Keeping steady rhythm in ballads

[Ed Fuqua]

Originally Posted by Lovebown

Nice advice from T-Bal, and as far as...


First off, we were talking about BALLADS here. Not uptempo swingers, and IT IS common to play ballads rubato. I guess it depends on what your influences and references are, but saying that playing a ballad with a steady pulse is "harder" than playing a ballad with a good rubato feel, is not true IMO.

/lovebown

Sorry, you did say the above, right? I mean all I did was click REPLy which quotes the whole post. And COMMON means standard practice right, the standard way, the norm. Hey I've only been speaking English for 47 years now, my experience with language is probably leading me down some blind alleys here.

So which is it, common practice or viable option? You seem to have said both.
If you don't want your opinions slammed, then you should try having something to base them on other than "that's the way I think it should be".

Like some actual experience.

[Lovebown]

Originally Posted by Ed Fuqua

Sorry, you did say the above, right? I mean all I did was click REPLy which quotes the whole post. And COMMON means standard practice right, the standard way, the norm. Hey I've only been speaking English for 47 years now, my experience with language is probably leading me down some blind alleys here.

So which is it, common practice or viable option? You seem to have said both.
If you don't want your opinions slammed, then you should try having something to base them on other than "that's the way I think it should be".

Like some actual experience.

Hahahaha, my suggestion for you is to cool off a bit.
You wanna argue over this silly crap? My definition of common in this case was something that occures somewhat frequently. In my experience it does, maybe it doesen't in yours.

What I meant to say, all along, was it's a viable option. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't understand what the problem is.

I've said all I've wanted in this thread.

/lovebown

[Ed Fuqua]

Hahahaha, my suggestion for you is to cool off a bit.Thanks, you basing that on some experience?
You wanna argue over this silly crap? According to your PM, you're the one who comes to TB to "discuss and argue". Don't tell me you're on the mat already.

My definition of common in this case was something that occures somewhat frequently.
From Merriam Webster

Main Entry: 1com·mon
Pronunciation: 'kä-m&n
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English commun, from Old French, from Latin communis

occurring or appearing frequently - not "somewhat frequently", not occasionally.

In my experience it does, maybe it doesen't in yours. That's my point, you got less experience. Your experience is limited, mine less limited. George Mraz experience is even less limited than mine. If he says something to me, I'm gonna check it out. Because his range and depth of experience FAR OUTSTRIP mine and he's going to have a lot to teach me. Unless I get all "well that's your experience, mine is that what you're saying is wrong". Actually that's wrong, he'll still have a lot to teach, I just won't be able to learn anything if I'm all caught up in being right.

What I meant to say, all along, was it's a viable option. Nothing more, nothing less. Then you should say that. Nothing more, nothing less. But why say it at all, if that's not what he's asking about?

I don't understand what the problem is. It seems to be that the problem is multi faceted:
1. you want the ability to post your opinion based on your experience and have it carry the same weight as opinions based on more experience
2. you don't want these opinions questioned. Or more precisely, if they are questioned, the fact that there is a deeper range of experience should have no bearing.
3. if you contradict an earlier post, you want to be able to change the meaning of the earlier post so the contradiction disappears.

I've said all I've wanted in this thread. What a beautiful world this would be...

[Lovebown]

1. you want the ability to post your opinion based on your experience and have it carry the same weight as opinions based on more experience

If I'm right, I'm right, no need to jammer on about experience all day. Judging from how "emotional" this discussion has gotten you maybe something from my "uninformed , unexperienced" mind hit home?

2. you don't want these opinions questioned. Or more precisely, if they are questioned, the fact that there is a deeper range of experience should have no bearing.

Well, if experience was the only thing that matters why aren't our jazz venues crowded with 70+ yearolds playing? they do have the most experience, which , according to your posts seems to be the most important thing in all situations.

And why did most of the jazz innovators do most of their "inventions" early in their careers? If that statement is true, thats kind of weird considering they got older and older (thus more experienced).


3. if you contradict an earlier post, you want to be able to change the meaning of the earlier post so the contradiction disappears.

That's just BS, and you know it.

/lovebown

[Ed Fuqua]

Yeah, but you ain't right. Or at least when you were saying that rubato ballad playing was the common approach. When you changed that to mean "viable option" that was OK.

Well, if experience was the only thing that matters why aren't our jazz venues crowded with 70+ yearolds playing? they do have the most experience, which , according to your posts seems to be the most important thing in all situations.
Yes that's absolutely true. There are no 70+ year olds that are saying anything with any relevance any more. The only real innovations are being made by those players who have been playing jazz for less than 3 years.
And why did most of the jazz innovators do most of their "inventions" early in their careers? It's entirely because of the lack of experience thing, as you so well know. Since you've already been playing jazz 3 years, your best work is behind you. You've nowhere to go but downhill from here.


If that statement is true, thats kind of weird considering they got older and older (thus more experienced).
Yes I absolutely agree with you . If that statement is true, it is kind of weird.

That's just BS, and you know it. Well I know that first rubato playing was common ie the frequent or regular approach and then it was just a "viable option", one of many, right? Or does BS mean something different in this post?


And apropos of nothing, what does "I've said all I've wanted in this thread." currently mean?

[Lovebown]

Originally Posted by Ed Fuqua

Yes that's absolutely true. There are no 70+ year olds that are saying anything with any relevance any more. The only real innovations are being made by those players who have been playing jazz for less than 3 years.

So you use sarcasm when you have no argument, cute.

It's entirely because of the lack of experience thing, as you so well know. Since you've already been playing jazz 3 years, your best work is behind you. You've nowhere to go but downhill from here.

Blah. Running out of arguments?

Well I know that first rubato playing was common ie the frequent or regular approach and then it was just a "viable option", one of many, right? Or does BS mean something different in this post?

No that's what YOU said. I said it was a "common" approach and that automatically meant "the most common" way to you.
It doesen't mean that to me, which is semantics and just silly anyway, I think my point was made clear so it's nothnig to argue about.

And no, since you can't lay off here, I guess I'm not leaving this thread alone even though I'd like to.

/lovebown

[Eric Jackson]

Originally Posted by Lovebown

...since you can't lay off here, I guess I'm not leaving this thread alone even though I'd like to./lovebown

Which means what, that you're determined to have the last word?

Lemme ask you a couple simple questions, Lb. How long have you been playing double bass? How many paying gigs have you played?
No opinions or subjective judgements necessary, simple mathematical answers will suffice.

[Ed Fuqua]

Well we could always go back to PM, if the constituency feels that the entertainment factor is gone.

SO, everybody bored? Mildly entertained? Going to switch the channel as soon as Fear Factor comes on?

I mean, I'm done for today, but tomorrow doth bloom anew, ripe with promise.

Get those votes in before the polls close Tuesday morning EDST (ie my first cup)

PROP. A - SHUT THE F**K UP ALREADY - me and LOVEBONAPARTE will take our discussion totally private and will delete all posts (to each other) but our first ones

PROP B - SHUT THE F**K UP BUT LEAVE THE FUNNY STUFF - as above, but no deletions

PROP C - FIRE AT WILL - keep on keeping on, do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law as long as we all get to read
it


So vote A. B or C (or get your brother to rig the tally) and tomorrow shall bring what tomorrow shall bring.

[Lovebown]

Originally Posted by Eric Jackson

Which means what, that you're determined to have the last word?

Not really. I've offered to leave this discussion already but it seems Ed (and now you?) won't let it go.

Lemme ask you a couple simple questions, Lb. How long have you been playing double bass? How many paying gigs have you played?

I've been playing the Double Bass seriously for about 2 years. And slab 2 years before that. I've been talking lessons from established players weekly and practiced atleast 2-3 hours every day. I play regurarely within a few diffrent groups at school (which is a music high school of quite high regard), and privately with other musicians. I'm serious about being a jazz musician.

The amount of paying gigs I've had playing jazz are limited. Not more than 10. Now before you slam my experience like Ed already has, you should keep in mind that Göteborg, where I live has an EXTREMLY high amount of tremendously good bass players relatively compared. This is not me talking bull****, come over here sometime and check it out... ever heard of guys like Peter Janson, Lars Danielsson, Anders Jormin, Yasuito Mori ?
They all hail from Göteborg and if you've heard them , you should know they are heavy players, who have played with heavy names.

So, at the current moment there is no way I can compare to guys like these, and about the other 20 or so gigging double jazz bassists in my town. But some day, hopefully quite soon, I hope to.

There you go, my experience is limited, and I'll be the first to admit. But claiming that I'm always wrong in relation to someone like Ed, who undeniably has more experience isn't right.
[/quote]

[scott reed]

Originally Posted by Ed Fuqua

The only problem with that guy was that the other end of his metronome went past mine, too.

Bill's playing I don't know, is he on anything? All the vinyl I got with Phineas is Max or Kenny, the only CD I got is Elvin.

Bill was a local guy - did some recordings for Stax/Volt but
not much jazz. Toured with Groove Holmes and Jack McDuff.
Phineas was past his peak but his playing still had flashes of
brilliance. Mental illnesses had taken their toll (like Bud
Powell). His brother Calvin (fine guitarist) says Phineas was
the only guy Oscar Peterson was afraid of besides Tatum.
Phineas died shortly after that concert in 1989 from lung
cancer.

[lermgalieu]

Prop C! I've been checking this thread periodically today when I take breaks, and its wildly (ok not wildly) entertaining.

Ed, the thing I love about you (ok not love) is that you make people stick to what they've written, especially if you don't have any other connection to them. I mean, when Sam said he'd lay down and play if that's what P.W. advised, that's because Sam is aware of P.W.'s experience. He has a reason, other than comments typed into a text box, to respect him. A *better* reason. Let's face it, anyone can act like they know what they are talking about on this board, but most of us have a lot to learn.

If you mean what you say, you don't have to go back and qualify and equivocate. I get in arguments still with people on this board from time to time, but I definitely know when to shut the f*** up, and I learned it mostly from getting my ass handed to me on the bandstand and then going "aha, Ed was right!".

[Perplexer]

Personally, reading this thread has been more exciting then listening to a ballad played rubato, but that's just an opinion.

I'll stick with the metronome, thank you.

the dividing the beat is great advice too.

[McBass]

I vote Prop C. Let the record speak for itself for all to witness.

To Lovebown:

It's great that you're so passionate about the music, and it seems like you've listened and absorbed a lot. Be careful not to move on too fast. It's easy to have some success in music, especially while you're in school, and to feel your ready to move on to the most advanced concepts at the expense of the basics of musicality, taste, and timekeeping. The danger is failing to fully learn those basics and never really knowing that you never learned them. I was out of college and playing professionally full time before I was told that I didn't have a great feeling quarter note feel. I consider myself lucky that a great older drummer that I respected cared enough to clue me in. I had no idea that my quarter note wasn't strong, I was too busy working and having a very sucessful "jazz education" career while in college. Being told something so basic as you need to work on quarter notes is not something you're not likely to get in a jazz education environment. It's got to come on the bandstand.

The reason for my personal story is to keep you from having to do the same "retraining" that I had to do, or, worse yet, never realizing a weakness in your playing. Keep checking out the later Miles records, but pay attention to simpler music too. The amount of complexity and beauty in a good quarter note hookup with a bass player and drummer is amazing and very difficult to quantify let alone reproduce. It's great to be versed in the music of the European roster of ECM, but don't forget to check out Sam Jones and George Duvivier and Percy Heath. Those players of old made it possible for guys like Palle Danielson and Anders Jormin to do what they do today. Check out early Miroslav Vitous recordings and then check out what he plays like today. He's clearly evolved. Ron Carter didn't come out of the womb doing metric modulations. He spent years learning how to play on the bandstand. It was those years of learning and playing with older players that gave him the foundation to let go when he got with Miles. Seek out older players who are grounded in tradition ( if you can find them) and learn as much as you can from listening and playing with them.

There are plenty of bass players who have plenty of gigs who never got this. Don't be one of them. Play as loose as you want, but not because you can't tip. Play the way you want to play, but do it because you've made an informed choice. Don't forget where this music came from before you decide where you're going to take it.

All of this probably amounts to playing ballads in time, with good time, on most gigs, if you're a sideman. Taste and consideration of the other musicians dictates that.

Just some hard learned knowlege humbly offered.

P.S.
No offense, but saying you're an authority on bass playing because you're in Göteborg, Sweden is kind of like saying you're an authority on bass playing 'cause you're in Provo, Utah. Ed lives and plays in New York, so he probably subs gigs to guys that you admire on records and see at jazz festivals.

[hdiddy]

All I gots to say is ... THANK GOD I'M OVER 25!!! (yes I know I'm a relative youngin' ). And what I mean by saying that is... I don't have to prove myself or my little ego or anything. I think I ate my foot plenty of times over the past 30 years to be able to say that. Instead I can really sit down and listen to the good (and sometimes harsh) wisdom of guys like Mr. Fuqua. Either that just shut up and practice and find out the hard way on the bandstand.

No offense but the sooner you get over your ego, LB, the quicker you'll learn by listening and experiencing. That's a bit o' advice if I may give.

In other news... yes metronome good. I'm hesitant about rubato... that's just a completely different ball game thats more reliant on feel than rhythm IMHO. A different paradigm.

Being able to play without a metronome is good too. I'd say it's important to be ablen to keep time without any aids and are forced to internalize the rhythm. Who knows when you might get lost and lose 1 if you don't have it down. Hmm.. I might just start turning the clicks off on the metronome and go by lights to check my time now and then to see how I'm doing from now on.

Also not to mention other styles, like samba or salsa, pretty much require you to FEEL where you are on the clave. If you lose it, that's your fault buddy - you stick out like a sore thumb. I'm a fan of internalizing everything where it all becomes automatic. Toe/foot tapping is just a crutch IMHO.

BTW: It's been reeal and it's been fun. I vote B.

[Lovebown]

Originally Posted by McBass

I vote Prop C. Let the record speak for itself for all to witness.

To Lovebown:

It's great that you're so passionate about the music, and it seems like you've listened and absorbed a lot. Be careful not to move on too fast. It's easy to have some success in music, especially while you're in school, and to feel your ready to move on to the most advanced concepts at the expense of the basics of musicality, taste, and timekeeping. The danger is failing to fully learn those basics and never really knowing that you never learned them. I was out of college and playing professionally full time before I was told that I didn't have a great feeling quarter note feel. I consider myself lucky that a great older drummer that I respected cared enough to clue me in. I had no idea that my quarter note wasn't strong, I was too busy working and having a very sucessful "jazz education" career while in college. Being told something so basic as you need to work on quarter notes is not something you're not likely to get in a jazz education environment. It's got to come on the bandstand.

The reason for my personal story is to keep you from having to do the same "retraining" that I had to do, or, worse yet, never realizing a weakness in your playing. Keep checking out the later Miles records, but pay attention to simpler music too. The amount of complexity and beauty in a good quarter note hookup with a bass player and drummer is amazing and very difficult to quantify let alone reproduce. It's great to be versed in the music of the European roster of ECM, but don't forget to check out Sam Jones and George Duvivier and Percy Heath. Those players of old made it possible for guys like Palle Danielson and Anders Jormin to do what they do today. Check out early Miroslav Vitous recordings and then check out what he plays like today. He's clearly evolved. Ron Carter didn't come out of the womb doing metric modulations. He spent years learning how to play on the bandstand. It was those years of learning and playing with older players that gave him the foundation to let go when he got with Miles. Seek out older players who are grounded in tradition ( if you can find them) and learn as much as you can from listening and playing with them.

No argument here. I love all kinds of jazz man (except perhaps dixie stuff). You'll see Sam jones and Percy Heath as two of the guys listed as my influences, for example. Actually most of the players I dig the most are very grounded in the tradition.

There are plenty of bass players who have plenty of gigs who never got this. Don't be one of them. Play as loose as you want, but not because you can't tip. Play the way you want to play, but do it because you've made an informed choice. Don't forget where this music came from before you decide where you're going to take it.
All of this probably amounts to playing ballads in time, with good time, on most gigs, if you're a sideman. Taste and consideration of the other musicians dictates that.
Just some hard learned knowlege humbly offered.

Ok, I accept your advice, although it's nothing new that I haven't heard and it's not something I disagree with , I'm with you.

P.S.
No offense, but saying you're an authority on bass playing because you're in Göteborg, Sweden is kind of like saying you're an authority on bass playing 'cause you're in Provo, Utah. Ed lives and plays in New York, so he probably subs gigs to guys that you admire on records and see at jazz festivals.

No offense taken, but you missed my point.

NYC has so many great bass players, probably more so than any other city in the world. But there are also A LOT of gigs available (since it's such a big city). My city has only one (1!) real "jazz" club (although a few alternative places where it's possible to get gigs). And we have as I said about 20+ gigging double bass jazz players who are proffesional. There's no way people who are not 100% working as musicians can get much any of these.

In other words, I rarely see any amateurs playing aroudn here.

/lovebown

[Eric Jackson]

-There are lots of guys over 70 still playing. Oscar Peterson can hardly walk to cross the stage to the piano, but still plays like a mother when he gets there.

-Two years and ten gigs sounds like an honest answer. Points for that.

-I too live in a city populated by world class bassists, lots of 'em. But you don't become a good bassist by osmosis. It still takes study, practice and experience. You can take all sorts of driving instruction and study the rules of the road endlessly, but until you've logged time behind the wheel and learned distance judgement and how to react in an emergency situation, you can't call yourself a good driver. There's no substitute for experience.

-Having your "ass handed to you on the bandstand" (I love it) is a humbling experience. It's also a learning experience. There's much to learn under battle conditions, actually playing with a group in many different circumstances. You don't get that from lessons or practice.

-I've played string bass for 28 of my 50 years aboard this planet. I made my living in music for 9 years in the late '70's- early '80's, (a couple years mainly on slab), and played part time in various bands before and since then. I have more experience than some, less than others. I still learn something pretty much every time I play. I've learned a huge amount from this board, from guys like Ed whose experience eclipses my own. Lb, you have the opportunity to do the same if you flush the attitude. You seem bright and enthusiastic, hopefully in 10 or 15 years when you have some experience under your belt, you'll look back at this period in your life and realize how much you didn't know yet, and how cocky your attitude was. You'll be a much better musician then.

- I too love it when Ed's on a roll, the entertainment value's real high. Prop C.

[Lovebown]

Ok. I'm going away for an audition in the southern parts of the cou ntry and I'll be back tommorow (wednesday) afternoon, my time.

See ya then,
/lovebown

[Ed Fuqua]

Originally Posted by Lovebown

Not really. I've offered to leave this discussion already but it seems Ed (and now you?) won't let it go.

Well I never made any statements like, for example "I've said all I've wanted in this thread." Or "I'm not leaving this thread alone even though I'd like to." Sure it started out with a disagreement about whether or not you were answering Dmitri's question, but we have gotten into this whole territory of depth of experience. And my unwillingness to accept statements about what is common practice made by a high school student who has been playing upright about as long as I've had this set of Anima's on my bass. Especially when my own experience (which is admittedly just my own) says something vastly different . But my experience is deeper, broader, longer and more varied than yours, so I give it more credence than yours. The same way I give someone else whose experience is deeper, broader, longer and more varied than mine more credence. Like I said in the PM to you, it's not just age. I played with Chris Potter when he was 15 years old. The level of experience and depth of understanding he had at 15 far outstripped mine, and it was evident in his playing and his demeanor. There was only one jazz club in Columbia SC and at least 30 or 40 tenor players in the area, but Chris worked all the time. Because he could play.

Originally Posted by Lovebown

I've been playing the Double Bass seriously for about 2 years. And slab 2 years before that. I've been talking lessons from established players weekly and practiced atleast 2-3 hours every day. I play regurarely within a few diffrent groups at school (which is a music high school of quite high regard), and privately with other musicians. I'm serious about being a jazz musician.

And it's great that you are coming up in that environment, with those opportunities. You do understand that this level of experience is soemthing I had years and years ago, right? And that on top of that I have had a level of experience of playing gigs, sessions etc., right? The part you seem to have a real problem with is that this added experience just might give me insights that you don't yet have the tools for. Why is that? I mean on one level, I think it's just typical post adolescent bulls**t and this too shall pass. But like I said, I meet younger players all the time and they don't seem to be all caught up in being right. Especially in the face of someone with a deeper level of experience and understanding.

Originally Posted by Lovebown

The amount of paying gigs I've had playing jazz are limited. Not more than 10. Now before you slam my experience like Ed already has, you should keep in mind that Göteborg, where I live has an EXTREMLY high amount of tremendously good bass players relatively compared. This is not me talking bull****, come over here sometime and check it out... ever heard of guys like Peter Janson, Lars Danielsson, Anders Jormin, Yasuito Mori ?
They all hail from Göteborg and if you've heard them , you should know they are heavy players, who have played with heavy names.
So, at the current moment there is no way I can compare to guys like these, and about the other 20 or so gigging double jazz bassists in my town. But some day, hopefully quite soon, I hope to.
There you go, my experience is limited, and I'll be the first to admit. But claiming that I'm always wrong in relation to someone like Ed, who undeniably has more experience isn't right.

Fine, only 10 gigs. You understand that it's not JUST about gigs but it's about playing in group situations? and that even if you have played in group situations for every day of those 2 years you've been playing upright that you STILL haven't played as much as I have? That's not a moral position, I haven't played as much as Jamil Nasser, I haven't the depth of performing and recording experience of Peter Washington, so if guys like that tell me "Look Ed, it may seem like that from where you are now, but that just ain't the way it is, you need to be aware of this.", I'm not going to say "Well, I'm right, you're wrong, end of story." I'm not going to say "My experience is just as valid as yours (which is true, everyone's experience is valid), so my knowledge is just as deep." Cause that's just not true.

At any rate -
So you use sarcasm when you have no argument, cute. No I use sarcasm when you say something so incredulously stupid that even I can't believe that you really mean it. I mean simply surfing the Village Voice website to look at who's playing and you turn up cats from their mid 30's to 70s (and 80s in some cases) playing all over the city. Yeah, you live in a town with one jazz club (according to you) so it may seem, with your limited experience, that 70 years olds aren't in the clubs. My experience is broader and shows me an entirely different picture. So what do you want to argue about now, whether your limited experience allows you to make statements I know to be ludicrous and feel "right" about it or that when you said 70 what you really meant was something else?


Blah. Running out of arguments? Well, what does your experience so far tell you?

I said it was a "common" approach and that automatically meant "the most common" way to you.
It doesen't mean that to me, which is semantics and just silly anyway, I think my point was made clear so it's nothnig to argue about.

OK, I'll buy that. To me "common" does mean "the usual way". It is common for me to get a cup of coffee in the morning. It is common to buy a newspaper at a news stand kiosk. It's common for The Voice to be available everywhere on Wednesdays. The common way for most urban New Yorker's to commute is by public transportation.

I could get a milkshake, I could buy a paper at the grocery store, the Voice could be delayed til Thursday, I could ride a bike. But none of those are common, they are all exceptions.

OK, common means something different to you. So I understand what you are trying to say, what is the usual/standard/general/most often used approach to playing a balld -with tempo or without tempo?


Look, BONECONE, you seem to be taking the attitude that I think you're a jerk or lame or something personal, a moral judgement about what kind of person you are. Well, that ain't it. You're in a place where you are gaining a lot of good experience. I think you should be less adamant about what experience you already have, and a little more willing to enlarge on that experience.


As an aside, for those of you who haven't heard McBass play, he really sounds great. And it ain't just me, the ISB thought so too.

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by FOGHORN

As an aside, for those of you who haven't heard McBass play, he really sounds great. And it ain't just me, the ISB thought so too.

Ooh, I sense a new Sampler submission on the horizon.


Hint.





Hint.

[groovinreuven]

Have you tried playing the tune more uptempo a couple of times in rehearsal? I find that a simple, no-frills run through (strictly in tempo - subdivide internally for accuracy) helps one see and hear the longer lines necessary to carry a potentially lumbering ballad tempo.

Hope this helps!