Double Bass Simandl Shifting Counterintuitive?

[fu22ba55]

maybe because the method was written in the gut string only era. This can make for some what seem to be awkward choices.

That's even more useful now that modern strings make all of the notes practical.

The "it was written in the gut string era" explanation definitely sets my mind at ease a bit re: the justification for some of these choices. And as others have said, there are other, musical, reasons for some of the choices.

 

[neilG]

The idea in that case is that you have played the E in the previous measure with your first finger so you only have to make one shift to play up to the A. uses.

Yes, I think that's exactly what he meant, and also avoiding any notes in 2nd position. But you can bring the fingering into the modern era simply by re-positioning the hand during the open string. If you don't count that as a shift, it's still only one shift and more musical. With my students, I also have them play this etude as much as possible in II and II/III positions, right from the beginning, so they learn the notes on the A and E. As you suggest, something much easier with modern strings.

 

[Bruce Calin]

I have an old method book(1940) written by Bob Haggart for "dance bassists" which is actually a very good method in general with an approach very Simandl-like. His fingering chart references the unsuitability of playing the lower two strings beyond what would now be considered(with metal strings anyway) a very limited point. This is the reason I think this may have been part of the fingering considerations of Simandl. Somewhat off topic, I have seen at least one newer edition that has a lot more bowing markings than my old Zimmerman and that in many cases I wouldn't necessarily agree with. Different strokes.

 

[neilG]

I have an old method book(1940) written by Bob Haggart

My first method book was the Bob Haggart book. My first teacher was a dance band player who wisely and thankfully sent me on to a more accomplished teacher within a few months.

 

[damonsmith]

Also, it is important to understand it is not musical - it is getting you the mechanics to play music. That is why it is far more efficient and potent than "musical" methods. Understanding the difference between practicing and playing will help you more than other mindsets.

 

[neilG]

Also, it is important to understand it is not musical - it is getting you the mechanics to play music. That is why it is far more efficient and potent than "musical" methods. Understanding the difference between practicing and playing will help you more than other mindsets.

There's no reason why you can't make music out of Simandl etudes, and you should. I do know what you mean by the "musical" methods. They do tend skip over technique early on, IMO.

 

[damonsmith]

There's no reason why you can't make music out of Simandl etudes, and you should. I do know what you mean by the "musical" methods. They do tend skip over technique early on, IMO.

You can, but you shouldn't need to be "tricked" in to practicing. You should play it as well as you can, but the intent is to get you around the bass in tune. Best to treat it as the task it is and play some music after. A Simandl exercise or etude is 3-5 minutes at most.

Rabbath is unquestionably a more musical method. It is also far more involved. Doing it right includes 2 hours of scales and more complex etudes. It is great IF you have a proper teacher and that level of commitment to playing that way.

Simandl is more common and more basic.

 

[Paps]

Hi I have posted in introductory and this is my first post.
The more I practice and the more "advanced" I get in my playing, the less I worry about fingering.
I agree, for beginner, a solid system and good habit building are essential, especially when sight reading.
But the same size isn't always a good fit. As for the 1-1 and 4-4 discussion, which I use depends on where I've come from and where I am going next, ie what note precedes or follows the shift.
When studying the Bille, apart from substituting 2nd for 3rd, I try to follow my method book, but vary this in Orchestral situations. I work on the assumption that Bille knew what he was doing.
I also have Dr Morton's fingering book, which gives good general principles for shifting along with useful and efficient notation. You could look for this on his website if it still exists!

 

[fu22ba55]

Hi I have posted in introductory and this is my first post.

Your first ever post on Talkbass? I'm honored! Welcome!

I work on the assumption that Bille knew what he was doing.
I also have Dr Morton's fingering book, which gives good general principles for shifting along with useful and efficient notation. You could look for this on his website if it still exists!

I have a couple of the Morton books, so I'll re-visit them.

 

[longfinger]

It's not in the Major Scale fingerings I remember... it occurs in the middle of some of the illustrative exercises.

I get that he wants me to be comfortable shifting up and down the G string, but some of these fingerings seem cuckoo to me?

Page 23
View attachment 4927156

And page 47
View attachment 4927157

I have the Blue cover edition, the older one, and the fingers for the parts marked in green in your post are different. Back when I bought it, my teacher said get the blue one if it's available. He thought it better than the red one.

I'll see about posting the pics..

but until then, for the moments marked in green in your post, the blue book fingerings are:

A major ex 7
4 41214

1242 4 (the 4(E) 2(G#)4(A) being in IV)

4214 01 in half position


D minor exercise, starting m. 14
2 44 1 1 4 1

2 44 1 0 2 4

m.20-21
blue book has C and A on the D string 4,1, followed by 1 2 4 for DEF

 

[Paps]

Yes, I think the Blue Part 1 and Yellow Part 2 is the International (company name) version.
This is the version I was advised to get.