Double Bass Purpose of an amp

[anonymous8547j7d7b]

I like this thread a lot. My own feelings & experiences on the matter have been pretty well covered as common to most of us in other posts. In short, I need to hear myself & be heard, with as good a tone as possible. If I can get away with playing acoustically (rare), I will. Otherwise, I have no pressing desire to risk that toneless, strangled thunk (beloved of non-bassists) from old albums in a vain effort to be heard. It seems to me that a lack of amplification can often be the leader's doing rather than the bassists choice - which is real nice if everyone is on board and adjusts for the music's sake & aren't just on some "authenticity" trip. Still, it kinda irks when a non-bassist effectively sets themselves on a pedestal of greater knowledge of bass technique/tradition than any amp-using bassist (you know, like Ray Brown, Ron Carter etc...)

 

[PB+J]

I'm late to this thread but I'll chime in. I do mostly small local gigs, some receptions that get large, outdoor gigs (Outdoor gigs in Alexandria, near the flight path for national airport--a great musical experience!). I hate using an amp--I lug the big bass around because I love the tone, and would love to never have to amp at all. I generally play in smaller combos, and I feel like most of the time when I need an amp it's because the other players can't modulate their volume. Is that unfair? Maybe.

I try to use the amp in as unobtrusive and unintrusive a way as possible--as low end support or more often as a slight bump in the midrange, which as Chris Fitz said is where you hear your pitch and where other hear the bass. When it gets to where I hear the amp more than the bass I start thinking I should have just brought my electric. If there's a PA, well that's a different story.

Some players--like Stanley Clarke or, sorry, NHOP, have what to me sounds like an amp-dependent tone. Great players, yes, but it sounds like their tone is developed more from the amp than the bass. People used to say that about Scott LaFaro, but to me he has the sound of his bass amplified, if that makes any sense, while Stanley has a tone that's hard to tell from a fretless electric. He's a great player, obviously, I just prefer a different sound

 

[bolo]

I like what you had to say PB+J as usual.

But ... I don't associate LaFaro's tone w/ a pickup and an amp at all. Maybe I am all wet. Steely sounding Spiros, yes ... two fingers of the right hand a-galloping, yes ... But I thought Sunday and Debby for example were just him, his bass, and a mic (or mics) recording the group live. Maybe you are referring to other recordings and/or other settings. Or maybe like I said, I'm just flat out wrong.

I thought I also read somewhere that he would step up toward the mic for his solos, and then step back a little when the solo was over.

I dunno. Maybe I just dreamed that.

[ Edit: If you haven't seen it yet, you owe it to yourself to watch this. Amp or not ... oh my. ].

 

[flatback]

I like what you had to say PB+J as usual.

But ... I don't associate LaFaro's tone w/ a pickup and an amp at all. Maybe I am all wet. Steely sounding Spiros, yes ... two fingers of the right hand a-galloping, yes ... But I thought Sunday and Debby for example were just him, his bass, and a mic (or mics) recording the group live. Maybe you are referring to other recordings and/or other settings. Or maybe like I said, I'm just flat out wrong.

I thought I also read somewhere that he would step up toward the mic for his solos, and then step back a little when the solo was over.

I dunno. Maybe I just dreamed that.

[ Edit: If you haven't seen it yet, you owe it to yourself to watch this. Amp or not ... oh my. ].

As far as I know scott never used an amp or steel strings. I think PBJ means Eddie Gomez. The youtube video is not scott but Chuck Israels. There is a scott video just a few seconds here

 

[PB+J]

LaFaro--he used gut strings, by all accounts. There's a raging debate about him--some people, including Don Higdon, who saw him live, say he was inaudible. He doesn't sound like anyone else at the time, that's for sure--what I was trying to say is that he still sounds like a double bass to me (whereas NHOP kind of doesn't) but that he apparently needed a mic to get that sound

I'm still not sure that's even true--there's this little video clip--sure looks like he's hitting pretty hard AND fast

Link Removed

 

[bolo]

piro, thanks. Eddie Gomez, okay yeah, a signature type amplified tone for sure.

At the risk of emphasizing what I don't know, are you sure that Scott LaFaro didn't use steel strings? I thought he was one of the players that actually brought it to the fore.

But ... I could be all wet. Toss me a towel.

[ Edit: Looks like PB+J answered that already. Drip, drip. ]

 

[PB+J]

I've always loved LaFaro--he's one of the main reasons I play bass. But I was doing a search on him just now and came on this archived talkbass thread where Don Higdon talks about LaFaro:

"Don Higdon
01-28-2002, 05:37 PM

You say that LaFaro had a huge sound. He didn't. I was around when he came on to the scene, and a major topic of discussion among bassists was the tradeoff he was making between speed and projection. I'm talking about a time when nobody used an amp, even in big bands. You can't go by what you hear on recordings."

I have a live recording of Lafaro and Evans at the Birdland, just before they made the famous vanguard recordings, and he sounds huge. But Hidgdon says he was there the night the Birdland recording was made and LaFaro was inaudible. You can hear, on some of the tracks, a lot of rattling and buzzing on the higher notes which suggests really low action.

So on the point of the thread--I love his tone, it sounds like a double bass to me, but apparently it depended heavily on mics and PA support

Here's the whole thread, including the claim he used gut:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-37860.html

 

[Pcocobass]

Hey guys, those Lafaro clips are amazing! Every time I see a clip of him, even though it is only a few seconds, I'm moved by it. He was such an amazing musician and the first upright bassist I ever heard!

As far as the amp stuff goes, I also think it's very important to find a good rig and be very flexable with it. I've been using an Acoustic Image Contra and Realist for quite a while now and I'm very happy in general, but there are times when it doesn't really cut it.

 

[bolo]

So on the point of the thread--I love his tone, it sounds like a double bass to me, but apparently it depended heavily on mics and PA support

Yep, nice segue. And nice find on that old thread too. Applicable to the point of this thread just like you said. A respectable example of the highest order, no doubt.

Thanks for all the clarifications & corrections too, both you and piro.

 

[flatback]

I've always loved LaFaro--he's one of the main reasons I play bass. But I was doing a search on him just now and came on this archived talkbass thread where Don Higdon talks about LaFaro:

"Don Higdon
01-28-2002, 05:37 PM

You say that LaFaro had a huge sound. He didn't. I was around when he came on to the scene, and a major topic of discussion among bassists was the tradeoff he was making between speed and projection. I'm talking about a time when nobody used an amp, even in big bands. You can't go by what you hear on recordings."

I have a live recording of Lafaro and Evans at the Birdland, just before they made the famous vanguard recordings, and he sounds huge. But Hidgdon says he was there the night the Birdland recording was made and LaFaro was inaudible. You can hear, on some of the tracks, a lot of rattling and buzzing on the higher notes which suggests really low action.

So on the point of the thread--I love his tone, it sounds like a double bass to me, but apparently it depended heavily on mics and PA support

Here's the whole thread, including the claim he used gut:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-37860.html

Scott is a miracle. He is so damn creative and musical. Nobody approaches the bass the way he did. He remains one of my big inspirations and I dig that he figured a way to express all that raw energy on the bass, however he did it. And some of the lines he plays are just really unique. He seems always to be playing the subdivisions, to be thinking fast (faster them me...)

 

[anonymous8547j7d7b]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypZbagxgxIoOn the subject of Eddie Gomez's amped tone. Check out this clip
Eddie unamplified on guts - still sounds like Eddie. I think the first Montreaux album (w/Bill & Jack DeJohnette) illustrates this as well. I'm not a fan of late '70's di recordings like The Bill Evans Album - but it's still recognisably close to the unamped guts in my view.
On the subject of NHOP, I think he solved the amp problem in a very unique way which worked for him but few others. Whether you like the tone comes down to taste I guess, but IMHO his approach was to be deliberately amp-dependent - whereas other folk just end up that way.
I can understand, when you hear some awful 70's recordings, why amps have been frowned upon. Pickups and amps have come on in leaps since then, though; and it's getting easier to sound much more acoustic when amplified.
I suppose the bottom line is - we wouldn't use an amp if we didn't have to (for all the reasons we've all spoken about in this thread)

 

[anonymous8547j7d7b]

My apologies for such an untidy post. TB must have the luddite filter on 2day

 

[PB+J]

jaydbass, that's a great clip of gomez playing--thanks. I can't help but notice the mic in front of him though. Was that for recording, or did he always assume he'd have PA support? Either way, it sure likes like his technique evolved to play acoustically, rather than with a mic.

I'm just a small time local gigger--I often can't count on there being a PA and I always have an amp in the car at least, and often have the amp plugged in and ready to go but not turned on. But if I was playing at that level, touring as part of a "name" act, I'd be able to count on a PA and a sound guy who know what he was doing and then maybe I'd go to a mic on a stand, and maybe if I did that full time for years I'd end up lowering the action, playing lighter, and letting the amp do the work.

I wonder--if La Faro was touring or doing concerts with Evans, could he count on a PA in every club? Probably. But it still looks to me like he came up playing acoustically, same as it looks with Gomez in that clip

But look at this clip of Stanley in a wank-fest with Al Dimeola and jon luc Ponty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hXFiwjLf88

Hello, giant bass guitar. Does he get any acoustic tone at all playing that light? I can't tell on you tube over computer speakers. Maybe he does.

I'm just assuming there's an evolution in your style depending on the venues you're playing in, or there might be. It seems like wherever Ray Brown played he played like he'd never seen an amp, but LaFaro sounded so different from everyone else and I assume it's because he recognized that if a mic and a PA were doing the heavy lifting he could play differently

 

[anonymous8547j7d7b]

Interestingly enough, I heard from a local bassist/luthier that he'd got speaking to Ray once, and played his bass. Ray had taken the action down to about 5mm on the g-side cos "as you get older, some nights you feel like a rest..."
Did it make any difference to his sound or playing? You betcha it didn't!!

 

[pdbass]

When you think about it, many of these artists deal with some pretty 'ideal' circumstances when compared to someone that might have to play in clubs or bars every night. Playing unamplified seems like a good idea if I were to be playing at the Vanguard or the Blue Note and then playing a concert hall or a festival with huge PA support. It also helps when you can hear a pin drop to be able to appreciate the nuances of the instrument (and the music). I was on the road for about 4 years and, believe me, when someone pays a good price to come out to hear you play, there is no talking. Everyone is listening to the music. You don't have to play loud or hard. It's alot harder to do that in a bar where 1/3 of the people are listening, 1/3 are talking OVER you, and 1/3 of the people are trying to watch a game on the TV. Ideally, we would all be able to play acoustically and be heard. Certainly, someone like Christian McBride can count on decent PA support and a quiet audience just about every night. Unfortunately, for those of us that work in the combat-zone, an amp is necessary if we expect to be heard at all. Given the choice, I prefer to play acoustically, and I'll take advantage of that every chance I get. The problem is that audiences here in Pittsburgh haven't quite gotten that whole "being quiet" thing while the music is being played . To play without an amp, it seems as though the music has to have a range of about pp to f, whereas most of the time, gigs seem to start at about mf and go to fff!

 

[anonymous8547j7d7b]

Yip, +loads.

 

[bolo]

Yeah, I'd have to say on most of my "typical" gigs the room gets the quietest and people turn to notice the band the most when we stop playing. The reduction in din makes their conversations get awkward all of a sudden.

din – noun 1. a loud, confused noise; a continued loud or tumultuous sound; noisy clamor.