Double Bass Need help refining time

[fasternak]

Hi there!

I'm using a metronome to work on my ability to get ahead of the beat- aka increasing forward motion. And I'm finding the sensation of rushing awkward, hard to hear and subsequently difficult to practice. Have any of you discovered an effective technique for nailing down this microscopic adjustment in your timing? A friend of mine who play alto - not bass - tells me that a bass player he once knew recited a carefully chosen two-syllable word at quarter note intervals to this end. But he couldn't remember what that word was.

I expect this ability comes naturally to a lot of you. And others find it easier to extract this skill metronomically. I'd like to hear from the player who used some other device or technique to master this skill, if possible.

Many thanks in advance!

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

You'll get a lot of varying answers to this, I'm sure. I'm not sure that playing ahead of the beat is a goal that everyone will recommend, but I'll let folks speak for themselves and answer the way I understand the question.

For me, the issue comes down to the attack/bloom/sustain envelope of the double bass. It's a tricky thing that eventually needs to be simply felt rather than thought about, but understanding this basic concept helped me to clear up some of the confusion I had about what I was hearing in my own recordings and the recordings of others.

The picture below is of 7 pizzicato attacks of an open D string:

At first glance, it looks like only a 2 part envelope: Attack, where the biggest excursion happens. and then a gradual decay as the wave narrows. But if you zoom in closer, you can see what the ear actually hears:

In this view, you can see that the widest point of the wave is actually slightly after the attack instead of immediately on it.

It's easier still to see if you zoom in a bit more:

Above, you can see how the attack actually takes place slightly before the bloom of the note, which is then followed by the decay of the note.

My take on this issue of "what part of the beat to play on" is that the real question is "which part of the sound should coincide with the beat"... the attack, or the bloom of the note? When I used to hear myself playing on recordings and feel that I was dragging or not supplying enough forward motion, I eventually discovered that what was really going on was that I was placing the attack of the note on the beat, but perceiving the bloom of the note as being slightly behind. Placing the attack on the beat is logical because that's what physically feels like playing on the beat; sonically, it's easy to perceive the bloom of the of the note as actually being the "center" of the note, so it can cause some confusion when listening.

Add to this the fact the the different strings bloom at different speeds because of the string excursion (E blooms slowest, G fastest), and it can be a real rabbit hole to try to address things like this through analytical methods.

Now, while I don't micro analyze this kind of thing in the way I used to, I do try to center the sound of the note on the beat, which technically means that often the attack comes just a hair earlier. Mostly it's a feel thing at this point, but during the learning process this kind of realization was helpful in explaining some of the aural disconnects I was running into. Enjoy the journey!

 

[Ed Fuqua]

I, again, hold that the feeling of propulsion and forward motion is achieved more with note choice than with rhythmic displacement. Most cats I know try to be at the center of the beat.

 

[Michael Glynn]

Chris definitely hit the nail on the head with the differences between the attack and the bloom of the note. I would add that I think some of the perceived differences between players who are believed to play on top, or ahead of the beat, and those who play further back on the beat are really related to how prominent the attack sound is.

Imagine you have two bass players who are placing their notes in exactly the same place. Player A has a strong, percussive attack sound that sticks out. Player B's way of playing minimizes the "clicky" attack sound and emphasizes the bloom of the note. To the listener, Player A will be playing ahead of Player B, even though they are actually playing at the exact same time.

I encourage students to work on their attack sound to find what works for them. You can do this by gently muting the strings with your left hand near the nut, and plucking with your right hand as normal. If you try plucking higher and lower on the strings for example, or change the angle of plucking (straight across the fingerboard, or more down into the board), you will hear distinct differences in the tone and volume of the attack sound. I personally like a strong and sharp attack sound when playing straight ahead swinging music, because I think it cuts through the band nicely and helps give an aggressive and somewhat pushy sound. On ballads, or in other styles, I may adjust the way I use my right hand to make my sound less punchy and aggressive.

 

[fasternak]

Wow, Chris, this is a wonderful response to my question! Two pianists I regularly play with have asked me to get out in front of the drums more because they like that feel. I get it. I do too. But I can't do it just yet. I'm going to put your brilliant explaination to work by de-emphasizing the feel of attack - something which I didn't realize I was so firmly fastened to until now - and start putting the bloom where I want it instead. This gives me something concrete to focus on. I was thinking I needed some sort of mantra. Brilliant advice! Thanks so much for your help!

 

[fasternak]

Thank you for the great suggestions, Michael Glynn. I will spend some time experimenting with the various approaches to attack you mention here. The simplisity of Chris' solution is very appealing. I'll spend a few hours/days working it all over. A breakthrough would be most welcome!

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Glad you find it useful! But don't discount what Ed and Michael are saying as well. Note choices are an entirely different can of worms, and there's a lot to explore there.

Regarding Michael's point about the difference in attack between different players, he's right on with that - you'll hear a lot of variations with different players. What I try to emphasize with my students is the idea of attack velocity being very crucial to the overall sound and groove. Without getting into a whole technical explanation, the faster the finger moves through the string, the closer the attack and bloom are together, and the less dead space you hear during that split second where the finger touching the string stops it before the new pizz stroke starts the string moving again. There are a lot of variables, and in the end, we're just programming our own personal feel.

 

[dreamadream99]

The quickest way to learn how to play ahead of the beat, is to play with a drummer who drags.

 

[Tom Lane]

I experimented with playing ahead, on top of, and behind the beat. For a while, I had a devil of a time doing anything other than my natural inclination to play on the beat. What worked for me was to listen to bassists and then mimic them. For ahead of the beat, Ray Brown, Lynn Seaton, are two good choices. Behind the beat? I can't think of anyone who consistently plays behind the beat but maybe others will have some suggestions. I have heard Rufus Reid make excellent use of playing behind the beat at least once. Once I was able to mimic the feel, I can recreate it. But, I found that I have to be careful not to mess up the drummer. I've tried to push the beat only to have the drummer follow me and then pretty quickly I'm back on the beat, just faster.

 

[fasternak]

Lots of physics here. But as you say, Chris, it's a matter of feel. More than anything, I need some way to realize that microscopic adjustment. I was trying to do this by moving each attack forward in time with zero regard to each note post attack. Doing so makes me feel like I might get caught in an vortex of ever-increasing speed. It feels terrible. However, breaking each note into attack/bloom/decay in my head might give me the new anchors points I need to rev up the time feel more comfortably. Wonderful possibilities here. Looking forward to growing better ears. Thanks again, everybody.

 

[Tom Lane]

Another thing you could try that helped me was to decompose the issue, and just try clapping to the metronome. I was taught to "disappear" the metronome, but with some practice, I found that I could train myself to clap a relatively even amount ahead or behind the metronome chirp.

 

[fasternak]

I, again, hold that the feeling of propulsion and forward motion is achieved more with note choice than with rhythmic displacement. Most cats I know try to be at the center of the beat.

Thanks for the advice, Ed Fuqua! The center is my prison it seems. I've been asked to get out in front of the drummer and drive. I've been kicking around your notion of increasing forward motion via note choice. And I certainly enjoy walking up to thumb position and beyond because it adds an appealing quality of frenetic urgency to the time feel. Is playing short strings the sort of thing you're referring to? Would you mind sharing a little more information with me here?

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Well, the 'bloom' is not quite as distinct to my ears as I hoped it might be. And the swelling seems to grow increasingly difficult to detect the further I get from the nut.

The bloom is something that you learn to feel. The surest way I found to begin to line it up was to work on a consistent velocity of stroke. What helped it sink home for me was focusing on the "thunk" that happens when the striking finger hits the next adjacent muted string. It's a subtle distinction, but it's there.

The distance from the nut aspect is not your imagination: the higher the stop, the shorter the vibrating length, which means less excursion of the string. In English, this means that the string will speak more quickly when you shorten the vibrating length. This realization helped me understand why thumb position seems to speak with almost no delay, while first position feels and sounds more sluggish by comparison.

 

[Chris Symer]

Another thought...... Have you been using an amp? If so, try playing without it for a while. IME playing without the amp forces the player to focus on a different part of the sound and listen in a much different way. Most pickups/amps tend to compress the sound, playing without amplification (and yes, with a drummer) often will get you playing a bit farther up on the time in order for you to hear the loudest part of your sound on the beat. I know my perception of things changes depending on whether I am amped or not (and also whish pickup is on my bass at the time). Of course if you are already playing acoustically my point won't help you.

 

[Michael Glynn]

playing without amplification (and yes, with a drummer) often will get you playing a bit farther up on the time in order for you to hear the loudest part of your sound on the beat.

Yeah, this is an important point. A good argument for at least putting the attack part of your sound ahead of the drummer. The reality of our instrument when played acoustically is that it is just in a different world from the drums in terms of dynamic range. Our forte is the drummers mezzo piano, at best. So we have to find ways to be heard through them. Playing at the front end of the beat helps. A strong and articulate sound helps (left hand is huge here). Having a sensitive drummer is perhaps best of all. All of this talk of beat placement should also take into account what the drummer is doing. In a straight-ahead four feel, I'm especially listening to the ride cymbal. I feel that the attack and decay characteristics of the ride match up most closely with the sound of the bass* so I try to work my feel around that.

In addition, though, the drummer is probably playing 2 and 4 on the hi-hat. The thing is, the hi-hat closing sound is kind of the opposite of the ride and the double bass. As the drummer starts closing it you get an increasing volume and the strong attack comes at the end when it fully closes. I've heard plenty of drummers whose hi-hat sounds like it is behind the ride for this reason, especially if they close the hat too slowly. It can be a cool sound when done well, but it is often just sloppiness. This is another reason I focus on the ride. Sometimes if you match up with the hi-hat, you'll end up behind the ride cymbal and end up sounding like you're behind the beat.

The drummer may also be playing four on the floor with the bass drum. This is treacherous territory, because if the drummer plays too hard it will cover up the bass entirely (both because of pure volume, but also when hit harder, more frequencies are produced which cover up more of our sound). Also, the idea of playing four on the bass drum, as I've heard it, is that it makes the bass sound louder--and when done right it actually works! To do this it has to match up perfectly with the bloom part of the double bass note. So if the drummer is doing this, we must be sure to put our attack ahead of the bass drum, so that the bloom hits at the same time.


*I could go into a long digression about the evolution of sounds in jazz and how changes never happen in a vacuum. To keep it short, let me say that I do not think it is coincidence that as the ride cymbal became the primary time keeper on the drum kit, the preferred bass sound became longer and more connected.

 

[Don Kasper]

I, again, hold that the feeling of propulsion and forward motion is achieved more with note choice than with rhythmic displacement.

I'm still thinking about this and can't quite envision what you're saying.
Could you provide 2 written examples of quarter note basslines? (on, say, the first 8 bars of Autumn Leaves),
One demonstrating a "feeling of propulsion and forward motion...", and the 2nd, NOT so much.
Thanks.

 

[Don Kasper]

You'll get a lot of varying answers to this, I'm sure. I'm not sure that playing ahead of the beat is a goal that everyone will recommend, but I'll let folks speak for themselves and answer the way I understand the question.

For me, the issue comes down to the attack/bloom/sustain envelope of the double bass. It's a tricky thing that eventually needs to be simply felt rather than thought about, but understanding this basic concept helped me to clear up some of the confusion I had about what I was hearing in my own recordings and the recordings of others.

The picture below is of 7 pizzicato attacks of an open D string:

View attachment 994185

At first glance, it looks like only a 2 part envelope: Attack, where the biggest excursion happens. and then a gradual decay as the wave narrows. But if you zoom in closer, you can see what the ear actually hears:

View attachment 994187

In this view, you can see that the widest point of the wave is actually slightly after the attack instead of immediately on it.

It's easier still to see if you zoom in a bit more:

View attachment 994195

Above, you can see how the attack actually takes place slightly before the bloom of the note, which is then followed by the decay of the note.

My take on this issue of "what part of the beat to play on" is that the real question is "which part of the sound should coincide with the beat"... the attack, or the bloom of the note? When I used to hear myself playing on recordings and feel that I was dragging or not supplying enough forward motion, I eventually discovered that what was really going on was that I was placing the attack of the note on the beat, but perceiving the bloom of the note as being slightly behind. Placing the attack on the beat is logical because that's what physically feels like playing on the beat; sonically, it's easy to perceive the bloom of the of the note as actually being the "center" of the note, so it can cause some confusion when listening.

Add to this the fact the the different strings bloom at different speeds because of the string excursion (E blooms slowest, G fastest), and it can be a real rabbit hole to try to address things like this through analytical methods.

Now, while I don't micro analyze this kind of thing in the way I used to, I do try to center the sound of the note on the beat, which technically means that often the attack comes just a hair earlier. Mostly it's a feel thing at this point, but during the learning process this kind of realization was helpful in explaining some of the aural disconnects I was running into. Enjoy the journey!

Fascinating.
I have some questions:
1. Can the "lag" between the Attack and the Bloom be measured? (I believe it can, in milliseconds). What, then, is/are that measurement(s) for different pitches, and/or, what is the general range of that lag (in milliseconds)? (FYI - "pitch" is measured in cents, 1/100 of a half-step, and it is widely accepted that most humans can only perceive a difference of 5 cents or at best, 3 cents.)
2. What is the smallest time increment that the human ear/brain is able to perceive?
3. Do all instruments have some kind of "lag", or are there instruments that have such a small lag, that it is not perceivable by us? (The Plot Thickens?)
4. Is the human brain and its associated muscular systems (the human body) capable of controlled micro-incremental adjustments (measured in milliseconds?) in playing Time? (i.e., playing on top of the beat just a fraction in order for the "Bloom" to occur ON the beat.) I'm not sure that my tiny brain is capable of this on a conscious level.
5. Is the ability to hear/feel and play "Time" an inborn, pre-wired pathway - (that MIGHT be nurtured and improved), or does it reside too deep inside the brain DNA to be significantly altered? (ex. - Don't we all know drummers who "had it..." from Day 1, and others who seem to never get near it?).
6. How much does the physical act of playing Time (the very mechanical movements) filter or alter the (pure) Inner Time that is perceived by and sent by the Brain to the Hands? I would guess "A LOT".
Thanks.
Sorry for all the Counting.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Not scientific enough to be able to answer empirically, but I'll give the questions the old college try.

1) I'm sure the lag could be measured, but there are too many variables (i.e. - the velocity of the attack, the string the note is played on, the vibrating length of the string, the tempo of the song, etc.) for the Human brain to make much mathematical use of that measurement.
2) I've heard the answer to this as being anywhere from 1/24th of a second to 7/100ths of a second, beyond which the brain "quantizes" the two sounds into one perceived sound.
3) I think most instruments lag (we know that sound itself does, especially over distance), but that some lag more than others. Most notably, the standard arrangement of an orchestra is set up so the slowest speaking instruments (strings) are in the front, while the fastest speaking (percussion) are in the back.
4) I think the key word in your question/statement is "on a conscious level". The subconscious is capable of lining up a feel for things much better than the conscious mind, IMO; but sometimes the conscious mind can shift its awareness to a certain aspect of a problem that can help the subconscious along.
5) I have not idea of the empirical answer to this. As an educator, wheat really concerns me is the question, "can anyone's sense of pitch and time be improved with focused practice". Obviously, I feel that it can.
6) I agree that "A LOT" is probably the best answer to this. Many times I make physical adjustments to issues that I know from past experience are problem areas; one example is intentionally pulling back on 8th note triplets, which I know I tend to rush. There are many others, but I think the physical is a very important component in all of this.

 

[Don Kasper]

Not scientific enough to be able to answer empirically, but I'll give the questions the old college try.

1) I'm sure the lag could be measured, but there are too many variables (i.e. - the velocity of the attack, the string the note is played on, the vibrating length of the string, the tempo of the song, etc.) for the Human brain to make much mathematical use of that measurement.
2) I've heard the answer to this as being anywhere from 1/24th of a second to 7/100ths of a second, beyond which the brain "quantizes" the two sounds into one perceived sound.
3) I think most instruments lag (we know that sound itself does, especially over distance), but that some lag more than others. Most notably, the standard arrangement of an orchestra is set up so the slowest speaking instruments (strings) are in the front, while the fastest speaking (percussion) are in the back.
4) I think the key word in your question/statement is "on a conscious level". The subconscious is capable of lining up a feel for things much better than the conscious mind, IMO; but sometimes the conscious mind can shift its awareness to a certain aspect of a problem that can help the subconscious along.
5) I have not idea of the empirical answer to this. As an educator, wheat really concerns me is the question, "can anyone's sense of pitch and time be improved with focused practice". Obviously, I feel that it can.
6) I agree that "A LOT" is probably the best answer to this. Many times I make physical adjustments to issues that I know from past experience are problem areas; one example is intentionally pulling back on 8th note triplets, which I know I tend to rush. There are many others, but I think the physical is a very important component in all of this.

1. ...But there must be a quantifiable "range" of lag? Can't the sample you provided be measured? (ProTools - type technology?) I'd be curious if there has been research into this. Google may be in my future.
2. 1/24 of a second is also the frame rate of motion pictures.
3. I thought the arrangement of the Orchestra was Soft-to-Loud? (front-to-back). That Orchestral Bass Drum is (probably) a Lag-o-saurus! (as are the Tuba and Trombones/French Horns).
4. Sure.
5. Of course it can be improved, (from crappy, to not so crappy, to maybe - pretty good), but can it surpass what is "genetically" cast? Same with pitch, IMO. Is there an inherent pathway or connection that is predetermined - NOT learned or practiced?
6. Yes.
Thanks for your time and interest, Chris.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

1) Probably, but it's above my pay scale, and I believe that the variables are just too... well, variable. As Michael pointed out earlier, two players playing the same bass get completely different sounds, and as a bass teacher I can attest that there is definitely an aspect of "pointed attack" that students seem to grasp progressively as a combination of the aspects of awareness of it and technique to execute it.
2) Right. Whatever the math, it's the same basic premise at work - beyond a certain point, the two events get perceived as together. But if you've ever spent any time syncing audio and video, without a mathematical timecode to use for the sync, it's a very laborious process of eyeballing/earballing the results until they feel right. I can attest that it can be done, but it takes a lot of trial and error to get the feel for it.
3) That, too; but having worked closely with a number of conductors, getting the "fast" instruments and the slower instruments to sync properly is a big part of the deal. I've heard conductors bitching about this - usually to the strings for lagging - quite a bit. How they manage it with those nebulous downbeats in the air has always been one of life's great mysteries to me. Some people seem to be able to communicate it clearly, and others.... well, not so much. But for us bass players, we are often syncing up with a ride cymbal and a hi hat, which tend to speak very clearly on the front end. My favorite drummers always seem to have a flat ride in their palette, and it's usually my favorite cymbal to lock with - i think it's because of the lack of wash compared to the attack.
5) No idea. I know this: I'm not Chris Potter, and I'm not Mozart. But I also know that worrying about this on my part feels like a cop out, because whatever I may be, my goal should always be to accept it and do what i can to improve and enjoy the fruits of that labor. I don't see very many things in life as simple, but this is one of them. As always, EEMMV.