I find it alot easier to be consistent with up and down strokes for picking which makes sense because it requires only wrist movement rather then trying to sync two fingers perfectly.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Alternating fingers: Does it need to be perfect?
- Thread starter Hardbassjunkie
- Start date
I find it alot easier to be consistent with up and down strokes for picking which makes sense because it requires only wrist movement rather then trying to sync two fingers perfectly.
I don't strictly alternate but I have taught myself to use one finger for the beats and the other finger for the "ands." I do not rake going downstring on eighth notes. I strictly alternate but not note-for-note. I don't even think it makes me faster, or my timing more perfect but it does give them a certain consistency of feel that always works. It gives me a bigger margin for error.
I wouldn't worry about playing wrong for too many years making it harder to "correct" it later on. When you're ready, you'll develop your technique.
There's no right answer unless you want to become super-versatile and professional. I reached a point where I did want to.
Edit: this technique also works for pick. In duple time, going down for the beats and up for the "and."
I wouldn't worry about playing wrong for too many years making it harder to "correct" it later on. When you're ready, you'll develop your technique.
There's no right answer unless you want to become super-versatile and professional. I reached a point where I did want to.
Edit: this technique also works for pick. In duple time, going down for the beats and up for the "and."
Man, do you have any clue how many times I’ve tried to get people to play like Kim Deal and they just can’t? There’s a specific technique to getting her sound and so many people just think that she didn’t care so they shouldn’t either.
The technique is downstroke picking every 8th. No upstrokes on an 8th, ever. If you don’t do that, you don’t sound like Kim Deal.
I'm pretty sure she learned bass after joining the pixies. Saying the technique was masterfully constructed reminds me of people who try to dissect Nirvana lyrics, when kurt Cobain said they just jumbled random words together.
That's not what I said. I said that Kim Deal has a specific technique and that you won't sound like her if you don't imitate it. Just because the person you idolize didn't care about technique doesn't mean their signature sound can be achieved any other way.
I think they're connected. I think of down and up strokes as like using two fingers. There are so many things that only sound right when using one finger. Likewise, there are many things that sound right with purely downstrokes. People with even the slightest punk background know this. I think it's more important to get the feel of the ups and the downs than to be alternating all the time. I'll use multiple downstrokes in a row, even I'll use multiple upstrokes in a row if it helps me feel the downbeat on the downstroke.
Your right hand fingers don’t need to always alternate. BUT, I will argue that learning to play with “perfectly alternating fingers” will make you conscious of your technique decisions/tendencies in the future. If that makes sense?
SteveCS as usual concluded everything you need to know pages ago...
In a nutshell, if you haven’t been playing more than a few years, aren’t interested or fascinated about the discipline required for classical pedagogy over rock (I’m classically trained in piano, different instrument, same approach to learning; I’m trying to avoid sounding elitist here, I just have classical experience
)...
And you’re playing rock bass in a band, save your money. Learn from the teacher who knows and plays what you want to know and play. Glean technique tricks and tips from every discipline. You don’t have to study under Sir Blah Stuffy Blah of the Conservatory, etc, to grab a metronome and drill alternating fingers, picking, plucking, and all manner of things. If you can keep time you’ve served your instrument and your band well.
In a nutshell, if you haven’t been playing more than a few years, aren’t interested or fascinated about the discipline required for classical pedagogy over rock (I’m classically trained in piano, different instrument, same approach to learning; I’m trying to avoid sounding elitist here, I just have classical experience
)...And you’re playing rock bass in a band, save your money. Learn from the teacher who knows and plays what you want to know and play. Glean technique tricks and tips from every discipline. You don’t have to study under Sir Blah Stuffy Blah of the Conservatory, etc, to grab a metronome and drill alternating fingers, picking, plucking, and all manner of things. If you can keep time you’ve served your instrument and your band well.
That's really helpful, sorry if I sounded sassy. It just stressed me out that I paid $80 bucks for someone to tell me I'm doing everything wrong and literally bending my fingers to his will.
This for sure..
I don’t know if it’s a lefty thing or what, but floating thumb is essential, and by doing that my ring finger suddenly showed up to take up slack from a tired middle finger... so now at times I’ll play 8th note chugga- chugga lines with ring and pointer, and muddle through 16th lines with 3-2-1 3-2-1 ...
3rd finger really helps with galloping lines too.
I think I’m way of topic sorry.
To be honest, I would have to actually see how you are doing things. I'm a retired band director who has seen people do some really awkward things with instruments that needed correction with a much easier and efficient way of doing. This may be what your new teacher is talking about. Or, he/she may just be very set in their ways about how things should be done. I'm inclined to think the later.
$80 was three times your old teachers price? That's not at all an uncommon price for lessons to be honest.
Hearing you're doing something wrong can be discerning at times, but I'll add this; would yo have taken lessons with him in the first place did you not think there were certain skills you could improve on? If yes, then why stress over something you probably already expected? A the end of the day, most of us want to get better at music; this teacher gave you solid advice to make you a better player. Do what you will with that..
Well, I am a classical pianist by training. When I had been playing for about 7 years, I met my best teacher. We are talking world renowned college professor learned from legendary pianist from childhood. He pretty much broke my entire technique and rebuilt it from scratch. It’s kind of become the reason I can play piano like I can. I was a good pianist before and I am still merely good; great takes a level of dedication that I haven’t put in. But my piano technique is completely effortless and never gives me discomfort and it starts from the basics of positioning and fingering and posture. If I didn’t have those things and get them early in life, I’d be a much worse player. It set me on a completely different path.
Why would you pay someone $80 to tell you that you’re good? You pay $80 because you want to reach another level. Be honest with yourself. Do you respect your teacher’s opinion? Do you respect his playing and his technique? Do you want it? Do you want it badly enough to follow his lead while paying for his instruction? If not, then walk away. If you do, then embrace it.
Of course a teacher should be literally guiding your hands. Do people honestly not expect this? Music is at some level a physical activity. How can you coach someone to improve at a physical activity without guiding them physically? Would you trust a weightlifting coach who would tell you you’re doing everything great and never puts a hand on any part of your body? I mean come on.
Perfect sense. Classical bowing is first taught with the correct hold, before even getting near an instrument. Then it's up and down, full bow, even strokes, constant weight/speed, etc, all at glacial tempo... Only once that is understood does it start exploring the different dynamics and tones associated with areas of the bow, different weights and speeds, moving between bridge and fingerboard, resetting for consecutive up/down bows, etc, at which point the player can mix and match on demand. But all of that starts to fall apart without the good bow hold taught on day 1. The same principles should go for teaching our right hands, IMHO, but they rarely do.
Absolutely. I think it’s perverse to suggest that your fingers should always alternate no matter what you’re playing. Especially when you have hammer ons and string changes on odd syncopated passages. But in classical learning, there’s this idea that you learn an over-simplified approach to acquire good habits and discipline and control. Then you graduate to learning how to express and your rules become relaxed. This is why you learn to play Bach and Mozart without any sustain pedal. And then when you become good enough at it to sound good without the sustain pedal, then you learn how to sprinkle it into your Bach and Mozart to get that tiny bit of ambience and then your mind gets blown that it’s allowed. But it was always allowed; it’s that placing that limitation actually allowed you to make better habits and to not rely on something else as a crutch. You learn to strictly alternate so you can do it. Then when it’s second nature, you start using different strokes to make different sounds and feels.
I completely agree with what you said. People are really hung up on some notion that a classical approach to electric bass isn’t a thing because a classical bass is a double bass. I think nothing could be further from the truth. Take the theremin. Completely electric instrument that didn’t exist back in the day, but Clara Rockmore clearly approaches it classically, and Jimmy Page doesn’t.
This also ignores the fact that most so-called classical instruments outside of the violin family (including concert bass) didn’t even reach their modern form until well into the 19th century when technology enabled instruments to become perfected. A lot of composers were writing for instruments that had just been invented or improved to enable a certain piece of music to be played. Brass instruments couldn’t even be played chromatically in Mozart’s time, but as soon as valved brass instruments were available, composers used them to play things that couldn’t be played before. Sax had just been invented when Bizet was writing for it.
You can have a formal approach to electric instruments where you learn the notes, you learn the scales, and you develop technique in a tiered fashion. It’s honestly quite a bit slower than a non-classical approach to technique, but you’ll have fewer gaps and roadblocks.
And as for the notion that classical education makes you stiff or unimaginative or unable to improvise, that’s just not true. Beethoven had no problem improvising fugues on the spot. Liszt could make people faint. I think that stereotype only happens today because the slow and steady approach to classical music has turned a lot of creative types off of it, but I think everyone can benefit from it.
Does he know Freebird? Smoke on the Water? What's his favorite Pixies song? Can he play Stairway to Heaven without the sheet music?
My hunch is the reason he spent the whole lesson nitpicking your technique was to cover up his ignorance, that you actually know more about rock bass than he does.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm haha. You know I think his intentions were good but just not the good fit. I'm all about improving my playing but I what is frustrating is that he didn't really give me anything to practice just "your right arm needs to be angled like this" "no no no you plucked the index twice again" then that's it
