I think so. I think ALL albums that feature an instrument run the risk of sacrificing composition for showmanship. And in the case of a supportive instrument such as the bass, it just never seems to work out.
Sure, as a bassist I like hearing some fancy virtuosity as much as the next guy. But it grows weary quickly. At some point you need a song! And riffs and licks aren't enough. Jeff Berlin can pull it off, but even then, it's his technique that carries him though. Where are the songs?
I feel this way about the whole modern prog scene. They show off their chops, however, when it comes time for an actual composition, they fall short. Meanwhile, a band like YES, showed off their skills WITHIN the great songs.
Speaking of which, one of the greatest solo albums by a bassist is FISH OUT OF WATER. And...not one bass solo! Just a few breaks and fills now and then. YET, it's a bass masterpiece. THAT'S the way to do it.
On my own CD I originally had the concept of featuring old instrumentals with the bass as the lead, but along he way way I either replaced it or at least doubled it with guitar BECAUSE IT SOUNDS BETTER THAT WAY. The bass is still featured and gets to stand out, but in a more appropriate way -- functioning as a BASS.
The only thing worse than an indulgent bass album is an indulgent drummers album. (Though Billy Cobham did some great stuff beyond his drum features).
Am I alone here? Am I wrong to not show much interest in bass tricks? The way I see it, I'm a musician who plays the bass, not a bassist who plays music. Yes? No? Maybe?
Feel free to give your take. (And no need to attack others). All opinions are welcome.
Sure, as a bassist I like hearing some fancy virtuosity as much as the next guy. But it grows weary quickly. At some point you need a song! And riffs and licks aren't enough. Jeff Berlin can pull it off, but even then, it's his technique that carries him though. Where are the songs?
I feel this way about the whole modern prog scene. They show off their chops, however, when it comes time for an actual composition, they fall short. Meanwhile, a band like YES, showed off their skills WITHIN the great songs.
Speaking of which, one of the greatest solo albums by a bassist is FISH OUT OF WATER. And...not one bass solo! Just a few breaks and fills now and then. YET, it's a bass masterpiece. THAT'S the way to do it.
On my own CD I originally had the concept of featuring old instrumentals with the bass as the lead, but along he way way I either replaced it or at least doubled it with guitar BECAUSE IT SOUNDS BETTER THAT WAY. The bass is still featured and gets to stand out, but in a more appropriate way -- functioning as a BASS.
The only thing worse than an indulgent bass album is an indulgent drummers album. (Though Billy Cobham did some great stuff beyond his drum features).
Am I alone here? Am I wrong to not show much interest in bass tricks? The way I see it, I'm a musician who plays the bass, not a bassist who plays music. Yes? No? Maybe?
Feel free to give your take. (And no need to attack others). All opinions are welcome.
