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.
Not a clear yes or no question. I play parts of a song the same every time if there are vocalists because they listen for queues. Plus, sometimes the audience recognizes the song from the bass line...in that case, it must be played the same every time. Differences are slight, like turnarounds, resolves, and passing notes...but the bass line itself stays consistent so the audience can recognize the song. If it's jazz or just a jam session, I never play a song the same way twice since it's all improvisation.
Don't know if anyone else experiences this, but one of my challenges is when I'm learning a song on the fly...playing it for the first time - live after a quick "can you play this?" kind of exchange where I'm given a line to play right before a performance, or as a last minute addition. In these cases I always play the song exactly the same way until I actually listen to it, or become familiar with the version being played. When in doubt, just give them "the note".
Don't know if anyone else experiences this, but one of my challenges is when I'm learning a song on the fly...playing it for the first time - live after a quick "can you play this?" kind of exchange where I'm given a line to play right before a performance, or as a last minute addition. In these cases I always play the song exactly the same way until I actually listen to it, or become familiar with the version being played. When in doubt, just give them "the note".
James Jamerson didn't... if you ever try to transcribe his songs and go from one recording to another... you can tell.
Our songs, no, the bass lines evolve over time.
The few covers we do, I generally will spice the basic line up when we work it out in rehearsal, but once I've gotten it hammered out, it won't change. I don't feel beholden to play the original line, but I don't evolve the line over time either, like will happen with almost all of our originals.
There are a few that are basically static at this point, but those are also the ones I have the least interest in playing.
The few covers we do, I generally will spice the basic line up when we work it out in rehearsal, but once I've gotten it hammered out, it won't change. I don't feel beholden to play the original line, but I don't evolve the line over time either, like will happen with almost all of our originals.
There are a few that are basically static at this point, but those are also the ones I have the least interest in playing.
I can if i want too, sometimes in studio if the songs are really well rehearsed over time, usully tough I improvise in various degrees. If im just really happy with my bassline on a particular song i tend too stick by it until suddenly the creative part of the brain kicks inn and steer my fingers otherwise 
I'm old and I forget stuff. When I can't remember a part, I make one up.
It's always a matter of evolution and filtering. Eventually my basslines stay more or less the same, depending on mood and on which bass I play.
I try to learn the exact bass line as an ear-training exercise. After that, I go with whatever works with what my bandmates are doing, and sometimes I'll adjust it to my own preference.
I have one bandleader who says "those songs sold millions of copies for a reason" to justify replicating the songs as closely as possible. For that band I try not to deviate too much.
In his defense, some musicians deviate out of laziness: they skip complicated parts, they insert their own frequently-played licks rather than something that would better fit the song. That said I think a bigger factor is that he's a bit of a control freak.
I have the most fun when deviating in a planned, creative way. Just one example: a BL I worked with put a funky New Orleans beat to the well-worn standard "Honky Tonk Women" and made it a lot more fun to play.
I have one bandleader who says "those songs sold millions of copies for a reason" to justify replicating the songs as closely as possible. For that band I try not to deviate too much.
In his defense, some musicians deviate out of laziness: they skip complicated parts, they insert their own frequently-played licks rather than something that would better fit the song. That said I think a bigger factor is that he's a bit of a control freak.
I have the most fun when deviating in a planned, creative way. Just one example: a BL I worked with put a funky New Orleans beat to the well-worn standard "Honky Tonk Women" and made it a lot more fun to play.
I do my best to play a song the exact same way every time once I find a bass line and groove that works because in my experience that helps those that call me to play remember me as "reliable". The trick I've found is that too much "reliable" can easily become "predictable" which isn't always a good thing.
So, I try to play parts consistently all the time. However, I'm human and am prone to add in a little embellishment when the mood strikes me right or maybe flub a note when the mood strikes me wrong.
So, I try to play parts consistently all the time. However, I'm human and am prone to add in a little embellishment when the mood strikes me right or maybe flub a note when the mood strikes me wrong.
It depends entirely on context. If I'm playing pop/indie/country, I pretty much play the song the same way every time because that's the way it's written and the bass line has often has a melodic purpose. In a more jammy, pure-groove based context, blues, etc, then I'll monkey around.
Nah. My riffs continue to evolve even after the recording has been finalized. Nothing radical; my bandmates will still have the standard lines to rely on but I'll mix up the fills or change the octaves of some runs, whatever I'm feeling at the time. You definitely want a solid framework in place for most situations though, IMO.
- Oct 18, 2012
- 6,683
- 5,538
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Fender, Spector, Ampeg, Curt Mangan, Nordstrand Pickups, Korg , Conquest Sound
I usually play songs the same way every time. I will sometimes add a fill but for the most part, I play the same way.
I will say this: If the bandleader expects me to play the song note-for-note every time, they'd better give me sheet music and/or recordings. I'm not going to remember the exact part between the rehearsal and the gig, if I don't have notation and/or a reference recording to study.
No! Why would the audience come to the second show or see you next week?
Only the people who helped spawn the huge use of DJs want to hear the song the same. They try to recreate that moment but because life is change everything is different. Different girl, you now have a paunch, etc.
people who love music and your group want to experience different treatments of the material.
Besides that takes out all the fun of responding to your fellow musicians.
Only the people who helped spawn the huge use of DJs want to hear the song the same. They try to recreate that moment but because life is change everything is different. Different girl, you now have a paunch, etc.
people who love music and your group want to experience different treatments of the material.
Besides that takes out all the fun of responding to your fellow musicians.
Classical: OMG are you kidding? Bog help you if you go off-page.
Jazz (big band): Yes, I play the line that's written if available or develop one that's repeatable, then repeat it.
Jazz (ensemble): Sometimes if there's a cool Ron Carter-y groove thing in some recording or another, I'll learn it, but I usually just walk over the changes or bang on roots as appropriate. I tend to use a lot of the same turnarounds and transitions over again in the same tunes for groove. Then I steal them for other genres, so mandolin players can say "Why you bein' so fancy, man?". Mandolin players don't get to complain nearly enough.
Covers: I often cover rock/blues BG songs with a DB, which tends to lead to some simplification. But, if there's a cool line or a badass lick, or a good transition, I'm learning them note-for-note and working them in somewhere (and probably stealing them to work in somewhere else).
Acoustic: There's only the two basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I steal from the melody for transitions.
Blues: There's only the six basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I use the same transitions as everybody else (because I'm creative).
Latin: There's only the eight basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I sometimes play a note that isn't a I, a IV, or a V.
Jazz (big band): Yes, I play the line that's written if available or develop one that's repeatable, then repeat it.
Jazz (ensemble): Sometimes if there's a cool Ron Carter-y groove thing in some recording or another, I'll learn it, but I usually just walk over the changes or bang on roots as appropriate. I tend to use a lot of the same turnarounds and transitions over again in the same tunes for groove. Then I steal them for other genres, so mandolin players can say "Why you bein' so fancy, man?". Mandolin players don't get to complain nearly enough.
Covers: I often cover rock/blues BG songs with a DB, which tends to lead to some simplification. But, if there's a cool line or a badass lick, or a good transition, I'm learning them note-for-note and working them in somewhere (and probably stealing them to work in somewhere else).
Acoustic: There's only the two basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I steal from the melody for transitions.
Blues: There's only the six basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I use the same transitions as everybody else (because I'm creative).
Latin: There's only the eight basslines, so it comes off pretty similar. I sometimes play a note that isn't a I, a IV, or a V.
The musical role of the bass (not the player, the part) is actually quite sophisticated. It provides a foundation and context to the harmony, it provides harmonic movement and interest in support of melody, sometimes it provides rhythm in its own right, often it defines or prepares cadences, sometimes it provides countermelody, it certainly has interplay with drums and percussion and it must maintain a keen sense of time and feel. All of these things provide meaning to the melody and also aural cues, clues and prompts to the rest of the band and the audience as to what is coming next. For me the challenge is write or develop parts that fulfil the requirements of the role by remaining constant from performance to performance, whilst at the same time provide sufficient space for creativity or improvisation the fly without undermining the songs themselves. As an example, one of the tunes we play has a total meltdown over Dm at the end - between us we create a soundscape using all kinds of reverb and delays on vocals and I get a chance to put my SuperEgo and looper through their paces, but once all that is happening I go back to a clean 13/8 arpeggio of Dm, G7 and Am roots over a clean fingerpicked 4/4 guitar part with a gradual slowing down to end on Dm - these parts have to be the same each time or the ending simply does not work, but the meltdown section is never the same twice, and long may it remain that way.
A lot of music is though as layer ( forward thinking ) while I see music as a block ( top down thinking ), I may have studied too much 4 parts harmony or listen to too much classical/prog/metal music where everything is important.
And I thought I was alone ! started to hapen to me in my late 40s and it just kept happening more often as time roles on, now that I'm getting closer to the big 60 it happens every gig we play, and to be honest with you, when I cook something up right out of nowhere and end up on the punch with the other 2, it sometimes makes me laugh out loud, and I feel that its even more fun to play, the guitarist says we are all dropping the ball more often the older we get, but we are getting it down to a fine art picking it up again.
I played in a band before that wanted to play it exactly like the album, after a few years of that it became less interesting and very very repetetive !
