Fretting fingering?

[jazzyvee]

Never even thought about consciously using a regime of specific fingers. I always try to work on the basis of economy of movement and use whatever fingers enable me to execute the line I'm playing cleanly smoothly and in time. In a tricky phrase or run like for example the intro and main riff to Spain by chick corea, it pays to work out a fingering regime.

 

[climber]

I've been playing for 51 years. I learned 1234 in the beginning, and have used and taught it ever since. I played upright for years as well and it was always 124, tho it's really 1 23 4! I have always done a lot of reading music and can't imagine switching between 1234 and 124 when I'm doing that.

IMNSHO consistency is the name of the game here, especially in the formative years.

 

[pedroims]

Depends on what part of the neck Im fretting, usually goes like this:

Lower register: 1,2,4
Middle of the neck either 1,2,4 or 1,2,3,4
Upper register: 1,2,3

 

[ba55i5t]

I use 124 when it comes to playing 5ths and octaves individually, but use index ring pinky when playing a root fifth octave pattern. Benefit of playing octaves index pinky is you can fill it up with index ring pentatonic patterns.

In a roundabout way, play what works for you. I practice 1234 throughout the neck and play the intro riff to Master of Puppets as an exercise.

 

[jamro217]

As previously stated, I never had bass lessons and started out in a trio where filling the most sonic space possible was mandatory. Picking up the bass after playing guitar led me to approach it as a completely different instrument - an electrified bass, rather than as a lower, four string version of an electric guitar. That meant no picks allowed. First and middle fingers do the picking with the occasional sideways bash with the thumb for emphasis. Technique only mattered to the point where you able to play the required notes cleanly and in time. When the fretless entered the picture technique suddenly became more important, owing to how finger contact and angle produced different tones. I find that my fingering is less parallel to the frets than it used to be and more pointing towards the body of the bass. The actual use of what each finger does has changed from looking at the fretboard from a vertical standpoint (parallel to the frets) to a horizontal one (nut to bridge). More analysis is required to answer properly. This may not be as easy to explain as it is in practice, so thanks for your patience.

 

[Hambone 70]

Thanks to everyone for the comments, experience, and recommendations!

I'm going to pursue 1-2-3-4 for the time being, using 1-2-4 when it is handy (root-5th, etc). Maybe one day I'll get to the level of some of you experts... just doing it without thinking about it!

My thinking is that 1-2-3-4 covers an entire major scale, and would therefore aid in sight-reading without having to shift a fret for the notes that falls outside of 1-2-4.

The short-scale bass is going to help, too.

 

[Plectrum72]

At present, I'll rapidly change my approach depending on the style of playing to whatever feels natural at the time and suits the thing I need to play. A more technical part usually gets the 1-2-3-4, while a more expressive part tends to find me unconsciously omitting my pinky and sliding to the far notes with my ring finger. This is principally because I am an undisciplined heathen with bad technique, but still sounds pretty nice.

--^@

It's like you're inside my head.

 

[InhumanResource]

OK, so it seems there's two schools of thought regarding fretting fingering. There's the one-finger-per-fret crowd (1-2-3-4), and the 3-finger people (1-2-4). (I reckon there's another group - the 1-thumb-per-fret punk crowd! Just kidding...)

The Ed Friedland book I'm working through promotes the 1-2-4 fingering, while the online StudyBass course pushes 1-2-3-4.

I see a huge benefit in 1-2-3-4 fingering. I can cover 2 octaves on a 5-string without changing hand positions. It makes sight reading easier for me, too. To me, using 3 fingers is like telling a keyboard player that he can't use his ring finger.

I can also see benefits in using both positions. For me, it's tough to use 1-2-3-4 near the nut, where the frets are further apart. So, perhaps a hybrid approach is best. Perhaps even occasionally wrapping the thumb around has its merits.

Comments, suggestions, experience, ideas regarding the two techniques?

I think it depends on the instrument and comfort. My preference is 1234, however I could see how doing that in 1st position on a long scale instrument could be uncomfortable or downright impossible for some people. I will say that it is helpful when reading, if you can make it happen in all positions.

I think the real trick is position management. 1234 or 12 4, you're still covering 4 frets with your mitt and setting yourself up for better economy of motion by minimalizing the number of shifts you have to make one you are automatically thinking of the fingerings in groups of those 4 frets per position (or 6 with a little bit of rocking).

 

[Novarocker]

I use 124 mostly, 1234 when absolutely needed (typically chording). But the reason for that is because I almost lost half of my ring finger in high school and lost some feeling and strength in it. I can fret with it, but I spent a year without doing so due to the accident. That kind of sealed my pinky as the go to. It's kinda nice because I can do nice stretches and strong fretting with my pinky. Also oddly enough, any licks I learned before the accident I still do with my ring finger lol.

 

[Mushroo]

One thing I've noticed about top players is that they can effortlessly shift position up and down the neck. The concept of keeping your hand in one position is a beginner's crutch, in my opinion/experience.

 

[Hambone 70]

Here's an informative 1-2-3-4 video:

 

[gfour]

The Ed Friedland bass method (if that's the book the OP mentions) starts with 1-2-4 but then becomes hybrid, e.g quote from the start of book 3: "Start on the 4th finger using the 1-2-4 fingering system, but switch to one-finger-per-fret (OFPF) in measure 3."

 

[StatesideRambler]

One thing I've noticed about top players is that they can effortlessly shift position up and down the neck. The concept of keeping your hand in one position is a beginner's crutch, in my opinion/experience.

A beginner's crutch? The ability to move quickly and smoothly up and down the neck is unquestionably something to strive for. However, the best musicians play with economical movement. When I watch somebody jumping all over the neck without a musical reason (long glissandos or timbre, for example) it strikes me that there's a player who either needs some lessons or is out to impress only himself. The players in the audience are asking each other, "What IS he doing?"

 

[tlc1976]

A beginner's crutch? The ability to move quickly and smoothly up and down the neck is unquestionably something to strive for. However, the best musicians play with economical movement. When I watch somebody jumping all over the neck without a musical reason (long glissandos or timbre, for example) it strikes me that there's a player who either needs some lessons or is out to impress only himself. The players in the audience are asking each other, "What IS he doing?"

Agree totally. When I see somebody jumping around (without reasons of getting certain sounds etc.) to play something that I can play in one place, I wonder how well they would do when they actually DO have a complicated part that requires a lot of movement.

 

[Mushroo]

Agree totally. When I see somebody jumping around (without reasons of getting certain sounds etc.) to play something that I can play in one place, I wonder how well they would do when they actually DO have a complicated part that requires a lot of movement.

The hypothetical "shift, don't stretch" expert would probably execute the complicated part quite well, as 1) the player would have healthy, relaxed hands free of repetitive stress injuries, and 2) changing position would be as natural as breathing.

 

[Novarocker]

The hypothetical "shift, don't stretch" expert would probably execute the complicated part quite well, as 1) the player would have healthy, relaxed hands free of repetitive stress injuries, and 2) changing position would be as natural as breathing.

I have to admit that although I subscribe to going up the fretboard a lot, I naturally slide up and shift a lot. Idk I do a ton of playing on frets 7-15, probably even more than 1-7. For me it all depends on the pattern. A big thing I've always been pushing for is always playing throughout multiple octaves and timbres instead of sitting in one core place. There are times when the groove demands a core, but there are a lot of times when it doesn't.

 

[Spin Doctor]

This is the hub of the issue. Most people are not against OFPF....above the fifth one. However, even seasoned players find "THE STRETCH" is too much lower down...

The phrase I quoted above is the problem. The WTH misconception...

This technique uses a shift, not a stretch. It's "place" one finger per fret. It's NOT weld a finger to a fret, then stretch to play the next note...

I have no idea why people think you have to stretch to play that group of notes at the first fret. It makes no sense to do that, whatsoever.

 

[Spin Doctor]

One thing I've noticed about top players is that they can effortlessly shift position up and down the neck. The concept of keeping your hand in one position is a beginner's crutch, in my opinion/experience.

As an accomplished bassist, you have to be able to manipulate the entire fretboard without conscious thought... What Miyamoto Musashai called execution with "the normal mind".

However what you call a crutch is a component of simple efficiency. Nothing beginner about it, even if it's one of the first concepts a bassist learns... I guess your experience is different than mine. I see no valid reason to abandon a good and useful technique just for the sake of someone's perception of it.

Maybe you meant something else by that comment that I missed. But if I can play a phrase from one position, I'm going to do that, if tone production or something else isn't a factor.