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.
Selling the bass part
- Thread starter Rockinjc
- Start date
I caught a double bill years ago at Wolf Trap... Stanley Jordan opened for Wynton Marsalis. Easily one of the most boring shows I've ever attended. Stanley was a one tone, two hand clinic and Wynton was clearly in a bad mood. Did he play well? ... yes, much better than I ever played trumpet but the only vibe around seemed to be anger, most of it directed at his bandmates. For anyone thinking Jazz musicians give 100% all the time, talk to a jazz musician after a gig and ask them what "they" thought about the gig. Jazz musicians can phone it in just like anyone else.
I'm critical of my own playing but I'm not going to let a clam ruin my night.
I agree with Jim and if it's BS... I'll live.
I'm critical of my own playing but I'm not going to let a clam ruin my night.
I agree with Jim and if it's BS... I'll live.
All this talk makes me think of Jeff Berlin.. here's a guy who's got bass playing DOWN, and yet I don't really see myself humming any of his tunes. Maybe he's got no feeling?
Thanks, Bruce. This is exactly my point. You can't just play any note at any point in a measure and think it will work because you played it with feeling. The wrong note at the wrong time is a clunker no matter what.
Non-musically educated people in an audience might not recognize a note as a clunker, but they damn well walk away feeling unsatisfied with what they heard thinking that wasn't as good as somebody else they've heard.
The bottom line is that right notes groove more than wrong ones. No amount of "feeling" can help it. If there are two bassists, one bassist is "grooving" (as you all define it) his ass off but hits the occassional clunker (even if he doesn't realize it), and the second bassist maybe isn't "grooving (again as you define it) as much but hits all the right notes at all the right times. Not a person hearing the two will think the first cat is better, guarranteed.
Note selections and even chord changes swing or groove in a way that is not at all related to time or feeling. The tension and release of the right notes in the right places and the way chords resolve in and out of each other creates the illusion of forward motion. When your notes swing or groove like that it makes your line inmeasurably better. That's what separates the good from the mediocre.
"It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing," was Duke Ellington. Anyone familiar with Ellington would know that if he heard some playing funny notes in funny places, despite them being played with all the conviction in the world, he'd think that cat isn't swingin'.
...and a whole lotta Jazz doesn't "swing", either.
The Boppers were criticized 'cause they didn't play "properly"; later, the Free/New Thing guys were criticized 'cause they didn't play "properly". I know I'm a hard-headed bastid...for me, it's about rhythm/feel/time first. IMHO, everything will be "OK" if played with emotion.
Then again, I'm mediocre & don't have to play for pay...
What's that Ornette Coleman line, "...when I realized I could make mistakes, I knew I was onto something".
The Boppers were criticized 'cause they didn't play "properly"; later, the Free/New Thing guys were criticized 'cause they didn't play "properly". I know I'm a hard-headed bastid...for me, it's about rhythm/feel/time first. IMHO, everything will be "OK" if played with emotion.
Then again, I'm mediocre & don't have to play for pay...
What's that Ornette Coleman line, "...when I realized I could make mistakes, I knew I was onto something".
I'm still with ya, Jim
Who's to say what the "proper" note is. I've heard guys blow out reams of proper notes and be downright boring. Then there have been others who use dissonance to put an edge on things. Is that "improper"? Believe it or not some people like "out" playing.
If the first guy in the example doesn't know he's playing an occasional clunker, he's probably playing the entire song with conviction. I don't think everyone will agree the second guy was better.
Re: Duke Ellington...if he only played what were considered proper harmonies what affect would that have had on his compositions?
see below
Who's to say what the "proper" note is. I've heard guys blow out reams of proper notes and be downright boring. Then there have been others who use dissonance to put an edge on things. Is that "improper"? Believe it or not some people like "out" playing.
If the first guy in the example doesn't know he's playing an occasional clunker, he's probably playing the entire song with conviction. I don't think everyone will agree the second guy was better.
Re: Duke Ellington...if he only played what were considered proper harmonies what affect would that have had on his compositions?
see below
I think the basic problem with what is 'proper' revolves around the fact that theory actually trails far behind cutting edge music. Many people who have an adventurous ear are drawn to new things going on now, but again theory has no way of validating the current stuff, so if it often discounted.
I think what music theory is all about is explaining why something sounds good, bad, or has some other effect, but those who let it dictate to them what is right are trapped to the confines of what has gone on before. Still this leaves a lot of room to work with, but it is not for everybody. Other thing that theory provides is a context to explore. This is best served by first understanding a lot of it and making conscious decisions about what rules you want to follow or break, and why. If in the end, changes win a lot of people over, they will make new branches of theory eventualy. Thats the way its supposed to go.
I think some archeologist found a five-thousand-year-old flute with a conventional scale on it. How the heck did those primitives learn to play the thing without a theory book? Western theory also borrows from other cultures as the lines of whats right are expanded. Lets face it, the lines keep moving!
jc
I think what music theory is all about is explaining why something sounds good, bad, or has some other effect, but those who let it dictate to them what is right are trapped to the confines of what has gone on before. Still this leaves a lot of room to work with, but it is not for everybody. Other thing that theory provides is a context to explore. This is best served by first understanding a lot of it and making conscious decisions about what rules you want to follow or break, and why. If in the end, changes win a lot of people over, they will make new branches of theory eventualy. Thats the way its supposed to go.
I think some archeologist found a five-thousand-year-old flute with a conventional scale on it. How the heck did those primitives learn to play the thing without a theory book? Western theory also borrows from other cultures as the lines of whats right are expanded. Lets face it, the lines keep moving!
jc
I won't argue that if it sounds good, it works. Of course theory is developed to explain why some things sound good and others don't. But no amount of conviction will make something that sounds bad sound good. I like a lot of advanced music. It all stretched what people thought sounded good at the time when they began playing it. Some of it is still "difficult". But it's not that it is being played with passion and conviction that it sounds good. It works because of the context, the time and place in the music, the players (or composers) no how to handle the notes to make them work. They don't just throw something in because they think it's cool but don't know how to get there or how to get out. If you want to play outside the changes you gotta know how and when. A bassist can't just play outside because he feels like it. He can't play out if the soloist is in. The soloist being out doesn't automatically mean the bass can go out.
jc - Thanks for getting us out of the ever so boring gear threads.
It's been said that there are no wrong notes, only wrong rythm. I believe it is true. Playing with assurance is problably what sells the part. Funny you mention Miles, I've told people that when a wrong note slips out, repeat it and do something with it. It's like saying: Yep, that's what I wanted to play. Of course, this should never be used as an excuse for playing wrong notes, but at least you show the audience that you know your stuff.
So yes, I think presentation has a lot to do with selling your part but content is what will make the buyer come back.
This is true in jazz and classical music because the audience generally has a good knowledge of music and above all, they listen. The problem with musicians not wanting to learn because it would impair their creativity (what a load of crap!) is also true for the audience, most people don't give a damn about music, all they care about is the fashion or trend associated with a particular genre. All people want is some noise to occupy their mind so they don't have to think or a boring beat (piston music) so they can move their mindless body on the "dance" floor. How many people listen to music like they would watch a movie or read a book? Not many. When the music gets a little too complex for them, they say it has no feeling. That's like saying that what a chinese person is saying doesn't make sense just because I don't understand it.
Sorry I went off-topic, I just wanted to say that the audience needs to be educated and it's up to the musicians to do so.
It's been said that there are no wrong notes, only wrong rythm. I believe it is true. Playing with assurance is problably what sells the part. Funny you mention Miles, I've told people that when a wrong note slips out, repeat it and do something with it. It's like saying: Yep, that's what I wanted to play. Of course, this should never be used as an excuse for playing wrong notes, but at least you show the audience that you know your stuff.
So yes, I think presentation has a lot to do with selling your part but content is what will make the buyer come back.
This is true in jazz and classical music because the audience generally has a good knowledge of music and above all, they listen. The problem with musicians not wanting to learn because it would impair their creativity (what a load of crap!) is also true for the audience, most people don't give a damn about music, all they care about is the fashion or trend associated with a particular genre. All people want is some noise to occupy their mind so they don't have to think or a boring beat (piston music) so they can move their mindless body on the "dance" floor. How many people listen to music like they would watch a movie or read a book? Not many. When the music gets a little too complex for them, they say it has no feeling. That's like saying that what a chinese person is saying doesn't make sense just because I don't understand it.
Sorry I went off-topic, I just wanted to say that the audience needs to be educated and it's up to the musicians to do so.
...it's cool, Dave.
Speaking of "difficult", how 'bout these guys that play outside the usual 12 tones? Are they playing bad notes, wrong notes, out-of-tune notes, etc?
On Don Grolnicks' "newest" cd, THE LONDON CONCERT, Marty Ehrlich is working with microtones & in a pretty straightahead-ish environment(Erskine & Peter Washington are the rhythm section). Ehrlich sounds "FLAT"...
Comments?
...and whadda 'bout guitarist Derek Bailey? Would someone clue me into what he's about?!
BTW, I actually caught some of Burns' JAZZ documentary last night; I think it was Part III & Ellington was briefly mentioned(I would hope this series goes into greater depth with Duke)...
Anyway, the little light came on in my head(finally)as to why many have a problem with the term "Avant Garde". In their respective place in time, Armstrong, Duke, Bird, Monk, etc all would have been considered "Avant Garde"...
It's all relative?
Speaking of "difficult", how 'bout these guys that play outside the usual 12 tones? Are they playing bad notes, wrong notes, out-of-tune notes, etc?
On Don Grolnicks' "newest" cd, THE LONDON CONCERT, Marty Ehrlich is working with microtones & in a pretty straightahead-ish environment(Erskine & Peter Washington are the rhythm section). Ehrlich sounds "FLAT"...
Comments?
...and whadda 'bout guitarist Derek Bailey? Would someone clue me into what he's about?!
BTW, I actually caught some of Burns' JAZZ documentary last night; I think it was Part III & Ellington was briefly mentioned(I would hope this series goes into greater depth with Duke)...
Anyway, the little light came on in my head(finally)as to why many have a problem with the term "Avant Garde". In their respective place in time, Armstrong, Duke, Bird, Monk, etc all would have been considered "Avant Garde"...
It's all relative?
Seems like this thread has taken a Jazz slant when it actually started talking about music in general. I could be wrong but knowledge of theory may not be an overriding concern in some other genres.
Passing chords, flat 9ths, comping... I just don't hear as much of it in, say, punk. Does that mean that it's mindless music... I don't think so, unless you just want to generalize. BTW boring is in the mind of the beholder, I know I'd rather hear Muddy Waters bend some notes (and play some clams) over Kenny G predictably playing scales and arpeggios. Did Muddy have his modes down? Who cares? Sometimes it's about the music. On the piston music tip, I can think of some Chaka Khan recordings with that beat and Anthony Jackson in the bass chair. Boring? Maybe, but I liked it. How's that for a dichotomy...AJ and piston music? A well trained musician playing mindless music.
There's nothing wrong with being musically educated but it really helps to have an idea what to do with it rather than merely regurgitate scales you've been woodshedding on for years.
Training the audience?... How?
Passing chords, flat 9ths, comping... I just don't hear as much of it in, say, punk. Does that mean that it's mindless music... I don't think so, unless you just want to generalize. BTW boring is in the mind of the beholder, I know I'd rather hear Muddy Waters bend some notes (and play some clams) over Kenny G predictably playing scales and arpeggios. Did Muddy have his modes down? Who cares? Sometimes it's about the music. On the piston music tip, I can think of some Chaka Khan recordings with that beat and Anthony Jackson in the bass chair. Boring? Maybe, but I liked it. How's that for a dichotomy...AJ and piston music? A well trained musician playing mindless music.
There's nothing wrong with being musically educated but it really helps to have an idea what to do with it rather than merely regurgitate scales you've been woodshedding on for years.
Training the audience?... How?
I think to sell the bass part, or any part, you have to understand the essence of the music. For instance, some songs have "hooks", some have contra-melodies, etc. The audience know these, and look for them in the song. Without these elements, the song just doesn't sound right. Now, if the bass is playing a contra-melody or a hook, and you're off doing something else, the audience is not hearing what it expects and this can be a turn off.
So, make sure you are capturing what the bass is REALLY doing ... providing a beat, providing root note foundation, or weaving around the melody played by another instrument.
Later.
So, make sure you are capturing what the bass is REALLY doing ... providing a beat, providing root note foundation, or weaving around the melody played by another instrument.
Later.
I didn't mean that "every" Jazz musician play 100% every night - the revelation was that anybody does this and I have talked to people who take this view - UK Jazz musicians that is - there are about 2 or 3 that I have actually talked to about this and it made a big impression on me.
The local Jazz club I go to has an audience that is mostly other musicians and you can tell that all the pros turn our for certain players and will be paying careful attention when they are taking a solo, whereas at other times they might be les attentive. There's one pianist I had a few conversations with and who mostly teaches, but when he goes on tour, he goes back to the basics and practices everything about his technique - all day for anything up to a month! I must say his trio and solo performances reflected this and were very intense, but I doubt that anybody other than musicians would have been aware what went into it.
To get back to the topic more - I make loads of mistakes and quite often it's just not working between me and the drummer in the band - but I don't think it's about "feeling" as such, but just not putting everything in the right place in the bar. So we have a better chance of the groove happening if we practice this and discuss what's going wrong, rather than just thinking that if we both get more into the "feeling" it'll work!
...hmmm, been thinking; how 'bout "chromaticism", the liberal use of all available 12 tones? Key word: "Liberal".
I'll use one of my tunes as an example-
...one day, I was reading/studying Diminshed Harmony in Levine's book; to make a long story short, I selected G-Bb-Db-Fb(E) as the key centers for my tune. I "instructed" the guitarist to do HIS thing, but just stay in those centers. As far as the bass' role, I knew I was gonna play any of the 24 notes under my fingers at any given time(4-fret stretch on a 4-string bass, 1/2 step up/down). I then gave the drummer an idea of the beat/feel(basically, a sped up Clyde Stubblefield beat). The "vocalist" then put his rap to it(tune is called "Blah Blah Blah"...I know; it fits, what can I say?)& off we went. As far as what I wanted, I knew, as long as I kept the feel/energy/groove goin', anything I played would "work".
Not sure if that's what Wagner would call an example of chromaticism...
I'll use one of my tunes as an example-
...one day, I was reading/studying Diminshed Harmony in Levine's book; to make a long story short, I selected G-Bb-Db-Fb(E) as the key centers for my tune. I "instructed" the guitarist to do HIS thing, but just stay in those centers. As far as the bass' role, I knew I was gonna play any of the 24 notes under my fingers at any given time(4-fret stretch on a 4-string bass, 1/2 step up/down). I then gave the drummer an idea of the beat/feel(basically, a sped up Clyde Stubblefield beat). The "vocalist" then put his rap to it(tune is called "Blah Blah Blah"...I know; it fits, what can I say?)& off we went. As far as what I wanted, I knew, as long as I kept the feel/energy/groove goin', anything I played would "work".
Not sure if that's what Wagner would call an example of chromaticism...
I understand, Bruce.
The funny thing is, upon reflection, I find that I play less when I'm giving 100%.
The funny thing is, upon reflection, I find that I play less when I'm giving 100%.
So like, who is the arbiter of cool?
Once a player understands the bassics, it's only natural for some personal characteristics to come into play. This is fine with me because playing verbatim can be done better by a sequencer.
I am thinking that feedback is the best tool to determine if a part is working well or not. Internal dialog, scales, theory, listening to others and experimenting get a lot of mileage but I think watching the audience or other players and talking to people post gig helps. I can tell from the stage if someone is engaged with the music or not. This is not only true with Piston music though I am from Detroit.
I think a lot has to do with who you think the customer is. And how many bad gigs you can weather before people get it. If you are playing alone in your room just for the sake of playing, do what pleases you. If its bar or coffee shop gigs, the establishment owner has something to do with it. Do those dim thirteenth chords sell beverages? If the group has one leader, can you present what you want to do to him in such a way that he is behind it or other band members if you are in a collaborative group.
Perhaps with should have a séance and ask Miles
Jc
Once a player understands the bassics, it's only natural for some personal characteristics to come into play. This is fine with me because playing verbatim can be done better by a sequencer.
I am thinking that feedback is the best tool to determine if a part is working well or not. Internal dialog, scales, theory, listening to others and experimenting get a lot of mileage but I think watching the audience or other players and talking to people post gig helps. I can tell from the stage if someone is engaged with the music or not. This is not only true with Piston music though I am from Detroit.
I think a lot has to do with who you think the customer is. And how many bad gigs you can weather before people get it. If you are playing alone in your room just for the sake of playing, do what pleases you. If its bar or coffee shop gigs, the establishment owner has something to do with it. Do those dim thirteenth chords sell beverages? If the group has one leader, can you present what you want to do to him in such a way that he is behind it or other band members if you are in a collaborative group.
Perhaps with should have a séance and ask Miles
Jc
Damn, JC. I was JUST gonna say that.
The thing that has struck me about this thread is the absence of consideration of the AUDIENCE. It is possibe to "know" that you know your particular style and can play it well, but if the listener ain't with you, what have you accomplished? There has always been a schism between the artist and the admirer, but, again, ya gotta know who's out there. You could put the most critically acclaimed free jazz quartet in NYC in a watering hole in west Texas, and not much communication will happen. If a tree falls in the forest...
So mho is that the bass part has to do what OTHERS think it needs to do. I just finished reading "Jaco", his biography. There were times in his troubled life that he played very wildly in what seemed like (to the rest of the people in the room) an inappropriate manner. This certainly came from the mind of the genius. Was it "good"? Was is "bad"? I think you do need to be within a certain set of expectations that people have. The fact that one has been delved into more deeply does not make it necessarily more valid than another.
The thing that has struck me about this thread is the absence of consideration of the AUDIENCE. It is possibe to "know" that you know your particular style and can play it well, but if the listener ain't with you, what have you accomplished? There has always been a schism between the artist and the admirer, but, again, ya gotta know who's out there. You could put the most critically acclaimed free jazz quartet in NYC in a watering hole in west Texas, and not much communication will happen. If a tree falls in the forest...
So mho is that the bass part has to do what OTHERS think it needs to do. I just finished reading "Jaco", his biography. There were times in his troubled life that he played very wildly in what seemed like (to the rest of the people in the room) an inappropriate manner. This certainly came from the mind of the genius. Was it "good"? Was is "bad"? I think you do need to be within a certain set of expectations that people have. The fact that one has been delved into more deeply does not make it necessarily more valid than another.
...like I said above-
I'm not a pro & don't have to PLAY for anyone but me & my bandmates. As far as me being hired to play in the Country band, that's a different ballgame; I'm being PAID by the company to execute a part that is consisent within the genre.
The other band I played did originals(for the most part). Our music was "supposed" to be 1/2 Free-Acid Jazz/Funk(whatever that is)& 1/2 composed/improvised groove-related" stuff. My mindset was to give what audience we had a 100% of ME; not what I thought THEY wanted to hear out of me.
IMO, that's compromising; I would be cheating them, me, & the music.
Too, why must audiences be "played down to"? I guess I shouldn't be surprised; current Jazz "fans" know more about Kenny G than guys like Sam Rivers, Braxton, James Carter, Chris Potter, et al(ALL LIVING & PLAYING TODAY).
Look at the recent interest(again)in these so-called "jam bands"...Phish, Dave Matthews, Flecktones, etc are pushing the limits of their material much like the bands did back in the Woodstock era. Any of the above bands could easily play a 3-4 minute version of their tune, rake in the same dough for a lot less work, & still satisfy their fans.
Why do they exert the effort & go the extra mile?
I'm not a pro & don't have to PLAY for anyone but me & my bandmates. As far as me being hired to play in the Country band, that's a different ballgame; I'm being PAID by the company to execute a part that is consisent within the genre.
The other band I played did originals(for the most part). Our music was "supposed" to be 1/2 Free-Acid Jazz/Funk(whatever that is)& 1/2 composed/improvised groove-related" stuff. My mindset was to give what audience we had a 100% of ME; not what I thought THEY wanted to hear out of me.
IMO, that's compromising; I would be cheating them, me, & the music.
Too, why must audiences be "played down to"? I guess I shouldn't be surprised; current Jazz "fans" know more about Kenny G than guys like Sam Rivers, Braxton, James Carter, Chris Potter, et al(ALL LIVING & PLAYING TODAY).
Look at the recent interest(again)in these so-called "jam bands"...Phish, Dave Matthews, Flecktones, etc are pushing the limits of their material much like the bands did back in the Woodstock era. Any of the above bands could easily play a 3-4 minute version of their tune, rake in the same dough for a lot less work, & still satisfy their fans.
Why do they exert the effort & go the extra mile?
Some would debate that Kenny G plays jazz. Heck, some even dispute that Pat Metheney plays jazz. Oh, by the way, Kenny G plays soprano saxaphone. The music he plays is probably best categorized as a very commercial jazz in that it sells a lot. You also might categorize it as easy listening. His two Christmas albums have been extremely successful, some of the highest selling holiday albums ever! In spite of his huge commercial success which has led him to performing for presidents, etc., he has many critics...maybe even as many as N'Sync and Backstrret Boys. Of course, nobody call their music jazz.
jason oldsted
jason oldsted
