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.
Double Bass stance and the holy grail - please read!
- Thread starter mike_odonovan
- Start date
Don't give up, my friend Shlomobaruch...all Donosaurus is requiring of us is to gain more experience with the elusive Alexander Technique.
Until then, we must remain content typing potentially incomprehensible words to each other whenever this topic is addressed.
Until then, we must remain content typing potentially incomprehensible words to each other whenever this topic is addressed.
LOL!!! Thank you, I needed that! It just annoys me to think that after years of yoga and studying other forms of psychophysical awareness that I couldn't *possibly* have a leg to stand on because I haven't followed a practicitioner of AT for a year or more. As if it alone were the key to heaven's gate. Which brings me to something else...
Ummmm... dude, who taught F. Matthias Alexander? I'll quote from the preface of the book that I have.
Of course I have zero doubt that instruction would make the whole process immensely faster and easier, but it isn't necessary. You yourself said it costs time and money and you weren't wrong there. So those of us wanting for both are SOL? I ain't buying it. What we are discussing is an internal experience and the awareness of that experience is available to any who cultivate the sensitivity to it - regardless of whether or not they follow AT or for how long they do so.
Ummmm... dude, who taught F. Matthias Alexander? I'll quote from the preface of the book that I have.
Of course I have zero doubt that instruction would make the whole process immensely faster and easier, but it isn't necessary. You yourself said it costs time and money and you weren't wrong there. So those of us wanting for both are SOL? I ain't buying it. What we are discussing is an internal experience and the awareness of that experience is available to any who cultivate the sensitivity to it - regardless of whether or not they follow AT or for how long they do so.
Alexander, in fact encouraged self-instruction. "You can do what I do" he said "if you do what I did."
Tell us what he did.
Tell us what he did.
He engaged in a thorough self-examination of his own behavior until he came to the realization about how he created his own behavior based on reactions to previous stimuli that if they were valid at any point, were no longer so. He found that decades of such misuse caused him to have an improper understanding of how to move correctly, as it does for most everyone. Changing this became a twofold process of inhibiting the improper reaction and allowing the natural, proper reaction to take its place despite the insistence of skeletomuscular history that the appropriateness of either was reversed. From the practice of this he also came to understand that the psychophysical awareness developed from such a practice was not something to be turned to only in times of crisis but rather was to be developed into a constant state of being. So the technique isn't so much of a solution, but an entire lifelong process by which certain problems will no longer be caused and thus have the appearance of being solved although they were not in any classical sense of the idea. Perhaps this is missing some details you would find crucial to a "proper" understanding. I don't care. It is my own and you yourself said you weren't in a position to enlighten me further, though I am sure that in this particular field you are certainly the wiser. I just refuse to accept your attitude that those of us without the time, money, or circumstance to study with someone "AT approved" are without hope for improving our psychophysical awareness and behavior and that we are incapable of ever having the kind of experience that AT provides.
My own revelation in this began with my neck posture. While practicing yoga I came from an inverted forward bend into standing, and after a moment felt an odd desire to stop sticking my head out in front of me. I then realized that I *was* in fact jutting my head out without being aware of it, and when I did stop doing it I realized the sheer amount of effort that I had put into doing it previously. I mentioned the yoga sequence because it exactly addresses that issue. Inverted poses are used to literally use the weight of the body to push the shoulders down the back away from the head and to lengthen the spine in general and the cervical spine in particular. So after much repetition of coming from one position to another my awareness of a particular behavior moved from unconscious to conscious. Which isn't to say that I've held my head perfectly ever since, it's more of a shifting of balance - the desire to hold it wrong becomes weaker and the natural way becomes more habitual. Through this I've since come to a deeper, visceral understanding of just how direct the mind-body connection is - how mental tensions and misalignments literally manifest themselves physically both instantaneously and over time, and how the body stores all the unresolved tensions of things within oneself that are unresolved. And the body also stores the good as well as the bad - the cardiovascular exercise that builds bigger, stronger blood vessels, proper nutrition, all of these things are behaviors that affect the body as all behaviors affect the body. It goes beyond "you are what you eat" - you are what you do both in physical and mental activity, and you do a lot more in both realms than you are aware of. Increasing that awareness is the discipline of disciplines.
There. Does that satisfy you that I do at least have a smattering of a clue of the truth? It doesn't matter. It's what I have and I can only go forward from here, though any hope of doing so by way of AT specifically is nil for the forseeable future, which is beyond my control and certainly beyond yours. I didn't type this for your approval. I typed this for your own edification so that you may understand why I thought your reply to my request for insight into a semantic matter was rude, elitist and uncalled-for. So that you may respond appropriately to those who seek the same self-knowledge you do albeit through other, equally valid means.
My own revelation in this began with my neck posture. While practicing yoga I came from an inverted forward bend into standing, and after a moment felt an odd desire to stop sticking my head out in front of me. I then realized that I *was* in fact jutting my head out without being aware of it, and when I did stop doing it I realized the sheer amount of effort that I had put into doing it previously. I mentioned the yoga sequence because it exactly addresses that issue. Inverted poses are used to literally use the weight of the body to push the shoulders down the back away from the head and to lengthen the spine in general and the cervical spine in particular. So after much repetition of coming from one position to another my awareness of a particular behavior moved from unconscious to conscious. Which isn't to say that I've held my head perfectly ever since, it's more of a shifting of balance - the desire to hold it wrong becomes weaker and the natural way becomes more habitual. Through this I've since come to a deeper, visceral understanding of just how direct the mind-body connection is - how mental tensions and misalignments literally manifest themselves physically both instantaneously and over time, and how the body stores all the unresolved tensions of things within oneself that are unresolved. And the body also stores the good as well as the bad - the cardiovascular exercise that builds bigger, stronger blood vessels, proper nutrition, all of these things are behaviors that affect the body as all behaviors affect the body. It goes beyond "you are what you eat" - you are what you do both in physical and mental activity, and you do a lot more in both realms than you are aware of. Increasing that awareness is the discipline of disciplines.
There. Does that satisfy you that I do at least have a smattering of a clue of the truth? It doesn't matter. It's what I have and I can only go forward from here, though any hope of doing so by way of AT specifically is nil for the forseeable future, which is beyond my control and certainly beyond yours. I didn't type this for your approval. I typed this for your own edification so that you may understand why I thought your reply to my request for insight into a semantic matter was rude, elitist and uncalled-for. So that you may respond appropriately to those who seek the same self-knowledge you do albeit through other, equally valid means.
Nine years. My point? You use the quote, and no experience, to support an abstract truth, that instruction is not necessary. Fine. It's also abstractly true that the majority of TalkBass members could become brain surgeons.
Since quotes are what you're using in the absence of experience, here are two: from Alexander, "We can throw away the habit of a lifetime in a few minutes if we use our brains," and from Pedro DeAlcantara, "It is entirely true. The catch is that it takes us a lifetime to learn how to use our brains." That's my point.
This started with you defining the Alexander Technique incorrectly. My posts speak for themselves. By the third post was I blunt, but I cited my own experience with learning that I didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did when in a position much closer to yours. OK, here are two more quotes: from Alexander, "It doesn't alter a fact because you can't feel it," and from DeAlcantara, "We can expand the dictum to say it does not alter a fact because you cannot understand it, nor because you cannot accept it."
You have not said anything so far that supports your pronouncement that AT was a kinetic reconditioning technique.
To answer that question, the first paragraph (2nd post 9/12)convinces me that you can read and write, but I already knew that. Reread my posts. There's more to AT than reading. You haven't said you've had any number of lessons, and I'm left to assume your experience is minimal. Experiential learning is essential and cannot be replaced by objective learning. When you speak for yourself and not through other people's words, you don't convey understanding of AT. And when you presume to define it in a public forum, if I think you're wrong I'm going to say so.
Since quotes are what you're using in the absence of experience, here are two: from Alexander, "We can throw away the habit of a lifetime in a few minutes if we use our brains," and from Pedro DeAlcantara, "It is entirely true. The catch is that it takes us a lifetime to learn how to use our brains." That's my point.
This started with you defining the Alexander Technique incorrectly. My posts speak for themselves. By the third post was I blunt, but I cited my own experience with learning that I didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did when in a position much closer to yours. OK, here are two more quotes: from Alexander, "It doesn't alter a fact because you can't feel it," and from DeAlcantara, "We can expand the dictum to say it does not alter a fact because you cannot understand it, nor because you cannot accept it."
You have not said anything so far that supports your pronouncement that AT was a kinetic reconditioning technique.
You want it both ways: showing how reasonable you are to defer to me for having "studied the technique much further than I [i.e., you] have," and for being in this field "certainly the wiser," and then being righteously indignant when I have the temerity to disagree with you:
See what I mean?
To answer that question, the first paragraph (2nd post 9/12)convinces me that you can read and write, but I already knew that. Reread my posts. There's more to AT than reading. You haven't said you've had any number of lessons, and I'm left to assume your experience is minimal. Experiential learning is essential and cannot be replaced by objective learning. When you speak for yourself and not through other people's words, you don't convey understanding of AT. And when you presume to define it in a public forum, if I think you're wrong I'm going to say so.
I still have that old nylon stringed guitar with the paisley strap, and am not as yet too old to sit crosslegged while playing it. And while I actually detest the smell of patchouli, I'm not above splashing a bit of it on when the situation warrants, although I'm afraid the curly locks are long a thing of the past.
Am I striking fear into anyone's heart yet?
Am I striking fear into anyone's heart yet?
I didn't want it both ways. As in all things I have no doubt that instruction provides the easier and more expedient route and having the fortune to study as you do certainly puts you in a better position. My contention is that you leave those of us without that opportunity to live in misaligned misery without hope for recourse and to never understand what you know regardless of what we encounter through our own study and through other means. That's the arrogant, elitist part that pissed me off. AT itself is one thing, but there are other roads to the experiential knowledge that it cultivates. I never said that I knew more about AT than what a handful of sessions and a book could provide, because I don't. The presumption from this that I am unaware of the mind/body relationship it cultivates is something I won't stand for. I've spent years studying how I do everything and just flat refuse your discrediting of what I've learned simply because it didn't occur in the context of AT.
Yes I did, and you even quoted it before. But to have at it again, "kinetics" would be the study of how applied force affects a system. "Conditioning" I was thinking of in the terms of learning or training. So kinetic reconditioning would be relearning the application of energy/force. While AT may have subleties that go beyond this, seeing as how I was looking for a simple description that would capture the gist of AT, Feldenkrais, and Ortho-Bionomy I think my words were well chosen. I just wanted to know your mind as to why I was wrong and instead got a song and dance about how I couldn't possibly understand without at least a year of dedicated study under my belt. As far as the collation, you I'm sure would contend that AT has nothing in common with such systems and trying to group it with them is an error betraying my ignorance of the matter. Bene. It's over and done and I've said my mind.
Yes I did, and you even quoted it before. But to have at it again, "kinetics" would be the study of how applied force affects a system. "Conditioning" I was thinking of in the terms of learning or training. So kinetic reconditioning would be relearning the application of energy/force. While AT may have subleties that go beyond this, seeing as how I was looking for a simple description that would capture the gist of AT, Feldenkrais, and Ortho-Bionomy I think my words were well chosen. I just wanted to know your mind as to why I was wrong and instead got a song and dance about how I couldn't possibly understand without at least a year of dedicated study under my belt. As far as the collation, you I'm sure would contend that AT has nothing in common with such systems and trying to group it with them is an error betraying my ignorance of the matter. Bene. It's over and done and I've said my mind.
i thought i might step in here and give an update to the original thread.....
My computer has been down for a bit (care of one of those damn virus things) and have been busy at the "which posture for playing the double bass will i try today" game. got pretty sick of looking at my ugly face in the mirror, can tell you.
Finally my subconcious kind of clicked into thinking about a local player i saw quite a while ago who played jazz in a seated position. Also this clicked me into thinking about our Chris F saying he sat when playing as he couldn't find a comfortable position to stand and play in.
So i thought before i run around buying stools i would track down this local player who i had seen months ago and see if i could get a lesson. i managed to get his number and gave him a call. what a guy! he said he didn't give lessons as he is too busy running off touring but as i literally live in the next street (and i live in London!; ie. how bloody lucky is that!) i could come around for a cup of tea and a chat about these issues.
he was great. showed me how he sat - seemed pretty logical/ kind of how i imagined all the classical types do. seemed a bit perplexed that i was finding it a really different experience. i felt comfortable straight away. especially the left hand. it's all right in front of you! YIPPEEEE! kind of like the Rabbath thing but without the weight of the bass leaning on you and without the kind of boxed in feeling i got from playing in the lower positions. know what i mean?
now it balances just on my legs which are grounded on the floor. The entire fretboard is at my reach without needing any twisting (Karr) or leaning back for the lower notes (Rabbath). don't get me wrong, those guys kick so much bigger ass than i probably ever will, but these were my observations. so sitting it was.
only concerns i had were with the right hand.
i feel i might have sacrificed a bit of tone as my right arm is in a slightly less comfortable angle than when i was more side on; but this could just take getting used to. Was also worried i would have to swap from the German bow to the French but i seem to have sorted that one out as well.
all i can say is if there is anyone out there who is having problems in thumb position, or with gripping the neck/numbness in the left hand or with general posture issues - check out sitting it's underated!
ps. why do all the jazzers stand?
My computer has been down for a bit (care of one of those damn virus things) and have been busy at the "which posture for playing the double bass will i try today" game. got pretty sick of looking at my ugly face in the mirror, can tell you.
Finally my subconcious kind of clicked into thinking about a local player i saw quite a while ago who played jazz in a seated position. Also this clicked me into thinking about our Chris F saying he sat when playing as he couldn't find a comfortable position to stand and play in.
So i thought before i run around buying stools i would track down this local player who i had seen months ago and see if i could get a lesson. i managed to get his number and gave him a call. what a guy! he said he didn't give lessons as he is too busy running off touring but as i literally live in the next street (and i live in London!; ie. how bloody lucky is that!) i could come around for a cup of tea and a chat about these issues.
he was great. showed me how he sat - seemed pretty logical/ kind of how i imagined all the classical types do. seemed a bit perplexed that i was finding it a really different experience. i felt comfortable straight away. especially the left hand. it's all right in front of you! YIPPEEEE! kind of like the Rabbath thing but without the weight of the bass leaning on you and without the kind of boxed in feeling i got from playing in the lower positions. know what i mean?
now it balances just on my legs which are grounded on the floor. The entire fretboard is at my reach without needing any twisting (Karr) or leaning back for the lower notes (Rabbath). don't get me wrong, those guys kick so much bigger ass than i probably ever will, but these were my observations. so sitting it was.
only concerns i had were with the right hand.
i feel i might have sacrificed a bit of tone as my right arm is in a slightly less comfortable angle than when i was more side on; but this could just take getting used to. Was also worried i would have to swap from the German bow to the French but i seem to have sorted that one out as well.
all i can say is if there is anyone out there who is having problems in thumb position, or with gripping the neck/numbness in the left hand or with general posture issues - check out sitting it's underated!
ps. why do all the jazzers stand?
That's my philosophy.
I think my right hand has a little more opportunity to keep the bass held up when doing pizz and keeping the thumb against the fingerboard. Easier for me than trying to hold it up with a bow, anyway.
Sitting is fine, and fine players sit. I put myself in neither camp right now, but maybe I'll get bored and have a seat sometime too.
I've gotten away from sitting because I'm not gigging much and have instead been teaching, and it is one less thing to deal with. When I go back to the realm of 2 1/2 hour rehearsals (hopefully next month) I have no doubt I'll be packing a place to park it. Hmmmm... maybe that *is* what's wrong with my playing these days...
Actually, learning a functional stance with the bass is a good idea, even if you decide to sit, and why I originally put the stool aside - I had completely forgotten how to play standing. Which isn't good, because sometimes your stool breaks or just isn't available and you still have to play. The less equipment you're 100% dependent on the better.
Actually, learning a functional stance with the bass is a good idea, even if you decide to sit, and why I originally put the stool aside - I had completely forgotten how to play standing. Which isn't good, because sometimes your stool breaks or just isn't available and you still have to play. The less equipment you're 100% dependent on the better.
chris i'll chew up my fingers for better tone any day! i think i will just get used to the new feel of the right arm being more envolved.
as for all this "one less thing to carry" stuff, Jeez does that me we should force drummers, pianists, cellists etc. to learn to play standing as well just in case they forget their stool? don't buy this thinking ....
as for all this "one less thing to carry" stuff, Jeez does that me we should force drummers, pianists, cellists etc. to learn to play standing as well just in case they forget their stool? don't buy this thinking ....
No one's forcing anyone to do anything, I'm just suggesting that even though sitting solves your dilemma (which is a valid solution and I'm glad you found it) you might still want to pursue getting comfortable standing for those times when the stool isn't available or is better left at home. I've been in pit orchestras where there wasn't enough room for me to sit.
There are major differences with the other instruments you mentioned. Drummers (as well as harpists, another sitting instrument which you didn't mention) are generally screwed for the amount of equipment that they have to carry, so a small stool isn't much of an addition. Or in both instances, their equipment, including stool, is provided at the site. Pianists aren't expected to carry their own instrument much less a stool. And all of those instruments require one to be seated because the feet have other things to do besides support one's weight. The cello is too small to be supported while standing, but doesn't require a special stool - any chair will do and the endpin can be adjusted accordingly. So the other instrumentalists either don't have to carry a seat or else carry so much more that the seat is a drop in the bucket. Also, standing isn't an option for any of them, it *is* one for the bass. Remember, a lot of jazz bassists also amplify - another problem not faced by your other instruments, so they are lugging their instrument plus an amplifier. Bringing a stool as well means four trips out to the car (two in, two out) no matter what, and that can be a pain in the ass.
The only thinking I or anyone is suggesting is to keep your options open and take advantage of any opportunity you can to make the gigs easier.
There are major differences with the other instruments you mentioned. Drummers (as well as harpists, another sitting instrument which you didn't mention) are generally screwed for the amount of equipment that they have to carry, so a small stool isn't much of an addition. Or in both instances, their equipment, including stool, is provided at the site. Pianists aren't expected to carry their own instrument much less a stool. And all of those instruments require one to be seated because the feet have other things to do besides support one's weight. The cello is too small to be supported while standing, but doesn't require a special stool - any chair will do and the endpin can be adjusted accordingly. So the other instrumentalists either don't have to carry a seat or else carry so much more that the seat is a drop in the bucket. Also, standing isn't an option for any of them, it *is* one for the bass. Remember, a lot of jazz bassists also amplify - another problem not faced by your other instruments, so they are lugging their instrument plus an amplifier. Bringing a stool as well means four trips out to the car (two in, two out) no matter what, and that can be a pain in the ass.
The only thinking I or anyone is suggesting is to keep your options open and take advantage of any opportunity you can to make the gigs easier.
Not so fast, senor - I use a folding dolly to roll both the amp & stool in on (it has built in bungee action), and just sling the bass over my shoulder with the shoulder strap.... so for most gigs, you can still one-trip it even with a stool if you set your mind to the problem.
Sweet! I never amplified enough to worry about that, so there you go. I do know someone who literally gave himself a hernia hauling his rig everywhere. I think he switched to a smaller amp after that...
