Playing the Line As Written (poll)

[Scribbler]

Fairly straightforward... We play Scottish and Irish jigs and reels that are generally very old so there's no original bass lines to worry about. I'm also the guitarist, so no having to tie in with him, either.. generally about keeping an ear on the tune and the drummer (there are three of us).

 

[KDHBass76]

I respect source material, and sometimes I like to play around. If the material is of high enough craft and quality, it will survive virtually any treatment.

Pretty much this. I play what I think the song wants. Sometimes that's the line as written/originally recorded, sometimes it's a variation.

 

[Fuzzbass]

I like to start off learning the exact bass line as an ear-training exercise. Exceptions:

• I can't always learn the exact line: not all songs are available online.
• I sometimes get sub gigs where I have to learn a whole bunch of new songs on very short notice. For these I do the best I can: I try to learn the recognizable bass hooks, but my most important goal is to learn the feel of each song, to go along with the chord charts (cheat sheets) that I make for them.

Even when I learn the line exactly, what happens after that will often vary:

1. Some bands prefer to invent new interpretations of covers, e.g. Honky Tonk Woman with a Nawlins funk groove. IMO this is refreshing, especially for way-overplayed cover tunes such as Mustang Girl and Brown Eyed Sally
   
2. Some bands can't do exact covers: they simplify, or overplay, or just get it wrong
   
3. Some bands simply don't care about precision: play it like the record, or don't.... as long as it grooves, it's fine

For these, I try to groove along with my bandmates -- and if they don't groove, I try to set one.

But yeah, I've been in bands that want to copy as exactly as possible: "There's a reason this song sold 8 million copies!" (Maybe, but I would argue that it really doesn't matter at a bar gig). In this situation I try to be precise.


P.S. I'll add here that IMO overplaying is a far worse crime than underplaying: definitely true for cover bands, anyway. My goal is invisibility: the audience should feel my playing, not hear it.

 

[marcus2007]

I was walking down the strip of clubs that I play often when I passed a group doing I'll Take You There by the Staple Singers. I adore that tune, mostly because the bass line is so good. Anyway, the bass man was slapping all over it. Now hear me when I say that this is not a slap bash thread so please do not turn it into one. There was no aspect of the original bass line left other than I to IV.

Now I am all about adding yourself to a bass line but I think sometimes folks get way too extra. Thus far in life I have not heard a good reason to stray really far from recognizable recorded bass lines. Ill Take You There is an example of one of those songs that if you only heard the bass line, you would still instantly know the song. The band/players that wrote and recorded the material must have done something right because their song became well known. Who am I (the lowly working musician entertaining a crowd with their material) to alter the bass line to the point of it no longer being recognizable?

So lets use this forum for what its best at.... post your opinion of altering a famous bass line beyond the point of recognition!

 

[marcus2007]

The Bass Line in I'll Take You There defines that song so if it were me i would'nt change it.

 

[picker1974]

I can't stand cork sniffing sticklers, but the bass line has to be at least recognizable for the particular song. When someone tells me "that's not how so and so plays it" or "that's not how it is on the album", I tell them to go home and listen to the album.

 

[IamGroot]

It's a personal preference thing and has a lot to do with the tolerances of your band mates and audiences.

Personally, I try never to futz with a well-crafted line, especially one that is easily identifiable or a linchpin for the song. Indeed, playing a lot of these pop bass lines note-for-note (to the extent possible) is a real learning opportunity that I still enjoy after 40+ years of playing covers. Many times, restraint and consistency are what made the line good and helped sell millions of recordings. I like practicing restraint and that approach has served me (and the bands I've played in) very well.

Also, when I nail a bass line from a pop hit as-recorded, no one can accuse me of the things in the OP. I won't be getting stink eye from band mates or audience members or risk muddling things up with my "creativity."

There are exceptions, and I sometimes do a little additive or subtractive editing depending on the song and tolerances, but "I'll Take You There" is such a beautifully composed line and so central to the strength of the tune, I'd probably learn it as-recorded and take very few, if any, liberties.

Even though I'm a proficient slapper, I tend not to slap songs that weren't recorded that way, and when I hear a bass player do that it almost always wrinkles my nose. It usually seems more an indulgence than an improvement.

What he said.
End of discussion

 

[Glenn Mac]

I was walking down the strip of clubs that I play often when I passed a group doing I'll Take You There by the Staple Singers. I adore that tune, mostly because the bass line is so good. Anyway, the bass man was slapping all over it. Now hear me when I say that this is not a slap bash thread so please do not turn it into one. There was no aspect of the original bass line left other than I to IV.

Now I am all about adding yourself to a bass line but I think sometimes folks get way too extra. Thus far in life I have not heard a good reason to stray really far from recognizable recorded bass lines. Ill Take You There is an example of one of those songs that if you only heard the bass line, you would still instantly know the song. The band/players that wrote and recorded the material must have done something right because their song became well known. Who am I (the lowly working musician entertaining a crowd with their material) to alter the bass line to the point of it no longer being recognizable?

So lets use this forum for what its best at.... post your opinion of altering a famous bass line beyond the point of recognition!

That is a great song, play it as it is! I agree!

 

[Modulus 96]

I let the song tell me what I can and can't do... Which is to say I allow my musical sensibilities to inform my fingers as to what is appropriate. A good example that comes to mind, from some recent gigs of mine....

Stone Temple Pilots "Vaseline" - little to no room to mess with the bass line.

Ozzy "Bark at the moon" - more room to play, in fact I double some of the guitar riffs throughout the song and completely jam the end but still keep it recognizable.

Some songs allow you to explore within the confines of the song, others not so much.

 

[IamGroot]

At some times, my "exact copy" philosophy extends beyond the original note for note to trying to emulate the exact sound. Time spent trying to get an upright sound on an electric for a Ray Brown or Roy Huskey Jr lines is time well spent.

 

[Stan Haldane]

I was walking down the strip of clubs that I play often when I passed a group doing I'll Take You There by the Staple Singers. I adore that tune, mostly because the bass line is so good. Anyway, the bass man was slapping all over it. Now hear me when I say that this is not a slap bash thread so please do not turn it into one. There was no aspect of the original bass line left other than I to IV.

Now I am all about adding yourself to a bass line but I think sometimes folks get way too extra. Thus far in life I have not heard a good reason to stray really far from recognizable recorded bass lines. Ill Take You There is an example of one of those songs that if you only heard the bass line, you would still instantly know the song. The band/players that wrote and recorded the material must have done something right because their song became well known. Who am I (the lowly working musician entertaining a crowd with their material) to alter the bass line to the point of it no longer being recognizable?

So lets use this forum for what its best at.... post your opinion of altering a famous bass line beyond the point of recognition!

Less is more.

 

[Speedhitter]

I was walking down the strip of clubs that I play often when I passed a group doing I'll Take You There by the Staple Singers. I adore that tune, mostly because the bass line is so good. Anyway, the bass man was slapping all over it. Now hear me when I say that this is not a slap bash thread so please do not turn it into one. There was no aspect of the original bass line left other than I to IV.

Now I am all about adding yourself to a bass line but I think sometimes folks get way too extra. Thus far in life I have not heard a good reason to stray really far from recognizable recorded bass lines. Ill Take You There is an example of one of those songs that if you only heard the bass line, you would still instantly know the song. The band/players that wrote and recorded the material must have done something right because their song became well known. Who am I (the lowly working musician entertaining a crowd with their material) to alter the bass line to the point of it no longer being recognizable?

So lets use this forum for what its best at.... post your opinion of altering a famous bass line beyond the point of recognition!

Not sure how you could change that without altering the groove of the song. I try my hardest to emulate the original main bass licks. Outside of that I play my own version that I hear in my head. I'm a lead singer as well, so there are lots of examples where I have to alter the lines so that I can sing first. lol!

 

[IamGroot]

I'll Take You There is a song with deeper meaning to some people. When I played that lick on sound checks, I would get nods from some of the patrons. Darryl Jones even used that lick in a Bass Player article as an example of using the right fingering to get the sound right.

Beatles are another example where it is usually better to play note for note.

 

[sean_on_bass]

Depends on the musical situation. Anything and everything could happen. If you are in a cover band and generally stick to the recorded version, play it note for note because that is what your band does. But then there are the multitudes of different types of group that may rearrange something in varying degrees. Then there's jazz.

I'll speak to how i personally approach jazz. There are certain standards with signature bass lines. Stuff like So What. My goal is not to play anything note for note as a requirement, but instead to play in the spirit of what the band is doing on the band stand. If the band is playing in the spirit of the Kind of Blue recording i am likely to play something fairly close to the Paul Chambers line but with my own inflections. If the band is feeling a bit more adventurous, i might change the line drastically.

 

[FrenchBassQC]

I voted for the fist option, unless your band is called Dirty Loops then you won't be the only one messing around.

 

[Wilda]

If the band is sticking to the original while the bass player is showboating I say a big fat boo. I say it's most important to groove with your bandmates.

I had a no rehearse gig with a singing Drumner and was happy to see The Etta James song "I'd rather go Blind" on his set list. Love that one! 2 chords, groovy unwavering bass pattern. I learned it And couldn't wait to play it. But oh no he laid down a new groove with different vocal phrasing . First I pushed back a bit trying to assert the way its supposed to go, then I tried to fit the orig pattern into the new groove, then I gave up and just locked in with the new feel and it was awesome. someone posted a vid of it on Instagram - the whole band was swaying and People were dancing and it turned out to be a highlight. We could've grooved on the 1 and minor 2 all night. I learned something important that night. It never hurts to learn a bass line note for note but don't be a stickler - be open and allow magic to happen.

 

[Bondobass]

Yeah, and if the original Key is in F...it's a guarantee, the band you are auditioning for, they'll want to play it in E, which is easier anyway so there's that.

 

[Jhengsman]

I was listening to a NPR obituary of Aretha Franklin and when they got to the late 60s period when she was interpreting hits by Wilson Pickett, Carole King, Dionne Warwick and The Band among others the speaker was pointed out that the entire "covering a song" concept was a Rock thing. Those coming from the Jazz, Gospel and R&B communities never picked up the concept, of it ain't yours if you didn't write it or got the first hit recording released. Taken here it is why when many of us think note, by note or as "written" or more appropriately the cut used for the release of the single, we tend to think that is a tribute to the original recording act.

That being said when if ask to hum a song you hum a bassline like The Trill Is Gone or I'll Take You There as has been used recently in this thread that is what you do, 90% of the time. And yes I forgive Christian McBride for his version of Chameleon

 

[SirMjac28]

I have to do it note for note it's a quirk of mine

 

[mbasile]

I think it has to be taken song-by-song, and I think that song in particular doesn't lend itself to too much messing with the original line. Maybe some flourishes here and there, and then do whatever you want at the solo.