Double Bass Are position names important to know?

[damonsmith]

I learned this 56 years ago and I thought it was dumb then. Still is.
Tom Gale

I'll just go ahead say that your lack of respect for the older methods is a big part of what makes me extremely skeptical of yours.

Everyone I have met who speaks out so much against them is normally someone looking for a shortcut and too lazy to have really worked through them.
Is that who you are looking to attract?

I am not saying there are not people who really worked over the older methods and don't like them, I just have yet to meet them.
Constantly saying or implying that Simandl, Billie, Nanny, etc. were idiots is going to do nothing but turn people off to your method.

Obviously, there are some outdated elements of those older methods, but most teachers and players are going to figure it out based on their own musical situations.

 

[TomGale]

Problem is that I never said that. You should learn to read.

 

[damonsmith]

I said saying or implying. Constantly slamming them here is not going to generate interest, just FYI.

 

[TomGale]

I believe the main purpose of giving names or numbers to all positions on the fingerboard is to try to clearly communicate between the author/teacher and the student/learner. Once that position is learned, the player tends to think in the groups of notes under his fingers. I have never heard an experienced player say, "Gee - I think I'll play that note with my 2nd finger in VI.V (or 6 1/2) position!" I also think the early use of Roman numerals was to make it universal and help sell the books in other European countries - other than the country of origin. Keeping those thoughts, I tried using a system that was the most student-friendly.
I started using just the position of the first finger and named it after the note. Easy for the student to remember. A, B, C#, etc - no halfs or numbers. To make the neck easier I went with the H, P, CS and ECS. (see several subjects down). As the student progresses more and more, will he/she remember all these things? Probably not - just the hand and notes BUT the student must start somewhere and I think my initial approach is the quickest to learn and master. Does the world agree? Not yet but at least I'm giving it my best shot.
Tom Gale
ASODB

 

[damonsmith]

I believe the main purpose of giving names or numbers to all positions on the fingerboard is to try to clearly communicate between the author/teacher and the student/learner. Once that position is learned, the player tends to think in the groups of notes under his fingers. I have never heard an experienced player say, "Gee - I think I'll play that note with my 2nd finger in VI.V (or 6 1/2) position!" I also think the early use of Roman numerals was to make it universal and help sell the books in other European countries - other than the country of origin. Keeping those thoughts, I tried using a system that was the most student-friendly.
I started using just the position of the first finger and named it after the note. Easy for the student to remember. A, B, C#, etc - no halfs or numbers. To make the neck easier I went with the H, P, CS and ECS. (see several subjects down). As the student progresses more and more, will he/she remember all these things? Probably not - just the hand and notes BUT the student must start somewhere and I think my initial approach is the quickest to learn and master. Does the world agree? Not yet but at least I'm giving it my best shot.
Tom Gale
ASODB

The problem is rarely with what you are saying but how you say it. Calling the older way "stupid" is not a mature way to get people interested in your way.

 

[MingusAmongUs]

As was sort of touched on here, the issue is the absence of a standard. And it's only an issue when trying to help keep the poor student from getting hopelessly confused. I recently ran into this issue myself when I was trying to suggest fingering to a young student for an exercise. I come from the Simandl method, but my student (10 years old) had only been using a bad book which is a generic method for the entire string family. That book's first position was different from Simandl's and when I told her "1st position" and showed her where the fingering was, she cocked her eybrows at me and said, "THAT's not first position!"

So my feeling is that it's mostly irrelevant, but a universal system would sure make the student's and the teacher's job much easier.

 

[TomGale]

"I learned this 56 years ago and I thought it was dumb then. Still is"

See? I didn't call it stupid - I said 'dumb' meaning there must be a better - easier - smarter - way to notate this. Please don't misquote me anymore.
Tom Gale

 

[TomGale]

my student (10 years old) had only been using a bad book which is a generic method for the entire string family.

I remember when these 'things' were published. It was an attempt to mix classes to accomodate budget cuts in most school systems. So, instead of a class of 3 violins, another of 1 cello and another of two basses, you now had one class of mixed instruments and the bass book usually got the worst of the deal. If I were in this situation, rather than confuse the student more, I'd just scratch over 1st and write in A. Instant understanding! Tell the ten year-old that bassists use real notes, not just numbers! Ta-Ta!!!
Tom Gale

 

[kpo]

""...my student (10 years old) had only been using a bad book which is a generic method for the entire string family.""

I remember when these 'things' were published. It was an attempt to mix classes to accomodate budget cuts in most school systems. So, instead of [working section-by-section], you now had one class of mixed instruments and the bass book usually got the worst of the deal.
Tom Gale

--Back in the mid-90s the Suzuki Method tried to correct this in their own way by publishing their first real Suzuki Bass Books; Daniel Swaim, then the ASU Bass Professor, made sure as many as possible of the same pieces were in the bass book as were in the violin, viola and cello books.
--The fingerings were mostly at the neck-block (Tom's "P" position) with use of four fingers (or pivots) so that all melodies and scales were available with no worrying about positions! Now bassists could use the same songs from the very, very, *very* beginning to join their brethren in The Suzuki Method.

--Gary Karr's Doublebass Books, also from the mid-90s, use the same basic introductory style and position, but do a much better job of explaining strategies, parts of the instrument, how to hold the bass, bow, et cetera, et cetera.
--(Gary's books are a great "Method Book" series, whereas the Suzuki books are mainly published songs. The "Suzuki Method" requires a Suzuki-Certified teacher and Committed Parents to actually learn "the method".)

 

[David Potts]

The end game is just about notes - finding them in fixed places on the finger board. The discussion here seems to be about how to systematise learning them with the clearest overview of how the fingerboard works. What seems crystal clear to the teacher can become very confusing for the student.

Your comments on this approach, please.

I draw a basic "road map" of four parallel lines for strings and cross lines for "frets" (similar to guitar) which I photocopy. In different versions of the basic diagram I can introduce more information as the student progresses through positions in this order - 1st, Half, 2nd, 3rd, 5th. This visual aid helps move students through easy keys both across and up/down all strings, giving them an understanding of how the fingerboard works, and teaching them how to shift and how to construct fingerings. Then I go back to the positions missed, because these contain the scales with more sharps and flats. This visual approach is explained on Day One as a way to clearly locate places called notes on the fingerboard and explain the logic of joining them up with fingerings.

Regardless of whose system is the best we still need a crystal clear systematic way to teach all useable notes on the fingerboard. I support the use of positions!

DP

 

[kpo]

...What seems crystal clear to the teacher can become very confusing for the student.
Your comments on this approach, please.

I draw a basic "road map" of four parallel lines for strings and cross lines for "frets" (similar to guitar) which I photocopy....
DP

This "Grid" is one of the visuals that "mixed method" books (the ones Tom and I dissed) use, back in the 1980s up to today.

I remember *completely* not understanding how "the Grid" visual-aid related to positioning my left hand when I was in middle school.

Of course, it seems crystal clear now, but as you say, what's clear to an experienced player can be very confusing for the student, and
using "the Grid" with a beginning student is a perfect example of "ships passing in the night"....

What makes more sense is marking lines (in pencil!!!! NO slimy, slidey TAPE!!!!) on the fingerboard at every "position", according to whatever system you're using. That way a student can See, Feel and Hear where the positions/notes are, instead of *only* using an abstraction on paper. Very important to directly connect Seeing to Feeling and Hearing. Even if it creates a "looking" habit, and it's far better than a "bad-guessing-and-I-don't-understand" habit.

 

[David Potts]

Someone used to make a strip of cardboard in the shape of a fingerboard with four strings and every note printed on it! Total confusion at first sight!!

I recently came across an old bass that I hope to buy and restore. It had one of these fingering charts stuck to its fingerboard !! - pity the poor kid trying to make sense of it somewhere out in the country!!!

DP

 

[David Potts]

kpo, I should add that I also do all the other things you mention in conjunction. Stars on A B D and G Octave on the G string for young kids. Sounding A above open D to tune into Simandl 1/2 and 1st Positions. Sounding G harmonic with 4th, 2nd or 1st fingers for 2nd, 2 1/2, and 3rd. Sounding D harmonic with 2 or 1 for 3 1/2 and 4th., etc.

I find the "frets" idea a useful way to motivate young kids, whose eyes light up when I say they can pick up a bass guitar and know exactly what notes they are playing and they can read notes too (which their friends usually can't!). They understand what the mother-of pearl dots on the guitar and bass guitar fingerboards mean.

In an effort to keep the note learning process crystal clear and simple I also encourage people to call out the names of notes as they play them. As well as identifying a place on the fingerboard with a sound and a particular note this also supports learning to read bass clef notes fluently. For the mouth to speak as you play the brain has already had to scan, digest and program the information into actions as familiar as fluently reading out loud from a book, which people instantly understand. When the notes become fixed indelibly the mouth stops. It's like giving the brain a double (or multiple) hit.

Regards

DP

 

[Pilgrim]

I learned on orchestral bass, and positions were part of the language used to communicate. They're very easy to learn - it would only take a few minutes to memorize them - so why not? Any language you can use that helps communicate with a student or peer is helpful and another tool in our arsenal.

On electric bass, counting frets is IMO a more effective way to communicate hand position - but on upright, I find positions clear and easy to use as references. As a student, I rarely had to discuss positions higher than 1st, 2nd and 3rd...but that was very handy.

"OK, try that note in 3rd position on the A..."

 

[Simandl Fan]

For my middle school orchestra, I mark the positions with a small dot of White Out on the edge of the fingerboard, where only the student will see them. I make four dots, at Simandl's first, second, third, and fourth position. I write the positions in their music, and I have great success getting my young bassists up and playing.

 

[slinkycheeseman]

slinkycheeseman say learning notes and rhythms be irrelevant. That's why slinkycheeseman spend her time learning which position be which.

 

[nfblackburn13]

i learned with simandl and then tried to learn rabbath
to me i think the simandl works alot better
i love rabbath
it is just he is the only person who i have heard done his own technique well

 

[Dogbertday]

first, I always thought that the use of Roman Numerals as Position markers was simply because a Letter (A, B, C, etc.) can be confused with something like "sul D" or a note correction, and a number is used for what finger you use on a note. In performance practice Roman Numerals are only useful for chord charts that need to be transposed. (at least as I have seen them).

I personally like the standard of where the positions are named but I wouldn't teach them right off the bat for every student. I'd be more concerend with makeing sure a young child knew what a C was. and I would say "high C" when describing C above open G. I would only introduce positions as a way to lead into string crossing, but quickly leave that after it's learned and talk about pivots and all that good stuff. I think this is much the same as how we teach music theory. First you learn what the notes and intervals are. then you learn how to build triad. then you earn all the rules for 4 part writing. then you learn how to break all the rules.

 

[aikakone]

I only played Double Bass 2 months many years ago, so please excuse my ignorance. I just got confused and wanted to clarify.

I was under the impression that positions on the guitar were by fret, or if you want to say another way, by half step. So... on that logic I thought 1st position was the open strings and first fret and that 5th position was the 5th half step... such as the note D on the A string. I had assumed this was correct of all stringed instruments, fretted or not.

Now I am very confused, but I'd like help. Thanks in advance.

 

[neilG]

I only played Double Bass 2 months many years ago, so please excuse my ignorance. I just got confused and wanted to clarify.

I was under the impression that positions on the guitar were by fret, or if you want to say another way, by half step. So... on that logic I thought 1st position was the open strings and first fret and that 5th position was the 5th half step... such as the note D on the A string. I had assumed this was correct of all stringed instruments, fretted or not.

Now I am very confused, but I'd like help. Thanks in advance.

aikakone,
I have seen at least one method book where the positions went in simple numerical order: half, then 1-12 to the first octave. There's no real reason not to do it this way. I think the "why" of the old intermediate position names are lost to history.