That's true. Good guitarists know how to do that... but some use way too much low end and use up all the space.
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.
MOTOWN SOUND
- Thread starter G&l leo
- Start date
That's true. Good guitarists know how to do that... but some use way too much low end and use up all the space.
I blame that on a combination of modern recording techniques blending the bass & guitars so guitarists think they need that thick sound, and guitarists that spend too much time practicing alone in their bedroom & not getting used to band situations.
They also compensate for not having drums by making really rhythmic lines.
Motown = Pbass and Flats thru a Ampeg B15 and most importantly Magic Fingers or the Hook
+1. Give all of your gear to me and buy that setup
Haha but that's pretty much the only way I could think of.I agree with all who say that the sound of the day was due to the equipment used and also it's limitations.
I you wanted to recreate the sound that Beethoven heard you wouldn't use modern instruments, they would sound too 'brittle'.
I'd also like to say that the sound on Amy Winehouse's worldwide platinum album Back to Black was recorded on tape. It works.
ps. Ever heard some of the digitally re-mastered disasters?
Then listen to the Blue Note mono recordings released on CD in stereo, they still stand up perfectly because so much care was expended in getting the sound and balance between the instruments just right. It doesn't need 'tricking-up'.
I you wanted to recreate the sound that Beethoven heard you wouldn't use modern instruments, they would sound too 'brittle'.
I'd also like to say that the sound on Amy Winehouse's worldwide platinum album Back to Black was recorded on tape. It works.
ps. Ever heard some of the digitally re-mastered disasters?
Then listen to the Blue Note mono recordings released on CD in stereo, they still stand up perfectly because so much care was expended in getting the sound and balance between the instruments just right. It doesn't need 'tricking-up'.
Yeah, that was how things sounded. I'm 50, so when I started all basses had flats and string mutes, and most of the amps out then weren't all that great. A lot of the grit you hear on some old recordings wasn't necessarily intentional. It's just how gear was back then. But it is often a cool sound.
Actually he didn't hear much of anything...
We was pretty deaf for most of his musical life. Totally deaf at the end of it. That's amazing in itself.That's a great CD, with lot of great old samples, and new parts that sound old too.
Here's another artist with a similar tone (at least in this alter ego)
Link Removed
By the way, that track I posted is the real deal... that's the man himself, not one of these "standing in the..." simulation tracks.
That clip is unbelievable. I don't think this is the 'funk machine' either. Look at the difference in the banding on the burst near the upper horn...
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
p-bass + flatt wound + string mute. I use a bit of foam rubber under the strings at the bridge. But, that is only the start, the rest is in the head and hands.
I love this thread, fascinating and necessary for a new generation of bassists, IMO, even if you have no desire to sound like the man.
My theory is that Jamerson came up with his amazing tone and style as a direct result of the recording technology and instruments and strings available in his day; as all great talents do. In doing so he helped define what the electric bass could sound like and the way it was played by his contemporaries and those that were influenced by him, knowingly or not. His approach was as an upright bassist who was discovering what an electric bass could sound like in the context of the new music they were creating, and the bassists that came after that were heavily influenced by him like Bob Babbit and Tommy Cogbill amongst others had a slightly different sound and atttack I imagine was based on the better sustain and more growl and midrange information that lighter gauge flats and eventually different recording techniques offered. Try a set of Jamerson flats with mutes and you will quickly realize they need a decently heavy touch to get them vibrating, and this will influence the way you play.
I've gleaned from reading as much as I can that he did in fact set his levels at the preamp input, and was obviously aware of how much better his bass sounded in the mix when overdriving the tubes in the preamp at the snakepit. Apparently he would make sure it was edging well into the red on the VU meter on his channel. If you listen to the isolated tracks on a good set of speaker or headphones, you'll hear, as has been mentioned, that the bass while being quite heavily distorted, in fact has tons of transparency and midrange information and is anything but only muffled thump. Turning the tone knob all the way down with a set of those LaBellas leaves you with a very bland and mushy tone, completely unlike his on those recordings. I have a feeling with the dead strings he used his tone was all the way up or no more than a third rolled off.
Using one finger to play his lines really gets you closer to his style, no matter how even you are when alternating. For modern day approximations of his sound, there are many ways to get there; though flats or dead rounds, mutes, a bass with tonal qualities similar to a P, and most important his style and phrasing are necessary, but if you really want to get closer to HIS tone, I still firmly believe only an excellent vintage style P with LaBella Originals will get you there, for better or worse. For a million reasons I can understand that for most bassists this is unimportant, as you can get an equally funky and satisfying sound with different strings and basses, and it is more interesting to find one's own sound, but nothing else sounds as good in that particular way as the combination of bass, strings and technique that define the Jamerson sound, IMO. The sheer weight, bounce and definition of each note, no matter how rapid or slow the groove, has never been equaled on electric bass, whether by accident or desire.
I'm sure there are many others around who have tried and can do it as well, but the only one who has come close that I'm aware of whose efforts are available to us (on youtube, in this case), for example, is jamersonshook, who posts here on Talkbass (sorry, i can't remember his name here). He channels the great man, amazing to listen to and watch for a study in how Jamerson did what he did.
My theory is that Jamerson came up with his amazing tone and style as a direct result of the recording technology and instruments and strings available in his day; as all great talents do. In doing so he helped define what the electric bass could sound like and the way it was played by his contemporaries and those that were influenced by him, knowingly or not. His approach was as an upright bassist who was discovering what an electric bass could sound like in the context of the new music they were creating, and the bassists that came after that were heavily influenced by him like Bob Babbit and Tommy Cogbill amongst others had a slightly different sound and atttack I imagine was based on the better sustain and more growl and midrange information that lighter gauge flats and eventually different recording techniques offered. Try a set of Jamerson flats with mutes and you will quickly realize they need a decently heavy touch to get them vibrating, and this will influence the way you play.
I've gleaned from reading as much as I can that he did in fact set his levels at the preamp input, and was obviously aware of how much better his bass sounded in the mix when overdriving the tubes in the preamp at the snakepit. Apparently he would make sure it was edging well into the red on the VU meter on his channel. If you listen to the isolated tracks on a good set of speaker or headphones, you'll hear, as has been mentioned, that the bass while being quite heavily distorted, in fact has tons of transparency and midrange information and is anything but only muffled thump. Turning the tone knob all the way down with a set of those LaBellas leaves you with a very bland and mushy tone, completely unlike his on those recordings. I have a feeling with the dead strings he used his tone was all the way up or no more than a third rolled off.
Using one finger to play his lines really gets you closer to his style, no matter how even you are when alternating. For modern day approximations of his sound, there are many ways to get there; though flats or dead rounds, mutes, a bass with tonal qualities similar to a P, and most important his style and phrasing are necessary, but if you really want to get closer to HIS tone, I still firmly believe only an excellent vintage style P with LaBella Originals will get you there, for better or worse. For a million reasons I can understand that for most bassists this is unimportant, as you can get an equally funky and satisfying sound with different strings and basses, and it is more interesting to find one's own sound, but nothing else sounds as good in that particular way as the combination of bass, strings and technique that define the Jamerson sound, IMO. The sheer weight, bounce and definition of each note, no matter how rapid or slow the groove, has never been equaled on electric bass, whether by accident or desire.
I'm sure there are many others around who have tried and can do it as well, but the only one who has come close that I'm aware of whose efforts are available to us (on youtube, in this case), for example, is jamersonshook, who posts here on Talkbass (sorry, i can't remember his name here). He channels the great man, amazing to listen to and watch for a study in how Jamerson did what he did.
I think you are over analyzing the whole thing.
The strings he used, as well as the tone, the string mute, etc., were pretty much the standard electric bass tone at the time. If you went to a store and bought a brand new bass, it had flats, and a string mute as standard.
I didn't know who jamerson was when I was starting, but I grew up hearing Motown, and the Beatles. I bought LaBella flats for my Teisco bass. That's what they sold at the local record store, and that's often where you bought stuff like picks and strings. I got some foam rubber and stuck it under my strings. I used that same tone, and everyone I heard used that tone. That's what electric bass sounded like, until a little later with Jack Bruce and John Entwistle and others.
Even my brand new Ric 4001, which I bought in 1973, had flats and a string mute. I don't remember if the mute was engaged, but on Fenders you had no choice, until you removed the bridge cover. I played with those flats for a year or so and then got my first set of Rotosounds. I don't recall seeing any basses sold new with roundwounds until the 80's.
And some people added another piece of foam to make the strings even deader. I had a Paul McCartney songbook that showed him with a big chunk of foam under the strings by the bridge. Carol Kaye made that sound famous as well.
As far as Jamerson playing with one finger... he was an upright player, and that's pretty much the normal way to play. You also get a more consistent tone from note to note. His particular hand position was very unique to him though, and once again is him coming from an upright and finding what he was comfortable with on electric.
We don't know for sure that the board used tubes, but surly a lot of the gear did. But his direct signal doesn't sound particularly tuby. Mike Mclean built the console and much of the studio. The "farty" tones on the bottom string was common for a P played with force. It's also good recording practice to keep your levels hot onto tape.
I think they just went for good tones, and they also used a lot of compression wasn't as common at the time.
Here's the console
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7576734@N02/846246970/
Just to put it into perspective, here's Paul McCartney's bass from a Day in the Life.
So what do you notice? It's a very similar tone to Jamerson's, even down to the farty low notes, even though Paul is playing a Ric bass with a pick. I'd imagine it's the stock Ric flats (made by Maxima) and he sounds like he has extra foam under the strings near the bridge. DI recording, into...? Who knows. I'm not sure what consoles they had at Abby Road, but I'm sure it's not hard to find out.
Link Removed
So it's not all that far from the Motown sound, which Paul emulated, but his playing is different. And Ringo is a very underrated drummer!
(as a disclaimer, I posted this purely for educational purposes)
The strings he used, as well as the tone, the string mute, etc., were pretty much the standard electric bass tone at the time. If you went to a store and bought a brand new bass, it had flats, and a string mute as standard.
I didn't know who jamerson was when I was starting, but I grew up hearing Motown, and the Beatles. I bought LaBella flats for my Teisco bass. That's what they sold at the local record store, and that's often where you bought stuff like picks and strings. I got some foam rubber and stuck it under my strings. I used that same tone, and everyone I heard used that tone. That's what electric bass sounded like, until a little later with Jack Bruce and John Entwistle and others.
Even my brand new Ric 4001, which I bought in 1973, had flats and a string mute. I don't remember if the mute was engaged, but on Fenders you had no choice, until you removed the bridge cover. I played with those flats for a year or so and then got my first set of Rotosounds.
I don't recall seeing any basses sold new with roundwounds until the 80's.And some people added another piece of foam to make the strings even deader. I had a Paul McCartney songbook that showed him with a big chunk of foam under the strings by the bridge. Carol Kaye made that sound famous as well.
As far as Jamerson playing with one finger... he was an upright player, and that's pretty much the normal way to play. You also get a more consistent tone from note to note. His particular hand position was very unique to him though, and once again is him coming from an upright and finding what he was comfortable with on electric.
We don't know for sure that the board used tubes, but surly a lot of the gear did. But his direct signal doesn't sound particularly tuby. Mike Mclean built the console and much of the studio. The "farty" tones on the bottom string was common for a P played with force. It's also good recording practice to keep your levels hot onto tape.
I think they just went for good tones, and they also used a lot of compression wasn't as common at the time.
Here's the console
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7576734@N02/846246970/
Just to put it into perspective, here's Paul McCartney's bass from a Day in the Life.
So what do you notice? It's a very similar tone to Jamerson's, even down to the farty low notes, even though Paul is playing a Ric bass with a pick. I'd imagine it's the stock Ric flats (made by Maxima) and he sounds like he has extra foam under the strings near the bridge. DI recording, into...? Who knows. I'm not sure what consoles they had at Abby Road, but I'm sure it's not hard to find out.
Link Removed
So it's not all that far from the Motown sound, which Paul emulated, but his playing is different. And Ringo is a very underrated drummer!
(as a disclaimer, I posted this purely for educational purposes)
Interesting thread, as I've always been fascinated by JJ's style and tones. I have to say that I get a decent approximation using my '73 P with 10 year old D'Addario flats, high action, lowered PUPs, volume full up and tone cut to about 20%, plucked over the PUP or slightly higher. (or at least a close approximation, IMO). But I do have a couple of questions: How "important" is the foam mute? It was my understanding that JJ never changed his flats for years, so he shoudl have had a lot of deadened thump built in already, but I get nothing but thud and thump out of my 10 year old strings without a foam mute. I can't imagine the need to mute my strings any more when they're already so dead and have so little sustain. Second, what was JJ's touch like? You have to consider that an essential part of his playing, and I've been experimenting with a lighter vs. harder pluck, but again with strings so dead and thumpy I almost have to pluck harder to get them to sound. Even with high action and the tone rolled off, plucking hard up near the neck can sound unwanted clicks and clacks on my bass, so I have to practice taming the noise. (though you probably don't hear it in the mix, and you can even hear clicks and clacks on JJ's isolated tracks, so I guess thats just the nature of the beast). I imagine he had a heavy touch considering he came from upright playing.
I agree with you guys about the significance of the vintage bass and studio gear that Jamerson used, but I think that the most important part of his tone came from the signal he was sending into his pickups.
He played big flats and hit them hard and evenly. This kind of attack means more vibration and thus more harmonic overtones, which make for a richer timbre. His heavy touch also pushed his P-bass pickups hard enough to create some naturally overdriven compression before his signal had even left the instrument. Having that kind of a front-end in your signal path makes a huge difference in your sound.
Before I returned to my bass roots, I played guitar in a band with a guy who played an old Rickenbacker bass but got a tremendous low-end P-bass fart sound by using big flats, almost unplayably-high action, and a really heavy hand.
A lot of bass experts suggest a soft, even pluck but I've always preferred the sound of a heavy, even finger attack. To my ears this approach transmits a more soulful sound than getting all of your gain from the equipment. You hear more of the player and the bass and less of the amp and processors.
I've been reading Talk Bass for a couple months now but this is my first post. Thanks to everybody for posting useful information. I've learned a ton on this site so far!
He played big flats and hit them hard and evenly. This kind of attack means more vibration and thus more harmonic overtones, which make for a richer timbre. His heavy touch also pushed his P-bass pickups hard enough to create some naturally overdriven compression before his signal had even left the instrument. Having that kind of a front-end in your signal path makes a huge difference in your sound.
Before I returned to my bass roots, I played guitar in a band with a guy who played an old Rickenbacker bass but got a tremendous low-end P-bass fart sound by using big flats, almost unplayably-high action, and a really heavy hand.
A lot of bass experts suggest a soft, even pluck but I've always preferred the sound of a heavy, even finger attack. To my ears this approach transmits a more soulful sound than getting all of your gain from the equipment. You hear more of the player and the bass and less of the amp and processors.
I've been reading Talk Bass for a couple months now but this is my first post. Thanks to everybody for posting useful information. I've learned a ton on this site so far!
JJ's decay was pretty quick. The dead strings give a dead tone, but they don't die out as quickly.
Go back in the thread and listen to the soloed JJ track. Especially when he plays on the G string. He has no sustain whatsoever. Not the type of tone you would want to use playing solo, but in the mix it's super punchy.
Also, you can get a good thump in your playing with technique, but he wasn't doing that. He didn't pluck any closer or father from the bridge to vary his tone, as most of us would do these days to get a punchy tone.
The mute was an essential part of the 60's/70's bass sound. John Deacon used to do it also on some tracks. Some people, like Tony Levin, still use it from time to time.
Speaking of LaBella's... I found a couple of sets that look like the photo below. I can't tell what year they were produced, but I would guess at least early '70's...maybe '60's?? Any comments? I haven't put them on a bass, they almost look like they should be framed as memorabilia. They were given to me by a guy at an old music store who was cleaning out his "junk" drawers.
DavidRavenMoon, everything you say in your great post just backs up the main gist of my post, that he was merely getting the best tone he could with the equipment of his day.
So many of what have become orthodoxies in modern music were at first just the nicest or coolest sounds that could be made at the time with the gear available.
What I don't agree with is that everyone sounded like that at the time. The style he developed while not being at all varied did benefit from his very high action and very sure and I imagine hard attack. I have a feeling if P basses of his time didn't have mutes he would have played differently as a sonic sludge would have resulted from the way he played.
Of course I am over-analyzing things. What is obvious to someone who was there, as yourself, takes a lot more effort to understand from the distance of a generation later, especially one in which things have moved on so quickly. I'm just grateful for a way backwards, one of the biggest pleasures for me in playing bass is trying to understand how different musicians did what and why. I'm sure most bassists that made their mark only did so by standing on the shoulders of their influences, after trying to emulate at least some aspects of their playing. it's a cliché but no less valid for it.
A more modern example would be Family Man. No one in reggae sounds quite like him, and his expressive style has as much to do with his tone as with his phrasing and note choice. He approaches the electric bass as an upright, and he tries to emulate the tone of one as much as possible. It's not always obvious in a mix, or with way he EQs, but it is very much there underneath, and his notes are so heavily shaped as to resemble words. I've heard dry dub mixes and him playing live through superb PAs, and there is so much more there than most can put their finger on, but they do recognize how great it sounds anyway. He sings through his bass, and no one else does so to his extent. It just adds another dimension and lifts the instrument to a higher plane, as I believe Jamerson did over other players of his era. Talking about it so much makes it sound unreal and implausible, but who feels it knows it.
I'll stop now.
So many of what have become orthodoxies in modern music were at first just the nicest or coolest sounds that could be made at the time with the gear available.
What I don't agree with is that everyone sounded like that at the time. The style he developed while not being at all varied did benefit from his very high action and very sure and I imagine hard attack. I have a feeling if P basses of his time didn't have mutes he would have played differently as a sonic sludge would have resulted from the way he played.
Of course I am over-analyzing things. What is obvious to someone who was there, as yourself, takes a lot more effort to understand from the distance of a generation later, especially one in which things have moved on so quickly. I'm just grateful for a way backwards, one of the biggest pleasures for me in playing bass is trying to understand how different musicians did what and why. I'm sure most bassists that made their mark only did so by standing on the shoulders of their influences, after trying to emulate at least some aspects of their playing. it's a cliché but no less valid for it.
A more modern example would be Family Man. No one in reggae sounds quite like him, and his expressive style has as much to do with his tone as with his phrasing and note choice. He approaches the electric bass as an upright, and he tries to emulate the tone of one as much as possible. It's not always obvious in a mix, or with way he EQs, but it is very much there underneath, and his notes are so heavily shaped as to resemble words. I've heard dry dub mixes and him playing live through superb PAs, and there is so much more there than most can put their finger on, but they do recognize how great it sounds anyway. He sings through his bass, and no one else does so to his extent. It just adds another dimension and lifts the instrument to a higher plane, as I believe Jamerson did over other players of his era. Talking about it so much makes it sound unreal and implausible, but who feels it knows it.
I'll stop now.
Que?
BTW, this is one of the best bass tones I've ever heard. I'd kill to hear the master of it. Insane line, too, Jamerson with a twist, verging on the psychedelic. I think it's Jerry Jemmott:
There is a related B+W clip there of the same song by her too, bass higher in the mix, also splendid.
Speaking of LaBella's... I found a couple of sets that look like the photo below. I can't tell what year they were produced, but I would guess at least early '70's...maybe '60's?? Any comments? I haven't put them on a bass, they almost look like they should be framed as memorabilia. They were given to me by a guy at an old music store who was cleaning out his "junk" drawers.
Oh wow... same strings I used to buy! Yeah, that's late 60's, early 70's. Look at the list of basses.
Getting back to JJ... I actually agree with everyone. Jamerson got the tone he liked from his bass.. the strings, the action, etc. BTW Stanley Clarke sets his action very high for recording slap bass parts. He said he had it so high when he did Silly Putty that he almost couldn't play it.
Everyone's tone is an evolution ... you try some things you like, and you try a few others.
The whole Motown sound was pure genius, from the instrumentation to the song writing. It's still some of my favorite music.
My whole thing about the over analyzing is that it happened in a more gradual intuitive way. Jamerson tried things until he got a tone he liked. He played what he heard in his head, and they got a slamming mix on those tunes.. what did you hear first? Bass! It often started the songs off, and was way more forward in the mix that a lot of music at the time.
Motown and the Beatles is why I play bass today.
