• 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.

Double Bass Question about a lesson

Norre

Norre

Jan 5, 2001
465
49
51
Antwerp, Belgium
users.telenet.be
#1
Hi,

I have a question about a lesson : Link Removed
In bar 2 which fingers would you use to play the last 3 notes of the first half of the bar (I put a red circle aroud them). Would you prefer 1-2-1 (meaning index, middle, index finger) or 2-3-2 (middle, ring, middle finger)? Somehow I think it's not really that important but I was just wondering which one you would choose and why.
I tried both and I think 1-2-1 feels more comfortable even though it makes the "jump" to the next bar half a step longer.

Thanks,

KN
 
#2
You will find more success in playing this piece, and in doing what this lesson is attempting to teach, by using 1-2-1. The phrase on that line is meant to stay in one position and you should therefore play the C later in that bar on the D string, not the G string.

Good luck.
 
#4
Actually I would also use 1-2-1, but I disagree that the following C and the notes after it were meant to be played on the D string - I think it is clear from the fingering indications that the notes following that phrase are to be played on the G string.

If you carefully examine the indicated fingerings it seems clear.

Therefore the A is played 1 on the G string, the F played 2 on the D, and back to the A again with 1 on the G. Then you start the next phrase with C on the G string with 1.
 
#8
Based on the fingerings used throughout the whole exercise, I'd say 2-4-2 makes the most sense.

The 4th position on the D string (of this fingering system) looks to allow either first finger on the G# or A.

Shifting from a first finger A on the D string to first finger C on the G string is not the most fluid shift and this exercise doesn't seem to focus on awkward shifting.
 
#9
If you have the time and inclination explore other fingerings to both see why they do/don't work as well and to develop diversity, given that the same note is 5 "frets" higher/lower on the next string. Most notes need more than one "sense of place" on the fingerboard that any finger must reach for with well-developed certainty.

Happy hunting,
DP
 
#14
Norre said:
The exercise is taken from the Nanny method book. The numbers under the staff indicate the position and the numbers above the staff indicate the fingers.
Click to expand...

I find this way of notation very confusing and annoying. Why not just write on which string the note has to be played? then the position will be clear automatically.
Since there are so many different position numbering methods in different schools.
 
#15
I find this way of notation very confusing and annoying. Why not just write on which string the note has to be played? then the position will be clear automatically.
Since there are so many different position numbering methods in different schools.
Click to expand...

I guess if you're used to another method then it can be confusing. For me, it feels very natural because I used this method since the first day I started playing. The only downside there is to it is that, since everything (positions and fingers) is written on the paper for you, you don't have to think about it anymore.
Parallel with this book I also use the Simandl book. My teacher doesn't use it in his lessons but since Simandl is more or less the standard in teaching methods I thought I'd give it a try too so I bought the book and am learning lessons on my own from it.
 
#16
Norre said:
I guess if you're used to another method then it can be confusing. For me, it feels very natural because I used this method since the first day I started playing.
Click to expand...

Yes but Nanny is apparently using yet another position numbering method than Simandl since Nanny's 1st position is Simandl's 1/2 position.

I find all these different position numbers confusing and not logical at all. Why not just use a position number for every half step? Like on guitar, electric bass and almost every other stringed instrument. Makes much more sense and it is much better for communication with other bass players. Now everyone is using a different system.
 
#17
True! Maybe we should start a "universal method" for bassplayers :D
I guess there's as many methods as there are bassplayers. I've even seen bassplayers using their ringfinger in the lower positions. How does that work?
In the end I guess it's the music that counts.
Btw, I wonder how it works in the orchestras. Is a bassplayer free in how (which position) he chooses to play the piece? I've heard for bowing the first bass usually tells the others how they have to bow so there are no "gaps" in the music. Is that true?
 
#18
Norre said:
True! Maybe we should start a "universal method" for bassplayers :D
I guess there's as many methods as there are bassplayers. I've even seen bassplayers using their ringfinger in the lower positions. How does that work?
In the end I guess it's the music that counts.
Btw, I wonder how it works in the orchestras. Is a bassplayer free in how (which position) he chooses to play the piece? I've heard for bowing the first bass usually tells the others how they have to bow so there are no "gaps" in the music. Is that true?
Click to expand...

I have never liked the idea of position numbers - there are so many systems, and they're similar enough to be confusing, but not so similar as to be interchangeable. My preference is to note the string and the finger, and not to worry about a position number.

Some techniques teach using fingers 1-3-4 rather than Simandl's 1-2-4. Bille is notated this way, although my teacher had me play the Bille exercises using 1-2-4. Still others (although this is less common) advocate for using all 4 fingers in the lower positions. If your hands are large enough, this can be a great technique.
 
#19
mjt0229 said:
I have never liked the idea of position numbers - there are so many systems, and they're similar enough to be confusing, but not so similar as to be interchangeable. My preference is to note the string and the finger, and not to worry about a position number.
Click to expand...

I do this exactly the same. No need to know the position numbers. Only comes in handy when communicating with other bass players. For myself I use the 'one new position every half step' numbering like most string instruments do.
 
#20
Norre said:
True! Maybe we should start a "universal method" for bassplayers :D
I guess there's as many methods as there are bassplayers. I've even seen bassplayers using their ringfinger in the lower positions. How does that work?
In the end I guess it's the music that counts.
Btw, I wonder how it works in the orchestras. Is a bassplayer free in how (which position) he chooses to play the piece? I've heard for bowing the first bass usually tells the others how they have to bow so there are no "gaps" in the music. Is that true?
Click to expand...

Fingering is usually free; very occasionally you might be asked to do something specific, but that's extremely rare, and it's usually written in the part by the composer.

Bowing on the other hand, the principal bass does decide how you will be doing it; of course, you do get to negotiate, and if you have the time to experiment in a sectional you might try a few options before deciding. Often bass bowing also more or less follows what the 'cellos do, but since their bows are four inches longer and have completely different dynamics, that doesn't always work. Sometimes having the players change bow in different places is the right thing... if you have a very, very long sustained note, for example.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back