There are a few bass anthologies out there that have transcribed basslines. Otherwise lots of transcription in standard notation available on the Internet and those, while still containing inaccuracies are generally higher quality than TAB.
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.
Always just like the record?
- Thread starter tunewriter
- Start date
There are a few bass anthologies out there that have transcribed basslines. Otherwise lots of transcription in standard notation available on the Internet and those, while still containing inaccuracies are generally higher quality than TAB.
Yeah, I'd walk on a RUSH tribute "improvising" on the original recorded parts, you bet. I've seen too many Rush tributes that claim that they are great but upon seeing them I realise that it's just their friends family and the band themselves that think they are really nailing the stuff.
Want to do your own spin to AC/DC tunes or whomever else, go for it.
Not RUSH tunes. Not for me at least.
Yes, too. I cringe when I see someone butcher up bass parts by Squire, like Siberian Khatru and Heart of the Sunrise.
If you're going to tackle those parts, play them right or not at all.
Sorry, that's how I always approached playing and I'm happy with being able to play songs near perfectly, with the same feel as the original. Thats a win for me.
Do I improvise on some songs by other artists??? Maybe, but most likely I will play what was recorded.
I play in a Soundgarden tribute. Not much wiggle room there. And if I started playing different, "improvised" parts at this stage, the rest of the band would be giving me funny looks. They know their parts as well as I know mine. Like, spot on.
Covers/dance/club bands???? Who cares? Go ahead and improvise in the frame of the songs all night. 99% of the people there wont care anyway. I'm sure if I were playing in a band doing that mundane stuff I'd need to "improvise" just to keep me awake and interested in that music.
If one musician came up to me after a gig and told me that I did a good job in my Soundgarden tribute, that is fine with me.
That way I know it was good enough for the rest of the crowd that dosen't care.
I have a real good ear and that helps when I learn songs. I'll know if one or two notes aren't right and I'll go back and make sure that they are right. And learn the songs correctly and memorize them that way.
The kind of music that inspires me is the kind that needs to be played correctly. It's a little tougher to play but I don't give up until I get it right. Good enough isn't my thing.
I don't play what most of the TB'er's here play. I'm not into the basic radio hits/classic rock thing that everyone else seems to play. Too many bands like that already, everywhere.
Oh, and I dont do 200 shows a year so the ones I do play will be my very best effort to deliver the music as it was recorded.
And for me it's fun when I nail the stuff correctly. I get a bigger smile on my face knowing I just nailed the song rather than bluff my way through in the name of "improvising".
To each their own.
Have fun.
scotch
It's not rocket science!
- Nov 12, 2006
- 6,944
- 2,081
- 51
- Disclosures
- Please see Profile for Endorsement disclosures
I think 4001 should be applauded & take pride in his/her commitment to learning a pop song 100% accurately! (yes, sorry: I still consider prog-rock "pop" within the full compass of western music) Certainly nothing wrong with that. Everyone plays music for a varying combination of reasons. If 4001' 'thing' is learning a song note-for -note, awesome!
It's not necessarily "being lazy" or somehow less work to color outside of the lines either, though! Developing the taste and maturity to modify (I think "improvise" isn't the ideal term here) a recognizable part while still maintaining the spirit of the music is equally (if not more) difficult than playing by rote. Music is an art form, afterall!
Still, if I saw a tribute band NAILING the look, energy, sound and music of an iconic artist- I'd be impressed! Not the same kind of impressed as seeing something different, but impressed nonetheless!
It's not necessarily "being lazy" or somehow less work to color outside of the lines either, though! Developing the taste and maturity to modify (I think "improvise" isn't the ideal term here) a recognizable part while still maintaining the spirit of the music is equally (if not more) difficult than playing by rote. Music is an art form, afterall!
Still, if I saw a tribute band NAILING the look, energy, sound and music of an iconic artist- I'd be impressed! Not the same kind of impressed as seeing something different, but impressed nonetheless!
I do, otherwise I wouldn't be doing it. It's a great time, at least so far.
If you don't care...........who cares?
And then he adds some decidedly non-awesome parts like putting down all players who do stuff he wouldn't like to do.
I wonder if the note-for-note players who cover "Maggie May" by Rod Stewart have to play the mistakes just like the record???
If you are using tab what do you expect. Get the chord charts for the song and then work with that. Most tab is wrong and what is right is tabbed poorly like long tabbed out sections using crazy notes choices when the whole song can be played in the first posistion with little movement.
It looks cool to play all over the fretboard you know
It looks cool to play all over the fretboard you know
scotch
It's not rocket science!
- Nov 12, 2006
- 6,944
- 2,081
- 51
- Disclosures
- Please see Profile for Endorsement disclosures
hmmm....you probably can't play Heart of the Sunrise exactly like the recording without 2 basses. 12 of the last 19 measures have 2 bass voices and from looking at it again I'm not seeing how a single bass player can cover all of it exactly. "Fake their way through" to use your term sure. But both voices exactly as written? I doubt it.
I'm willing to bet Squire dubbed the second voice.
More to the point there's something called a "studio arrangement" that's meant to be used to make a recording. Studio arrangements sometimes physically cannot be recreated live - Led Zeppelin didn't break out a half dozen guitar players when they played "Kashmir" live. And even if they can be done live they may not be appropriate - how many live performances have you seen that fade out to take a really trivial example?
Lots of singing bassists simplify their lines when they play live because they simply cannot play the studio line while singing.
I can go on and on.
You really need to stop holding up the studio version as the "right", "correct", "gold standard" for a song. It simply isn't true. Memorizing a part note for note doesn't make you a better musician (and as a guitar player I've memorized a number of 5 and 6 page long classical guitar scores). It just means you have a good memory
+1 And there you have it. Everyone plays for different reasons and different styles of music but please don't knock those who play music "YOU" don't dig!
great point about overdubs-
Have been listening to the "bass isolated" version of YYZ, and surprise, Geddy is human afterall, as you will hear there are several parts where he punches in (particularly the super cool bass fills)
Have been listening to the "bass isolated" version of YYZ, and surprise, Geddy is human afterall, as you will hear there are several parts where he punches in (particularly the super cool bass fills)
I said "Who cares?" because that is the general sentiment that I got reading others responses. "Who cares", meaning it dosen't matter to them if they don't play the songs note-for-note. I get it, they play the framework and do what they want to do for the rest.
Fine. Do whatever you want to do to those songs. Most of the people in the audience won't care. And most of the 'general' music being played by grage bands at their gigs dosen't require much thinking.
I have talked to lots of musical educators and one thing seems to be common. The students lack of wanting to put in any extra time to get songs NAILED. It seems that many people can only get so far figuring out a song and then have to succum to "improvising" a difficult part that they most likely could figure out but simply don't want to for any number of reasons. And they don't want to be drill instructors making their students go crying home to mommy.
Kind of reminds me of little kids getting a trophy when their team loses. Let's not hurt their feelings.
Perhaps it's not cool to be so precise? Sometimes it's just a couple of notes that make a huge difference but the all too often response is not one of "Oh, cool, now I can play it right", it's more like "Don't tell me how to play my instrument."
Tell me that dosen't happen. I wonder what FZ would have said to that kind of attitude??
Probably......:"You're FIRED!"
I play in one band, doing music that I like to cover the way it was recorded. The rest of the band takes that approach as well. I've been blessed to play in other bands where that was the same idea behind the musical presentation. I do not believe in "good enough". That approach is fine for joe six-pack that likes to just "jam". Perhaps that is a reason for so many jam bands as well. No rules, just play, so therefore no mistakes.
I like to put in the extra work.
I guess I have the time for that.
If you can learn the tune note-for-note, then you can go ahead and improvise on it. That's my opinion. Improvising without knowing or wanting to know the song correctly makes me think you didn't want to put in the extra effort from the get go, thats all.
If the coach tells the QB to execute the plays as designed and the QB decides to improvise, he better be pretty awesome or the team loses and the QB is on the bench studying game photos of where he went wrong as the fans file out early before the game is over. And there aren't that many great QB's that have that ability.
Not too many weekend warrior players like to put in the time all week, week after week to learn things correctly. Maybe they have families, jobs that require more than the average work week, etc. I don't have those worries so I put in the time.
My band is tight and spot on. The way I like it.
Because 'good enough' and improvising in parts that dont have room for it dosen't cut it in my band.
The hardcore Soundgarden/Audioslave/Temple of the Dog fan/s in the audience realise that when they see us play.
That's all that matters to me.
Carry on with the thread.
I like to learn it pretty closely (lots of listening/YouTube vids), say 95%-ish and then dial it back if needed. When I was doing a Priest/Maiden tribute it was nearly note for note, but that's out of pure respect for the music. Now days I'm just doing dance stuff that everyone knows so I try to keep it more like the original band did it live (extended solos/beginnings/endings) and people really appreciate all the extra effort.
Take the song Stone In Love, if I didn't play the exact bass melody line at the end it would sound ******. On the other hand songs like Somebody's Baby or the Neville Bros. cover of Love The One You're With I just do my thing.
That's probably because the students are smart enough to know that it's a waste of time, and not only because many of these basslines that you're "nailing" were improvised themselves, as has been stated here more than once.
As for your little kid & trophy comment, I don't see how you worked that in there. Are you sure that analogy fits?
