virtuoso, vs playing for the song

[Jay Terrien]

I agree with you 100% and unbelievably, Mills, Moulding, and Rourke are on about 80% of the CDs that I own. Can you imagine REM, XTC, or The Smiths playing "reunion shows"?

True musical personality often involves the combination of versatility, diversity, and of course, GREAT TASTE.

Jay

Originally Posted by Alan Vorse

What I'm looking for is someone with a VOICE on the instrument.

Yes I like Matt Garrison and Gary Willis and Squarepusher, but I also like Mike Mills, Colin Moulding, and Andy Rourke. What all of these players have in common, is whether they are playing wild solos, or supporting a pop song, they still have a distinctive PERSONALITY. They are EXPRESSING themselves.

I'd rather hear a bass player write something on the wall, rather than just lean up against it.

[tycobb73]

I just learned Day Tripper this weekend. Everyone knows about his work in Something , but over the solo in DT he is playing one note. Amazing!

[nysbob]

Does it have to be a choice? Can't we have both?

[Alan Vorse]

Originally Posted by nysbob

Does it have to be a choice? Can't we have both?

Amen.

[MammaryVest]

Someone said that the virtuosos play for the song, but in a way that showcases their chops. This could be true sometimes, but what is generally a more memorable song? A song by Mark King, or a song by Sting? Even if you don't like Sting, 9 times out of ten, his song will be more memorable, I don't know why, but it will. That's what I like.

[Alan Vorse]

Originally Posted by MammaryVest

Someone said that the virtuosos play for the song, but in a way that showcases their chops. This could be true sometimes, but what is generally a more memorable song? A song by Mark King, or a song by Sting? Even if you don't like Sting, 9 times out of ten, his song will be more memorable, I don't know why, but it will. That's what I like.

And chances are, Sting probably wrote a memorable bassline to that song (like Waling on the Moon).

[dougjwray]

Some great bassist (I think it was Ron Carter, although it could have been many people) said that he tries to improvise his accompaniments so that if you took everything else away, the bass part would be a coherent, self-sufficient piece of music.
That's fine, but there's also another interesting approach: Take everything else away, and the bass part sounds like a completely random (or at least impressionistic) collection of notes and rests... put everything else back, and you realize that the bassist was filling all the cracks, reacting to the other players, and making the whole thing happen.
Just something to think about...

[lamarjones]

I could use bass player examples all day on who I think is too much, too little (that's right) and just right. Granted its all IMO, but I do listen for a certain level of maturity.

Anyways, I'll say this. I play a bunch of tunes on the 1-5 tip these days, and I really don't have any desire to break from that save a few walk down or walk ups to the next chord. Even in the other styles, half the time I will just pump out the same exact bass line minutes on end, cause there are other people doing their thing and it just ain't my time. But, should we switch styles and somewhere I take a break, I wish to light it up (well, as best as I can). So yes, I spend a decent bit of time on the art of being melodic and shredding, but that's not to say when I get my chance I am cramming as many notes as I can per second.

I just get my tools together in my practice time so when called upon, I am ready. If I was a porn star, and they threw me into a scene with two chicks and my tools weren't ready......wait what are we talking about?

[The Owl]

Originally Posted by TiMMay333

hi guys, just wanted your opinion on this.

When you think of awsome bassists, do you guys think of how insane/many notes they play, or what they can do within the limits of a song.

One thing that bothers me most is when bassists dont get enough recognition that they deserve, just for playing what the song needs, and making it sound full. Adam Carson of U2 , Mark August Stoermer of the killers, Jeordie White from marylin manson, nine inch nails, Christopher Wolstenholme of Muse and Pino Palladino come to mind first.

when i listen to these guys i notice they dont play a heck of alot of notes, but they dont disrupt the melody, keep the groove down, chooses thier notes wisely, and make the songs more interesting.

i dont know, i guess thats my 0.02$ of the day! what do you guys think?

Tim

By and large, I'm far more impressed witha bassist that can make astounding note and rhtyhmic choices and really spark a listener's interest as well as being the glue that holds a song together. People who can do both the sheer technique thing AND play for the song are a rare thing unfortunately.

To be completely honest, I'm not at all impressed by some guy who has a 45-string exotic wood coffee table and plays scales at 19,000 mph, what impresses me is someone with 4, 5 or 6 strings that can really make the music come to life with a combination of tone, uniquely individual note choices, groove, melody and harmonic awareness. Speed and technique for its own sake bores the crap out of me. But then again, I get just as bored with minimalism for it's own sake, it bugs the crap out of me just as much when a basist is just playing minimal stuff that adds NOTHING to a song.

However, please don't take this to mean that I'm down on solo bassists I'm not, I enjoy Michael Manring a ton and our own Stew McKinsey because these guys are MUSICIANS, not empty soulless technicians, guys who play MUSIC not scales or calculus.