Locking in with the drummer

I thought it was a mutuallistic relationship.

 

Fair enough. Idealistically (... in a perfect world), the bassist and drummer are tight to one another. Nobody leads; nodoby follows.
I definitely agree that there are crappy bassists/drummers that will follow the other lest they be totally lost, but, IMO, the idea is to strive for a harmony between the two.

I don't consider Zender, Redding, or JPJ to be weak in any way.

 

I agree it is a mutualistic relationship, and one that should extend across the whole band.

We all tend to feed off each other, sometimes I follow the guitarist, sometimes they follow me, and on another song, the drummer changed his fill to fit around with a nice bass fill I'd improv'd.

As for 'locking in tight' I only tend to do this when necessary. A couple of songs it makes the song, such as a country-style song we play sounds great when the alternating bass line locks tight with the drums, yet others it's more free flowing, as that is what suits the song.

 

I agree in that way, but I think Jimmy is more being a "grumpy old man" and bemoaning the state of rock today...

So it seems that all rock music you hear nowadays is heavy guitar chords and bass and drums playing like an "extension" of that...

They are locked into very static rhythms without variation.

Whereas, when I was growing up as a teen - rock bass playing was really interesting and exciting!!

So the first few rock gigs I went to were Genesis,Yes, Led Zep - Beck, Bogart & Appice - where the bass players were doing incredible stuff...

I'm sure if I was a teenager growing up today, listening to rock music, I wouldn't be inspired to be a bass player...?

 

So to add to the above, I do agree with Jimmy to a certain extent -that it could be "dangerous" for young players getting into rock music - if they keep reading on forums like this about bass playing being all about "locking in with the drummer" - they will associate it it with monotonous rhythms and playing strictly along with everything else, with no variation or interest!!

 

I sortof agree with this assessment. My interpretation of locking in with the drummer is locking in with his groove(or him locking onto my groove). When I first started playing I was sortof awed by having to lock in with the drummer, but when I started jamming with a drummer I changed my views. If its just me and him jamming I get to play around in that groove, solo a bit. Then I lock into his kick/snare beat so that he can solo if he feels like it. Works well. If its in one of our bands songs, depending on the song I will lock onto different parts of his drums. Sometimes just the kick, sometimes just the snare, hi-hat, whatever. It doesn't have to be monotonous kick snare kick kick snare stuff that you lock in with. Then again I don't really know what I'm talking about, so feel free to disregard my opinion. But I do agree with you that recently rock music has been monotonous and boring and that it does not really inspire teens to pick up the bass. The ones that do(from what I've seen) all want to be like Flea and do slap/pop stuff. Sure that stuff is cool, but thats not all there is. I made a decision of wanting to play 'bass' and not really learn what rock music was doing at the time(5 years ago) because I thought it sucked.

 

I never considered the idea of "locking in with the drummer" to mean playing without creativity, or gluing myself to a kick and snare. I never thought that "Reach Out" wasn't TOTALLY locked in with the drummer. I also never knew a drummer with any passion and backbone that was going to change his established beats around to fit my groove. Even if they were to eventually pick up on whatever I was playing (that went against what they were doing) it would be out of the sheer fact that the song sounded like crap until they gave in and said I gotta do something to fix whatever it is this guy's doing to the song.

I respect your credentials, but I gotta agree with he grumpy statement someone else above made. Wuusup with the freakin on the youngens? There are just as many young new bassists out there tearing it up with creativity as there are guys sticking to the roots. Alright, about 3 less. In the past month or so I've heard a handful of new guys that floored and inspired me bigtime with things they were pumping out on their basses.

Haven't commented here in a while, so thanks for breakin me out of my shell.

 

Of course - that's because you're experienced and have been exposed to a lot of stuff...

I think the worry is that 13/14 year olds come on to TB as their first experience of anybody talking about playing music and reading that it's all about locking with the drummer -what are they going to think...?

 

As a bass player, I have to be sympathetic to the drummer and his motion. It takes a lot of movement to make one snare hit compared to the motion it takes to make a bass sound. Therefore, in the end I must defer to the drummer and his capabilities/sense of time. That said, it is imperative for me to give him clues as to where the true tempo lies. That is, if he is slowing down, my notes will start falling sooner upon his beat. This is in relation to where they were falling previously (in some songs it will be in front of the drummer, some after, and some right on depending on the feel or style of song). Conversely, if he is speeding up, my notes will fall farther back on his beat than they previously did. If the drummer is 'on it' he will pick up on my clues and adjust accordingly, and the audience (and most likely the rest of the band) won't even be aware of our 'communication'.
If the drummer doesn't respond to my clues, I have to go with him as his tempo meanders around in order that the band doesn't fall apart.
What happens on occasion is a drummer decides that he wants to play on the back of the beat when I am trying to play there, or vice versa. This can destroy a song.
The more I play, and the more drummers I play with, the more I realise that in a sense I am 'playing' the drummer (in terms of time) and 'playing' the band (in terms of feel). A great drummer will always sound great. I have to try and make the less great drummers sound great.
So for me, 'locking in' happens when the drummer knows (ie. agrees with me )where on the beat we each should reside, and is able to hear, understand, and respond to my nudges. When we lock, that's when the music flows like wine.

 

I agree with Pacman. "Locking in" isn't really what you suggested it was in your initial post. It's a much more flexible concept, properly understood. That fact that it's sometimes improperly understood doesn't make it any less valuable or important.

 

Yes, but without a proper explanation it can sound misleading to somebody with little or no experience...

 

Maybe we need a FAQ where these kinds of things are explained...?

i.e. Locking in with drummer does not mean...etc. etc.

But rather ....etc.

 

True, but so can about a zillion other things in music, and that doesn't mean you shouldn't say them or that the concepts have no merit.

 

Well, I kinda think you're creating an either/or relationship where none needs to, or probably even should, exist. I mean, it's not ballroom dancing--no one has to "lead" all the time. First, the idea that there's always one "main rhythmic instrument" that tells everyone what to play is, I think, wrong. Second, the idea that if there's one such instrument, it can't be the drums is also IMO mistaken.

To me, rhythm and groove are reactive and interactive. It's not so much that the drums should be taking their cue from the bass, or vice versa, but that both should be taking their cue from the demands of the music, as well as from each other and every other instrument in the band (including the vocals).
Though there are some cases when one or more of the other players is weak enough or unfamiliar enough or unrehearsed enough that you absolutely have to lead them to make anything happen.

I mean, suppose in the course of working up a song, the drummer or flutist or whoever comes up with a really cool change? Are you supposed to nix it because, hey, I'm already playing this bass part and I'm not gonna change, so you have to work with me? Or suppose the drummer in one particular situation is flat out better than you, or let's say, is playing better this particular night? If his/her time and groove are more happening than yours that night, maybe you'd better follow rather than try to lead. Or what if this particular song is actually more about the drums that it is about the bass? Again, maybe you'd better ride shotgun on the bus rather than try to drive it. IMHO it's all about trying to do the best thing musically in a particular situation. There doesn't need to be a rigid protocol about it.

 

Did anybody say that...? Not me!

I think what Jimmy and I are picking up on is the apparent trend in a lot of current rock for the bass to just play roots "locked in" with drums and heavy guitar chords and we are worried that these things could be related and we don't want future generations growing up thinking that the bass role is solely limited to that!!

I think it's certainly worth pointing out that "locking in with the drummer" is not as simple or restricting as that particular phrase sounds...?