• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Less is More Masters

Folks I specifically objected to definitely do not have monster ears. Nor have they mastered their instrument in any capacity.

But sure. People that are bad at their instrument, don't practice and were regularly replaced by band mates or session guys aren't bad. They're masters.

Whatever makes you feel better.
Sorry, but you are the one who misunderstood the assignment. The assignment was not "masters of the bass guitar who choose to write simple lines." The assignment was, quite clearly (and I actually am quoting instead of making stuff up like you), "Masters of the less is more style of playing bass." If you don't think Adam Clayton defines this category, I don't know what to say. He's "bad" at his instrument? That's a joke, right? Many musicians who play rock could arguably be called "bad" by elitists such as yourself. The point is that they are artists, and I am willing to bet you a large sum that you wouldn't have come up with the bassline for "With or Without You" for example. This whole concept you are selling about masters of the simple can only be those who have completely internalized and mastered the instrument at a technical level is a red herring, a fallacy. I repeat, to master something, you only need to master that thing. The OP said NOTHING ABOUT MASTERY OF AN INSTRUMENT. Literally nothing. Why are you harping on this?
 
Sorry, but you are the one who misunderstood the assignment. The assignment was not "masters of the bass guitar who choose to write simple lines." The assignment was, quite clearly (and I actually am quoting instead of making stuff up like you), "Masters of the less is more style of playing bass." If you don't think Adam Clayton defines this category, I don't know what to say. He's "bad" at his instrument? That's a joke, right? Many musicians who play rock could arguably be called "bad" by elitists such as yourself. The point is that they are artists, and I am willing to bet you a large sum that you wouldn't have come up with the bassline for "With or Without You" for example. This whole concept you are selling about masters of the simple can only be those who have completely internalized and mastered the instrument at a technical level is a red herring, a fallacy. I repeat, to master something, you only need to master that thing. The OP said NOTHING ABOUT MASTERY OF AN INSTRUMENT. Literally nothing. Why are you harping on this?

In several cases "best they can do" is being interpreted as "intentionally good at crafting things in a minimalist way".

Which is not an accurate interpretation. Nor is it accurate to flag those folks as "masters of less is more." In terms of ability, that's not what they're doing.

But again. Whatever makes you feel better.
 
In several cases "best they can do" is being interpreted as "intentionally good at crafting things in a minimalist way".

Which is not an accurate interpretation. Nor is it accurate to flag those folks as "masters of less is more." In terms of ability, that's not what they're doing.

But again. Whatever makes you feel better.
That's exactly what they are doing, and it's not about what makes me feel better. Stop saying that. I am referring to your statement that recast the OP's question as something else. It's not about technical ability. I reiterate that the OP said master of a style, nothing about technical mastery of an instrument. And moreover I don't think you can know that what you are saying is true, or that these lines weren't crafted intentionally. I'm a hack and I play with intention, what's the problem? If I create the perfect simple line for song after song, but failed to consider the more complicated possibilities (even though you don't know at all that's true), then I am not a master of what I am doing? By every objective measure that's false.
 
That's exactly what they are doing, and it's not about what makes me feel better. Stop saying that. I am referring to your statement that recast the OP's question as something else. It's not about technical ability. I reiterate that the OP said master of a style, nothing about technical mastery of an instrument. And moreover I don't think you can know that what you are saying is true, or that these lines weren't crafted intentionally. I'm a hack and I play with intention, what's the problem? If I create the perfect simple line for song after song, but failed to consider the more complicated possibilities (even though you don't know at all that's true), then I am not a master of what I am doing? By every objective measure that's false.

Can't be a master of less is more, unless you can feasibly do the more part.

But whatever makes you feel better.
 
source (3).gif
giphy (15).gif


:)
 
Peter Hook, sometimes(I'm thinking more of the JD stuff).

I've said this before, but the thing that elevates Hookie to genius status, for me at least (and also adheres to the "less is more" theme of this thread), is that he'll come up with some simple, yet iconic bass line, and then he has the audacity to surpass it - yet bury the musical zenith in the fade-out, at the very end of the track ( "True Faith", and "Fine Time" are prime examples).
 
Wow…. Last I looked, this thread was just starting its 3rd page. It appears to have taken a turn though. One person that I will not name has posted something that I think we can all agree, shows that they are a "master of polarization". I suspect, from their responses, that they are near the edge of their ability in constructive discussion. I could elaborate…but I won't. /unwatch thread
I just ignored the troll.