be.

One thing to add though.. I do use my thumb a lot in certain situations. This stems from the fact that I play a 5er with floating thumb technique. I figure if my thumb is in place I might as well use it.