My Funny Valentine

[Mike Goodbar]

Yes, when I was a kid (and by that I mean younger than 40) "My Funny Valentine" would be my cue to whip out the bow and play that descending line with much feeling and (more importantly) heavy vibrato. Blech. Problem is, the pianist or guitarist would be pounding it out too. One guitarist could always be counted on to do his high-larious "Stairway to Heaven" quote.

These days, depending on the sitch and the parties involved, I pretty much stick to roots Don outlined for the opening bars, or maybe something more melodic and conversational if the mood takes us there.

[kurosawa]

Well then you go pedal point. I thought the idea of this thread was to give a fellow bassist some ideas that he could use right away.

And this argument about chords is silly. There are NO correct chords. The bassist renames the chords with every note he plays. That's the power of the bass, an instrument that by being out of tune makes every other instrument out of tune, an instrument that renames chords. Do you want to make a major into a minor? Lay the 6th under the band. Now the whole band is playing the relative minor seventh. The flavor changes. You can richen a vapid passage immediately this way.

There is no such thing as a chord. It is a convenient way of describing the confluence of simultaneous melodic lines. The bass is a melody instrument. Whatever's on top, vocal, guitar, sax, that's a melody instrument, too. And the lines between ought to be doing melodic stuff, too.

Let me put this another way. Here you are, out on the ocean, and according to your instruments you're about to cross the equator. What, do you expect to see a dotted black and white band like you have encircling the globe on your desk back home pass under your boat? What's real is this sea, this boat, these clouds and birds and sun. Now this is a very, very useful descriptor, this equator.

And so are chords, but THEY ARE NOT THE BOSS. As bass players, we lead the band, we don't follow chords. Capisce? And the things we play define the chords, not the other way around.

[gerry grable]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRe_a1_Byno

And that settles it, Ollie.

[ChuckCorbisiero]

Originally Posted by kurosawa

Well then you go pedal point. I thought the idea of this thread was to give a fellow bassist some ideas that he could use right away.

And this argument about chords is silly. There are NO correct chords. The bassist renames the chords with every note he plays. That's the power of the bass, an instrument that by being out of tune makes every other instrument out of tune, an instrument that renames chords. Do you want to make a major into a minor? Lay the 6th under the band. Now the whole band is playing the relative minor seventh. The flavor changes. You can richen a vapid passage immediately this way.

There is no such thing as a chord. It is a convenient way of describing the confluence of simultaneous melodic lines. The bass is a melody instrument. Whatever's on top, vocal, guitar, sax, that's a melody instrument, too. And the lines between ought to be doing melodic stuff, too.

Let me put this another way. Here you are, out on the ocean, and according to your instruments you're about to cross the equator. What, do you expect to see a dotted black and white band like you have encircling the globe on your desk back home pass under your boat? What's real is this sea, this boat, these clouds and birds and sun. Now this is a very, very useful descriptor, this equator.

And so are chords, but THEY ARE NOT THE BOSS. As bass players, we lead the band, we don't follow chords. Capisce? And the things we play define the chords, not the other way around.

I'm sorry Akira. I'm a little confused. Could you elaborate? I don't think I fully capisce.

[shwashwa]

Originally Posted by ChuckCorbisiero

I'm sorry Akira. I'm a little confused. Could you elaborate? I don't think I fully capisce.

actually he's making our point for us. no one mentioned "correct or incorrect" chords. we're just suggesting that there are different ways of outlining that motion, which seems to be his point too, although it seems like he's getting slightly confrontational, but i could be misinterpreting things which would not be the first time ive done that.

[ChuckCorbisiero]

Originally Posted by shwashwa

actually he's making our point for us. no one mentioned "correct or incorrect" chords. we're just suggesting that there are different ways of outlining that motion, which seems to be his point too, although it seems like he's getting slightly confrontational, but i could be misinterpreting things which would not be the first time ive done that.

What is "our point". I like confrontational but I want a full explanation of this point he's making. He said, "Capisce". I don't quite capisce. Pedal point? I know what that is but please continue.

[DoubleMIDI]

I think he means a pedal note, a drone with several chords changing on it. Don't know if this is the correct english term, in german it is called Orgelpunkt.

I would generally prefer a notation without the drone in the chord root, I like it better notated as the (normal) chord on the (drone) bass note. This way it is easier to play the (normal) changes later and omit the drone. But it is just a different kind of notation of the same thing.
Omitting the drone in the chord is possible, but then the information that this part is often played with the drone gets lost that way. Since the bass player should decide himself where to play a drone and where not, omitting the drone in the notation might be preferable to some players.

If you need to play unknown pieces (not this one, of course!), the chord on bass note notation helps to play the drone where expected and still follow the roots of the chord changes later.

[ChuckCorbisiero]

Originally Posted by kurosawa

Do your best upright pizz imitation.

****, I missed this post ..............Sorry, I guess I'm in the wrong forum. OOps!

[kurosawa]

Originally Posted by ChuckCorbisiero

****, I missed this post ..............Sorry, I guess I'm in the wrong forum. OOps!

Mute well, or it will suck out loud.

[ChuckCorbisiero]

Originally Posted by kurosawa

Mute well, or it will suck out loud.

I see Akira, your love for Shakespeare and the theatre is insatiable. Unfortunately, we're not talking about the cinema. We're talking about:

Originally Posted by ryal1

walking through the first few bars of this tune Cm CMaj Cm7 Cm6
are giving me some trouble, any advice in making this line work? what would be a good approach?
Thanks

[Treyzer]

Man, this whole conversation is so funny and sad! "What a tempest in a teacup" To quote the venerable Unka Paulie, "Use your damn ears, for Pete's sake". Or words to that effect.

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by Treyzer

Man, this whole conversation is so funny and sad! "What a tempest in a teacup" To quote the venerable Unka Paulie, "Use your damn ears, for Pete's sake". Or words to that effect.

Trey, that would be "Use yer damn ears, ******'s. Kindly, so.

[Roger Davis]

Originally Posted by Treyzer

Man, this whole conversation is so funny and sad! "What a tempest in a teacup" To quote the venerable Unka Paulie, "Use your damn ears, for Pete's sake". Or words to that effect.

Yup, I've already posted something to that effect. Any bass player worth his salt should be able to hum a bass line to fit the tune. Playing it simply follows. The only exception I suppose is being presented with an unknown song on a gig. But that is surely quite unusual.

[gerry grable]

The only exception I suppose is being presented with an unknown song on a gig. But that is surely quite unusual.[/


Really?

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by gerry grable

The only exception I suppose is being presented with an unknown song on a gig. But that is surely quite unusual.[/

What if they call "The love Theme from the Texas chainsaw massacre" ?

[Roger Davis]

Er, I can't recall being asked to play that. Is it perhaps a waltz or a bossa.

Well, OK, I was playing last Sat and the sax player called a tune which I had never heard of. Mock astonishment from the others in the quartet and the piano player handed me his chord book. After we played it I remarked what a sweet tune it was with an unusual chord sequence so I couldn't really 'hear' - or 'ear' - it. Turns out it was one of the sax player's compositions.

[gerry grable]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

What if they call "The love Theme from the Texas chainsaw massacre" ?

HomeLite or Stihl ?

[kurosawa]

Originally Posted by ChuckCorbisiero

I see Akira, your love for Shakespeare and the theatre is insatiable. Unfortunately, we're not talking about the cinema. We're talking about:

Yah, I gave him 2 simple things he can do right now that will work. Everyone has to start somewhere. What did you give him?

[ChuckCorbisiero]

This poster gave the OP all he needed.

Originally Posted by Don Higdon

Part II



As for what to use, it depends:
The descending chromatic line as a bass line has been done to death on this tune, and risks being a distraction to the melody. The accompaniment is just that; it's not the star of the show. There's no reason that this countermelody has to be played by the bass. It can be an interior voice. Although I'm far from a slave to using roots, I've found by experience that in a case like this, playing roots while another instrument plays the line gives a framework and another contrast for showing off the line while not dominating the tune.
In this case, for the head, consider playing the roots
Cm---G7---Cm---F7---Ab---/Ab---/Dm7---/G7---
What to use varies with the instrumentation and the desires of the other players, and where you are in the tune - the head or the choruses. There are pianists who demand the line. You have to be prepared for whatever they want.

Then you added:

Originally Posted by kurosawa

Well then you go pedal point. I thought the idea of this thread was to give a fellow bassist some ideas that he could use right away.

And this argument about chords is silly. There are NO correct chords. The bassist renames the chords with every note he plays. That's the power of the bass, an instrument that by being out of tune makes every other instrument out of tune, an instrument that renames chords. Do you want to make a major into a minor? Lay the 6th under the band. Now the whole band is playing the relative minor seventh. The flavor changes. You can richen a vapid passage immediately this way.

There is no such thing as a chord. It is a convenient way of describing the confluence of simultaneous melodic lines. The bass is a melody instrument. Whatever's on top, vocal, guitar, sax, that's a melody instrument, too. And the lines between ought to be doing melodic stuff, too.

Let me put this another way. Here you are, out on the ocean, and according to your instruments you're about to cross the equator. What, do you expect to see a dotted black and white band like you have encircling the globe on your desk back home pass under your boat? What's real is this sea, this boat, these clouds and birds and sun. Now this is a very, very useful descriptor, this equator.

And so are chords, but THEY ARE NOT THE BOSS. As bass players, we lead the band, we don't follow chords. Capisce? And the things we play define the chords, not the other way around.

I didn't understand where you were coming from. I don't agree with the "use right away" concept. Also, if we suppose there are no chords, where does that leave us? What language do you suppose we use? "Well then you go pedal point" was your response. The work needed and foundation can't be bought or had immediately. I had nothing to add except clarity. I felt your post was confusing the OP. Sorry if I was to confrontational. You did use the word "capisce".

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by ChuckCorbisiero

What is "our point". I like confrontational but I want a full explanation of this point he's making. He said, "Capisce". I don't quite capisce. Pedal point? I know what that is but please continue.

I see Akira, your love for Shakespeare and the theatre is insatiable. Unfortunately, we're not talking about the cinema. We're talking about:

****, I missed this post ..............Sorry, I guess I'm in the wrong forum. OOps!

We're talking about several things here:

1) We're talking about a tune in a music theory forum on the internet. This particular music theory forum is open to all Talkbass members; Paul Determan decided to put it here in the DB forums because he thought it likely that there would be more trained theory folks about per capita, but it is meant to serve the entire forum, so no one is "lost" here because of the instrument they do or don't play.

2) The tune in question is "My Funny Valentine", which contains a common minor line cliche, which is also commonly found other places like the bridge of "My One And Only Love", the second 8 of "Bye Bye Blackbird", and a couple of other tunes already mentioned in this thread. Many people feel that having the bass always play this line is corny and/or overkill, or that (as mentioned) it's better not played the same way by the same person every time.

3) One common way that I often cover this change is by playing a dominant Pedal Point, as mentioned by a poster you seem intent on questioning for saying this. It's actually a very common and useful device to use with this particular line cliche.

4) I don't think the person who made this suggestion is a dead Japanese film director. As much as I love a good Fuquism, under the current set of site rules and at its current size and worldwide participation status, it's probably best to reserve the use of nicknames for those we feel pretty sure will appreciate them. Kindly, of course.