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.
How should I annotate 2 rests in a row
- Thread starter pmatz2
- Start date
From my bass player's perspective, a staccato quarter note is equal to about 0.75 of the quarter note.
So basically, laziness!
Mostly, YES.
When someone is transcribing a difficult (bass) line full of nuances, sometimes, you just want to complete it ASAP.
(Your good nerves go "bad".
)Plus, the software/app's "Bar Duration" checker does not see that kind of "laziness."
Last edited:
Seems like the person who was doing the transcribing just had no idea what they were doing. Measure 14 is a mess of enharmonic misspellings and the fact that there are so many 32nd notes suggests that they used the wrong meter.
For a song that is either in C or has no key signature, I can't think of any good reason to write this:
Instead of this:
Last edited:
or one of my first transcriptions
Last edited:
picture 1) is just better all around. I think it does a good job of visually leading the reader to the next downbeat, and keeping the spatial relationships nice and tidy.
picture 2) is ‘fine,’ and certainly the intent can be found, but at a base level I see the two as different musical ideas, and there simply isn’t a good reason not to do 1, which is also easier to read on the fly. I basically want to think of all my eighth notes within a piece/phrase/whatever as part of the same supply, and I wouldn’t necessarily (or even typically) view a staccato quarter as part of the same family, the same raw material as an eighth note. Good players will have a consistent identity to note lengths and weight, and will push and pull those as needed. As a player, I am going to see those as two different items- perhaps the quarter is something I LAND on, with the 8th as a pickup to move on. That kind of thing.
And of course I’m over thinking this kind of a phrase, but I’m trying to give a broader context as to how and why I would make the decision. Again, I think 2) is fine and will sound like the music you want, but I do feel almost strongly that 1) is a clearly better choice
Picture 3) is basically a workbook example of bad notation. I think quarter rests on an upbeat look uniquely odd and detestable to the reader. I can’t think of any scenario in which that’s the better call.
I’m a notoriously good sight reader, and I’m also very diligent about making charts/pieces VERY readable, because I’m typically relying on good players who can read well, as opposed to a ton of rehearsals. I’m not just bragging, it’s just something I’ve not only thought about a lot, but also something I’ve developed a reputation for and gotten a lot of feedback about- I can basically guarantee that if I asked ten guys I know to be good players which they preferred, they’d unanimously choose 1).
I get 2), but it feels clunky and I think the intent makes less sense, albeit with minimal context for me to draw upon.
picture 2) is ‘fine,’ and certainly the intent can be found, but at a base level I see the two as different musical ideas, and there simply isn’t a good reason not to do 1, which is also easier to read on the fly. I basically want to think of all my eighth notes within a piece/phrase/whatever as part of the same supply, and I wouldn’t necessarily (or even typically) view a staccato quarter as part of the same family, the same raw material as an eighth note. Good players will have a consistent identity to note lengths and weight, and will push and pull those as needed. As a player, I am going to see those as two different items- perhaps the quarter is something I LAND on, with the 8th as a pickup to move on. That kind of thing.
And of course I’m over thinking this kind of a phrase, but I’m trying to give a broader context as to how and why I would make the decision. Again, I think 2) is fine and will sound like the music you want, but I do feel almost strongly that 1) is a clearly better choice
Picture 3) is basically a workbook example of bad notation. I think quarter rests on an upbeat look uniquely odd and detestable to the reader. I can’t think of any scenario in which that’s the better call.
I’m a notoriously good sight reader, and I’m also very diligent about making charts/pieces VERY readable, because I’m typically relying on good players who can read well, as opposed to a ton of rehearsals. I’m not just bragging, it’s just something I’ve not only thought about a lot, but also something I’ve developed a reputation for and gotten a lot of feedback about- I can basically guarantee that if I asked ten guys I know to be good players which they preferred, they’d unanimously choose 1).
I get 2), but it feels clunky and I think the intent makes less sense, albeit with minimal context for me to draw upon.
i voted "other" and can only go with @Febs:
i see/hear the argument for exceptions based on "intent," but 'best practices' makes febs' example a common, acceptable, expected notation for the OP's query.
Yes, this is the one, so 'other' it is. Beaming across the beat is OK in some circumstances, but this really isn't one of them.
Groove Master
Commercial User
- Apr 22, 2011
- 1,808
- 1,291
- Disclosures
- Author of Groove 101, Slap 101 and Technique 101
There should be a #4 with the third beat beam together and same for beat four. But #2 is the best way to see the rhythm without even thinking ;-)
I have to stop reading this Thread...
I need a rest.
I need a rest.
Last edited:
Thank you, Febs for your input.
When I get home, I'll provide more information about those "strange" measures.
And when I get home, I'll fix the wrong notes I put in my rewrite.
Geoffrey Shob, an eclectic French bass player, the new Shob Bass.
Shob has transcribed his own bass-line.
The track is called, HORS D'OEUVRE.
Here is that track:
Here is a teaser with some of his explanation in French of that track:
Here is Shob performing live that track:
or one of my first transcriptions
From
"A Dissertation submitted to the
College of Music
In partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Music."
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF MUSIC
He seems like a talented player and I like the composition, but I still question his enharmonic choices. For example, the D# in the first measure should pretty clearly be an Eb, since that measure outlines an F7 arpeggio. He doesn't seem to use flats in his transcription at all.
Just because it was submitted doesn't mean it earned the student a pass, or wasn't returned for 'improvement'. But at that level they really should have known better!
Yes, sometimes when you focus on a "big picture", it's easy to leave out some details.
(Laziness or "overworked?)
(It's only my personal opinion.)
Geoffrey Shob, as a talented and very dedicated bass player, has spent LOTS of time with his bass guitar, and not enough time learning Music Theory/Harmony.
Most probably, Geoffrey uses some notation app (maybe, Guitar Pro.)
He (a) does not indicate any key signature,
(b) (most probably) enters the notes from TAB,
and
(c) the notation app assigns a note on the Standard sheet. If that note does not "match" the C major scale, then, it (always) uses the sharp accidental.
Your notation is very neat and easy to read.
