Bassist marketability

[dougjwray]

After decades of being a bit of a "jazz cat" guy, I confronted a major fear about 15 years ago and started on the long road to singing acceptably in front of people. Now that I'm doing it regularly -- background and lead vocals -- in duo and trio situations, I had this thought:
Why would any leader of a working (non-instrumental) band want a bassist who doesn't sing and can't solo even a little?
Maybe that's stating it too simplistically... but I think there's no doubt that being able to do those things *greatly* increases your marketability.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

The only audition I failed in over 50+ years as a bassist was because I wasn’t a 1st tenor. Vocally I’ve been blessed with a 2nd bass vocal range. There aren’t a whole lot of songs with melodies, or even harmonies that requires a low E (the lowest std note on a guitar).

Anyway, to your point you are absolutely correct.

 

[DirtDog]

very nice!

Out of necessity, I started singing lead for our rehearsals - due to a revolving door of vocalists.

I got comfortable enough to do it on stage for about a year. Overcame that stumbling block of being able to sing AND play bass!

Thankfully we eventually recruited someone with a lot more talent to take over lead vox.

At least that put me in a good position to be a much more confident and competent backing vocalist.

 

[dougjwray]

The only audition I failed in over 50+ years as a bassist was because I wasn't a 1st tenor. Vocally I've been blessed with a 2nd bass vocal range. There aren't a whole lot of songs with melodies, or even harmonies that requires a low E (the lowest std note on a guitar).

Anyway, to your point you are absolutely correct.

I'm a baritone, and "cutting through the mix" is a challenge in a rock band when you're not a tenor like Jack Bruce, McCartney, Sting...
I, myself, have sometimes had trouble hearing my voice as separate from my bass, sonically.

 

[Podgorny]

Why would any leader of a working (non-instrumental) band want a bassist who doesn't sing and can't solo even a little?
...I think there's no doubt that being able to do those things *greatly* increases your marketability.

Singing backing vocals, absolutely. But bass solos ≠ marketable.

 

[dougjwray]

Singing backing vocals, absolutely. But bass solos ≠ marketable.

Yeah, I see your point. I only threw that in because one of my situations is a duo with a singer/acoustic guitarist. He uses a looper to provide a rhythm guitar background while he solos, but there are plenty of songs where I need to play a solo to provide some variety and/or provide a crucial (originally non-bass) hook from a cover song.

 

[dougjwray]

An example: I sometimes sing the Doors' "The Crystal Ship", which has a beautiful piano solo. When I do it in the duo with the acoustic guitarist, I play a solo in that spot which closely paraphrases the melody of the original one. A composed solo, not an improvised or wanky one.

 

[Pdaddy1978]

I was once told, by an LA professional musician of some note, that if I moved to LA, I would have no trouble getting work.
Was it because of my incredible talent as a bassist?....uhh...no.
LA already had lots of those.
It was because I was a capable bass player who could sing high harmonies.
Killing two birds...with one stone.

 

[Stubb]

I've been playing 24 years and only in the past two have I gotten serious about singing. I've been in my current bar band for three years, and our singer is a wonderful vocal teacher. Early on when I joined, he encouraged me to sing more harmonies, and he identified that I've got pretty good pitch and can sing odd harmonies more easily than our drummer. Now we do four-part harmonies on a few things, and I sing lead on a couple of songs. It's wonderful.

These guys are all in theirs 60s and 70s, and I'm half that. But now I think that whenever this band splits, I'm going to be able to market myself much more competitively because I have some confidence singing. It's been great to be pushed musically like that.

 

[groooooove]

the only reason a non-instrumental band with a budget would hire a bassist with no vocal ability would be

1. he has a worthwhile name. if you're getting someone we've heard of - or someone we'd go out to see regardless of the band their in, that's worth it. very rare.
2. you can't find anyone good in your budget that can do both

that's basically it.

in the arts, we're in a "sexy" field. a competitive one, for good reason. we do for money what countless people do for fun. it's a buyers market. assuming the band has decent gigs, they'd be a little crazy not to make sure everyone they hire can do some amount of vocals.

 

[jimmydean]

I stopped singing 30 plus years ago and look at me.....................eh , bad example ..........keep singing .

 

[Major_Rager_4MF]

Need to sing? I’m sure it helps. But mostly you just need to show up, play your parts well, and don’t be a douche. Plenty of work with just those 3 “skills”

 

[Parzival]

Singing is so hard for me. The bass part is easy at this point. I can sing bass pretty well, but we don’t have anything with vocals like that so I have to sing higher and it’s challenging. I sing lead on a song and my female lead singer comes in with me on the chorus. As soon as she starts I disappear from the mix and can’t hear myself.

I keep bugging the band to let me do Mmm Mmm Mmm by the Crash Test Dummies

 

[Pings Bass]

I think some genres just really undervalue the bass, otherwise this wouldn't even be a question.

 

[hrodbert696]

That singing greatly increases your marketability, totally agree.

That it's necessary to get gigging work... not as sure. At least among local cover bands, I know some pretty busy ones where the bassist doesn't sing.

 

[moon-bass]

I was once told, by an LA professional musician of some note, that if I moved to LA, I would have no trouble getting work.
Was it because of my incredible talent as a bassist?....uhh...no.
LA already had lots of those.
It was because I was a capable bass player who could sing high harmonies.
Killing two birds...with one stone.

Same thing here, but NYC. Back in the day I had a buddy begging me to move up with him for the same reasons.

 

[oldcatfish]

After decades of being a bit of a "jazz cat" guy, I confronted a major fear about 15 years ago and started on the long road to singing acceptably in front of people. Now that I'm doing it regularly -- background and lead vocals -- in duo and trio situations, I had this thought:
Why would any leader of a working (non-instrumental) band want a bassist who doesn't sing and can't solo even a little?
Maybe that's stating it too simplistically... but I think there's no doubt that being able to do those things *greatly* increases your marketability.

I don’t sing very well, but I get more gig offers than I want. That being said, you are 100% correct. A good musician who also sings well will most certainly move to the top of any bands considerations for a gig. But that’s also true with ANY instrument. One of the best lead guitar players that I have ever played with told me that he’s been passed over for several gigs because he didn’t sing well at the time. He took vocal lessons to improve and with some work, actually was able become quite a decent singer too.

 

[micguy]

If you’re playing clubs, doing things with as few people as possible makes sense. In my world (church gigs), we have 6 to 9 vocalists across the front of the stage. Instrumentalists are in back. There’s no need for a singing bassist in that environment - they just want the best bassist they can get, no vocal talent required.

 

[JonathanPDX]

I never learned to sing competently but I became a very good soloist. I'm sure I got turned down for a number of gigs because I couldn't share vocal duties or add harmonies but I don't think anyone ever hired me specifically because I was a strong soloist. At best it was an added bonus and at worst it was something they tolerated to keep me happy.

I did a lot of other things well, like having a good ear, being a fast learner, and always showing up on time and prepared. Looking back I'm sure I could have played better gigs and made more money if I'd worked with a vocal coach instead of spending all those hours transcribing Victor Wooten solos.

 

[dougjwray]

If you're playing clubs, doing things with as few people as possible makes sense. In my world (church gigs), we have 6 to 9 vocalists across the front of the stage. Instrumentalists are in back. There's no need for a singing bassist in that environment - they just want the best bassist they can get, no vocal talent required.

One of my regular gigs is an annual holiday concert led by a world class singer-- there are videos of her bringing down the house at Carnegie Hall and the Royal Albert Hall.
At these shows there are a parade of singers doing a song or two each, plus a special guest. As with your example, the band is in the back, and I'm required only to sing on the "everybody join in" tunes. I always feel a little silly when the soundperson sets up a mic and monitor for me for only two or three songs.