Double Bass Melody solo or walking line?

[sean_on_bass]

i think they are great, but also i think you should make the walking solo sound melodic with your note choices. it should not just be what you did during the head.

RE: Grenadier - i like to use his approach to this, where you are displacing notes in the measure here and there to add interest. Especially useful at fast tempos. There is no reason a solo has to be rhythmically dense, essentially.

 

[sean_on_bass]

It has it's place, but in general a bass solo should employee syncopation/rhythmic variety and is usually played in a range above the money notes.

I've heard this before and don't really agree with it, particularly on the note range thing. I generally prefer a solo played in the lower registers of the bass where it is most resonant/punchy, and it would seem alot of our bass heroes agree, ie Paul Chambers & Charlie Haden. Even looking to other instruments in the ensemble, there is little requirement to play your solo in a higher range of the instrument.

 

[sean_on_bass]

The band does tend to lose the form during my solos too.

I find this happens when the band is not properly supporting your solo and just ducking out. Which is fine sometimes, but i really prefer to have someone doing some level of comping to keep the band and even myself in the form, just like i do for them when they are soloing. We even do it for drummers sometimes...ie marking the form when getting to a new section of tune to help keep everyone on track.

 

[PBandJazzBass]

I think it’s a perfectly fine approach, when used in certain contexts.

I use it occasionally for up tempo (in the 300 bpm range) swing tunes and on dance band gigs. Especially when played in thumb position. I also just like doing walking bass lines in TP as an exercise.

 

[Wasnex]

I've heard this before and don't really agree with it, particularly on the note range thing. I generally prefer a solo played in the lower registers of the bass where it is most resonant/punchy, and it would seem alot of our bass heroes agree, ie Paul Chambers & Charlie Haden. Even looking to other instruments in the ensemble, there is little requirement to play your solo in a higher range of the instrument.

I prefer a solo played wherever it's appropriate, and that can change with acoustics and the musical situation. It can also be influenced by the characteristics of the instrument, and of course the bassist's skill level and musical ideas.

I didn't say solos should be played in the double bass's upper range. I said solos are,

usually played in a range above the money notes.

My definition of the money notes is C above the staff and lower.

I don't necessarily mean every note has to be above C. I mean bassist are generally more inclined to play a little higher when they solo, rather than a little lower. But of course there are valid exceptions to play lower.

Some relevant factors for why I think bass players often move higher when they solo:
1. In poor acoustic spaces, the lower range tends to be more problematic.

a. Acoustic uprights are relatively weak in their lower range. Back in the day, playing higher during solos was pretty much essential if you wanted your ideas to be heard in a live setting.​

b. To compound the previous factor, the human ear is relatively insensitive to low frequencies.​

c. In poor acoustics, lower notes tend to mush together and become rumbly and incoherent. Higher notes tend be more clear.​

2. Lot's of people argue for the value of playing in the range of the normal human voice.

​

If you have the chops and an instrument that speaks in the upper range, there are definitely times where one would want to play pretty high. Not really an option for me, but this guy sounds great IMHO:


I believe his lowest note in this solo is G1 (49hz), but most of it lives above the money notes.

 

[JazznFunk]

Some relevant factors for why I think bass players often move higher when they solo:
1. In poor acoustic spaces, the lower range tends to be more problematic.

a. Acoustic uprights are relatively weak in their lower range. Back in the day, playing higher during solos was pretty much essential if you wanted your ideas to be heard in a live setting.​

b. To compound the previous factor, the human ear is relatively insensitive to low frequencies.​

c. In poor acoustics, lower notes tend to mush together and become rumbly and incoherent. Higher notes tend be more clear.​

2. Lot's of people argue for the value of playing in the range of the normal human voice.

​

I believe his lowest note in this solo is G1 (49hz), but most of it lives above the money notes.

I'd argue that modern amplification has rendered these factors less important or defining of what is or is not 'appropriate' in terms of where a double bassist solos. Strings as well have changed that paradigm. I heard Charlie Haden a couple of times, amplified, maybe 15 feet in front of me and never once yearned for him to go into thumb position for me to hear him better. Every note had weight and clarity, all up and down.

I also don't think that solos should be clinically limited to acoustic factors which we have no definite control over in the moment. Register should be chosen for melodic contrast and overall arc in the solo.

Christian McBride plays a very bright setup and has insane facility all over the instrument, but not even he lays up in thumb position all the time. He just plays what he hears. (Edit: I'd also add Larry Grenadier to the list of people who generally live in the lower register and rarely get into thumb position, and Larry always keeps it clear, melodic, and interesting even down low. Never an issue hearing every note of that punchy tone, unless he's buried in the mix by factors he can't control.)

YMMV.

 

[sean_on_bass]

My definition of the money notes is C above the staff and lower.

I don't necessarily mean every note has to be above C. I mean bassist are generally more inclined to play a little higher when they solo, rather than a little lower. But of course there are valid exceptions to play lower.

Appreciate the clarification because my mind goes to thumb position. But i still feel playing a solo largely below that landmark is doing good work and not a detriment. My definition of what one 'should' do is simply more open, and the full range of the bass is open territory ultimately but staying in half/first position for an entire solo is not a detriment to the quality of the expression and a valid artistic choice. It also enables you to frequently utilize open strings in your lines which you lose as you go farther up the fingerboard. IMO YMMV of course. I still love me a good Gomez solo.

 

[Jmilitsc]

As both a listener and a player, i do enjoy a walking solo, FWIW. Up tempo tunes seems to be a common theme in this thread, and I’d agree.

How many Monk recordings have we heard where the bass solo is walked, even for many successive choruses? They’re great, and I especially recall liking Ahmed Abdul-Malik in this way.

One factor that comes to mind is that in many ways a walked solo can be a contrast in the context of a full set / gig. Contrasts are nice. Similarly, playing above the money notes as has been said and into thumb position is also a contrast against much of what the bass is doing otherwise. Again, contrasts are an effect that can draw the listener in, can even draw the rest of the band in to listen closer, IMO at least.

I only walk solos a once or twice in a given gig, and sometimes throw in walked phrases, and it’s usually those contrasting moments that it comes to mind to do. It’s really fun to do it in a 3/4 tune, starting with playing in 2 over 3, and then “doubling” it to 4 over 3. It’s just different and becomes enjoyable to develop.

 

[Akami]

Some of the most enjoyable solos can be just a groove, no fancy parts needed.

 

[Clyde Stats]

OK; I take back everything I said earlier; well, at least most of it! Walking bass has its place as a solo technique. It can work to begin a solo before moving into a more melodic rhythmically varied section; it works GREAT as a way to end a solo and signal everyone else back in; as mentioned earlier, it sounds good at insanely fast tempos. Personally, I don’t like to use it as a fall-back on difficult tunes. I’d rather make my best effort to create an improvised melody on these tunes and applaud my successes and learn from my clams.

Not a fan of them, except on insanely fast tempos. Otherwise, it’s a cop-out; learn to improvise melodie

 

[Altitude]

I find this happens when the band is not properly supporting your solo and just ducking out. Which is fine sometimes, but i really prefer to have someone doing some level of comping to keep the band and even myself in the form, just like i do for them when they are soloing. We even do it for drummers sometimes...ie marking the form when getting to a new section of tune to help keep everyone on track.

Agree.

 

[Wasnex]

I'd argue that modern amplification has rendered these factors less important or defining of what is or is not 'appropriate' in terms of where a double bassist solos.

Amplification can even out the playing field as far as perceived volume and balance with the ensemble. However IME, amplification frequently makes matters worse in regards to the clarity and focus of lower pitches (as heard by a live audience).

AFAIK none of bassist you guys are bringing up are big on pushing volume with the amp. AFAIK most if not all of them tend to try and have a fairly acoustic approach and the amps just fill out the sound a bit. That doesn't work well for me in a loud ensemble or on a big stage.

but not even he lays up in thumb position all the time. He just plays what he hears.

When did I say anything about constantly using thumb position?

But i still feel playing a solo largely below that landmark is doing good work and not a detriment.

It can work, until it doesn't. All I am saying is a good bass player should be able break out of the box when it's called for.

 

[JazznFunk]

Amplification can even out the playing field as far as perceived volume and balance with the ensemble. However IME, amplification frequently makes matters worse in regards to the clarity and focus of lower pitches (as heard by a live audience).

AFAIK none of bassist you guys are bringing up are big on pushing volume with the amp. AFAIK most if not all of them tend to try and have a fairly acoustic approach and the amps just fill out the sound a bit. That doesn't work well for me in a loud ensemble or on a big stage.

When did I say anything about constantly using thumb position?



It can work, until it doesn't. All I am saying is a good bass player should be able break out of the box when it's called for.

I fail to understand how amplification can 'make matters worse in regard to the clarity and focus of lower pitches as heard by a live audience' without more qualifying evidence. The problem with lower pitches is that they need more energy and air moved to translate/project properly. A reasonable amount of amplification, set properly for the room, accomplishes this. Pushing the amplification too loud, or without a conscious effort to control the lowest end of the EQ spectrum can indeed introduce problems, along with room issues. But without amplification, it's likely in a modern ensemble that the bass wouldn't be heard at all. Even if it's just mic'ed, it's still getting amplified somewhere along the way for the FOH and/or the stage.

You are correct in saying that the aforementioned bassists in the thread (McBride, Grenadier, Haden, etc) do not/did not 'push volume with the amp'. Past a certain point you're getting into feedback territory, and the feel of the bass changes. It becomes more like a big electric bass (depending on EQ settings and the amp itself) when you get too loud. So yeah, the idea is to gently supplement the acoustic sound, not totally overwhelm it. If I have to play that loud, I'm going to switch to electric bass.

Agreed that a good bass player should be able to play a melodic, well-constructed solo using the entire instrument - low to high - within their capabilities and their personal vision for how they want to sound, without any dogmatic proclamations about what is 'right or wrong' or that the lowest pitches beyond X point should be avoided. Even Haden, Grenadier, and McBride at times do get into the upper register of the bass - they play what they feel and hear. But MOST of the time, they are living more in the lower register, and it works great. Maybe we all just have differing concepts of what 'lower register' vs 'higher register' means and it's all just semantics at this point?

 

[Bruce Calin]

A lot depends who I'm playing with. It can be as various as: some players will appreciate walking licks thrown in as musical jokes, others may need the form indicated to not get lost or confused, others aren't paying attention at all and need a real obvious reminder of what's going on.

 

[afroblue]

If I'm on a gig and the tune is 300bpm plus, you're getting a walking solo or I'm gonna leave it to the drummer. Of course we get this s**t all the time, usually after being passed over during a ballad where we actually have the capacity to play something more lyrical.

 

[JazznFunk]

If I'm on a gig and the tune is 300bpm plus, you're getting a walking solo or I'm gonna leave it to the drummer. Of course we get this s**t all the time, usually after being passed over during a ballad where we actually have the capacity to play something more lyrical.

Yep... and that's usually because we've already been walking at 300bpm for 25 choruses behind the sax player or guitarist and we're TIRED. I'll play melodically, with a lot of space over the changes in those cases. If nothing else, it's a break from the onslaught of the other instruments.

Most of those bebop guys didn't solo too often behind/after Parker, etc. Occasionally for sure, but not usually.

 

[damonsmith]

Really learning to walk well means learning to love quarter notes and really hear the subtle differences that are possible without leaving the quarter note value. Hearing someone do what the love is generally interesting. If your quarter notes are placed beautifully, your walking solo will be great.
I want to do an entire CD of free walking dedicated to Don Moore. The problem is that I don't want any jokers using it as a play along.

 

[Clyde Stats]

Not a fan of them, except on insanely fast tempos. Otherwise, it’s a cop-out; learn to improvise melodies!

If that’s just one of the tools in your “solo toolbox,” as it was for all the great players mentioned in this thread, fine. If it’s the ONLY tool, I stand by my comments above.

Actually, the absolute BEST place to play a walking solo (in my opinion) is in one of those bluegrass tunes played at burning tempos that banjo players seem to love, probably because you almost never hear a bass solo in those kinds of tunes and it will be unlike anything you normally would have played on that tune.

 

[DoubleMIDI]

“If the tempo is slow, I play fast. If the tempo is fast, I play slow.” (John Abercrombie)

That might have not been true for all stuff Abercrombie played, but it is a valid concept and I would use it on 300 bpm tunes if I am forced to solo over them.
When you solo you are no longer part of the rhythm section but a melody player like the horns and how many notes per bar has a fast tune like Cherokee in the melody?

If it sounds wrong it’s either playing too many notes on the beat (be rhythmically more interesting) or a wrong comping by the others which are not used to that kind of bass soloing, so you need to train them (and yourself) in rehearsals.

BTW, getting back after wild hyperspeed impro of some Horn to just a few melodic notes that easily can evolve into some more notes per bar without getting too fast would be a nice contrast for the listener if it is a nice melodic line with development.

Also a nice starting point for a drum solo to evolve from a few strokes to many.