• 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.

The technical bassist. Old school or new school?

#81
rimbaud said:
I had this kind of problem in a blues jam-session. A guitarist/singer wanted to play Stevie Wonder's "supersitition" to break out "old school blues". I played it, with my feel and groove, we had fun on stage , good drummer etc... and a guitarist followed me when i quit the stage to have a smoking break. Do you know what i heard? "that's not the way it should be played, superstition it is these notes, and not those ones bla bla bla...."

This guy loves to show himself as the "guardian" of the jam, "I've been playing blues for many years, i'm a pro, bla bla bla..."

People danced, we had fun, what else?

Trust me, never ear that kind of person, if you like it, the audience like, your mates like it, so just do it, and do not care about those guys. I love playing "put the shoe on the other foot" because it's my slapping fun, I have some fun, i can express myself , ... and it's technical... but only for old school bluesmen you know.

Serving the song, easy to ear whan you play shania twain or pop songs, you can't serve the song if you don't serve yourself before... music, like any other art, is individualist. Express yourself as you really want, with sincerity and "bon goût", that's the better way.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. Last year I was in Chicago and went to hear a couple of great bassists (Vuyani Wakeba and Billy Dickens) playing their respective Blues gigs. Both guys played outside the role, from choice of instrument (6 string for Vuyani, 7 string for Bill), concept (lots of bass solos, slapping etc.) and even material (Billy was playing with 60-something Blues guitarist Carlos Johnson and they even played a cover of Sly's "If You Want Me to Stay").
The next day I was riding around Chicago with Billy and I remarked that a lot of players I know (typically 40-something White guys) would have criticized him because he didn't play a P-Bass through an Ampeg B-15 with flats and just walk shuffles all night long. He had an interesting response. He told me the most of the Chicago Blues guys really consider the Blues a living art form and not a museum piece, so they're always trying different things.
Of course, being a middle-aged White Guy, I'm a supreme authority on the Blues.....;)
 
#82
Interesting topic for sure! These days it seems like more bassists (and musicians in general) are being technical just for being technical's sake. And that kind of ruins the music, for me at least. Playing with feel and emotion hasn't died though, obviously, and artists are still continuing to bridge the two. As for me, I try to do both. If a song calls for technicality then throw it in, but if you feel like you should lay back and just play what comes to you then I'd absolutely recommend that as well. Since merging the two, I feel like my playing and overall understanding of music has evolved. This is all first-hand of course, so I'm not sure what is really "best" for other players to go for. But to quote the late, great Ray Charles,

"How does it sound, baby?"

Stay on the low end everyone,
_Flempton
 
#83
"Less is more"

When you get that concept down and can apply it, you are now a good bass player.

Just take a look at "funk". Same as speed metal with a lot of notes taken out.

John Entwhistle was master at playing complex bass lines and at the same time making his audience think "simple".

Paul McCartney was master at the right groove in the right place.

Every bass player should be in two bands. A three piece so he can "shred" away and an eight piece to learn to leave space for all those other guys.

My job as a bass player is to make the front person sound better. Its the only reason I'm hired.

If you think boring, try singing. Most bands need better backup singers.

Me? What do I know? I've only been doing this for half a century. My advice is learn all you can from someone like me then "TAKE IT TO A NEW LEVEL" and leave me behind.

Good luck in your adventures.
 
#84
FlemptonBass said:
Interesting topic for sure! These days it seems like more bassists (and musicians in general) are being technical just for being technical's sake. And that kind of ruins the music, for me at least. Playing with feel and emotion hasn't died though, obviously, and artists are still continuing to bridge the two. As for me, I try to do both. If a song calls for technicality then throw it in, but if you feel like you should lay back and just play what comes to you then I'd absolutely recommend that as well. Since merging the two, I feel like my playing and overall understanding of music has evolved. This is all first-hand of course, so I'm not sure what is really "best" for other players to go for. But to quote the late, great Ray Charles,

"How does it sound, baby?"

Stay on the low end everyone,
_Flempton
Click to expand...

Being technical is MUCH easier than being musical. Being musical is truly the challenge.
 
#85
Mike Dimin said:
Being technical is MUCH easier than being musical. Being musical is truly the challenge.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. Playing with feeling is incredibly difficult. But I think that's what makes it the most fun to do/hear. I think one of the best examples of bridging technicality with feel is Vic Wooten (among others). Or maybe a more modern example is Jordan from Scale The Summit. But I absolutely won't argue that being tech is much simpler in design.
 
#86
Roy Vogt said:
That's interesting. Last year I was in Chicago and went to hear a couple of great bassists (Vuyani Wakeba and Billy Dickens) playing their respective Blues gigs. Both guys played outside the role, from choice of instrument (6 string for Vuyani, 7 string for Bill), concept (lots of bass solos, slapping etc.) and even material (Billy was playing with 60-something Blues guitarist Carlos Johnson and they even played a cover of Sly's "If You Want Me to Stay").
The next day I was riding around Chicago with Billy and I remarked that a lot of players I know (typically 40-something White guys) would have criticized him because he didn't play a P-Bass through an Ampeg B-15 with flats and just walk shuffles all night long. He had an interesting response. He told me the most of the Chicago Blues guys really consider the Blues a living art form and not a museum piece, so they're always trying different things.
Of course, being a middle-aged White Guy, I'm a supreme authority on the Blues.....;)
Click to expand...

Ha! That reminds me of a gig I had with the late bluesman Big Jack Johnson from Clarksdale whom I had the honor of backing on some club dates and festivals a few years back. Now up here in New England not showing up with a Fender and pretending it's still 1959 is a good way to lose the gig, so my mindset was as such heading into my first show with Jack. About half way through the first set he starts staring me down (true to his name he was pretty intimidating looking, and I'd never met him until that night) so I'm kind of pooping my trousers a bit wondering what I was doing wrong, and kept churning out nice simple shuffles. At the end of the set he pulled me aside, with whiskey for both of us and asked me what my background was (my first professional band was total headbanger stuff) and where I was from (rural Ohio) and proceeded to suggest I play like that and think about fishing (which was all we really ever talked about thereafter). The subsequent gigs were some of the most musical interactions I've ever had!! Sure we were still playing the blues, but it was the shizz ... he'd have me slap, play chords and just get nasty on certain things. He too considered the blues a living, growing form and that we should treat it as such instead of holding on to the past so much.
 
#87
I have been finding that all of us at the blues jams I go to are saying some new things, each in his/her own way. Maybe it's just a different tone, an unusual lick for the motif of the bass line, a different groove or beat, whatever. Yes, blues, like all music is still evolving, and should be. If it weren't it would not be a living thing, but it IS. So, there can always be a marriage between old school and new school. But, what's more is that it is still good to just play old school for awhile. I like the old ways. And then, for me, the new comes into play almost as if it appears on its very own. I can't say how many times that's happened to me onstage as well as at home. It's not something I can MAKE happen, though. I have to LET it happen. If I keep playing it will com forth at some point, even if it's just a little thing.

Music, like all living things, cannot help but evolve. It's the natural way of things.
 
#88
I played a blues gig in 1994 and I had two basses at that time...my modded 76 Fender PJ, and a custom neck-thru 5 string with EMG's. The guitarist was flabbergasted that I wanted to play the Fender. He didn't mind the SVT though ;)
 
#89
Russell L said:
Music, like all living things, cannot help but evolve. It's the natural way of things.
Click to expand...

Except in Boston ..:rolleyes: ..:) IME the guys that I have backed from around the country are much much more inclined to bring in modern tastes. I'm not sure why we are stuck in the mud up here. My blues gigs in Europe have also demanded 'authentic blues music' and they are often brazen enough to ask for all black bands, but fortunately the singer has enough pull to keep me on the gig ..'Sven' is not remotely an authentic blues name:D:D
Anyway, that's just my experience personally, I've been on plenty of festivals over there where other bands are cranking out some fresh stuff.
 
#90
Another thing is that there are still unusual ideas to pull from the older stuff. When I'm playing a blues gig -- with P-Bass, flats and Ampeg :D -- I have fun throwing in some "deeper" things that I might have heard a bass player play on a '50s blues recording.
As time marches on, the quirkier or more difficult things tend to be forgotten by the majority of players, but they're still back there, waiting to be rediscovered and used today.
 
#91
One thing I have to ask, though, is what good is being a college professor if you can't parlay that into getting college girls? Hey, they're over 18. Conflict schmonflict...I say if you can do it, more power to you ;)
 
#92
JimmyM said:
One thing I have to ask, though, is what good is being a college professor if you can't parlay that into getting college girls? Hey, they're over 18. Conflict schmonflict...I say if you can do it, more power to you ;)
Click to expand...

What always held me in check when I was single was the vision of eventually explaining my actions to a girl's parents-especially when I'm nearly their age. Awkward!
 
#93
KrisWarrington said:
I've noticed (in my short time of being a member of this forum) that no one (mainly the more seasoned bass "veterans") really seems to appreciate the technical side of bass and its aspects. I will admit that technically isn't a sure sign of being a great bassist, but there is a lot of skill involved in playing technical riffs on bass. Personally I started out like most bassist, holding down the low end with a fluid groove and simple beat while the guitarist did his thing. Over time I developed (as did my choice in music) to more technical aspects of the bass (ex. Steve Harris and Geezer). It just went on from there, constantly challenging myself to do new things on the bass. After awhile of doing that I realized that I was losing some of the core aspects of bass so I reverted back to the "AC/DC" way of playing bass for awhile eventually moving on to a moderate mix of both. IMO I don't find simplistic bass impressive, sure simplicity is genius but as a bassist doing something on bass that everyone can do is just adverage. I've been told that I think of bass as more of a competition which I think it really is, no one wants to be "adverage" at anything they want to push past their peers. That's what lead to some of the greats, another steve harris reference, which made them known a lot more for their style rather than what band they play in (Newstead, McCartney, ect). Anyone can be a famous bassist if they are in a famous band but for people to know who a bassist is, with out them having any knowledge of bass or music for the most part, is a pretty big achievement. Evan Brewer is another prime example. His solo album is amazing, and he incorporates so many styles of playing. This whole statement is IMO of course just wondering what some other thoughts on the subject were. Music is constantly evolving and changing eventually the old school bassists will die off and that will leave us with todays young bassists.
Click to expand...

You are 100% correct to say that eventually the old school players will die off and leave us with today's young bassist. But today's young bassist are standing on the shoulders of the old school bassist. Old school guys like Jamerson paved the way for the great young cats today. If you think of being a bassist as a competition, then you are doing yourself a disservice, because it's not. There is no race to the top. Mainly because there is no top. Every generation gets a little better, advances the craft a little more and so on. That's how it is in every aspect of life. In my life, I have ran across super talented players who couldn't get a gig because of their bad attitude or their over the top technical playing style. I guess the point I'm making is you can have it all if you work hard at it and leave the attitude at the door. On a side note, I heard a story (I think it was on his American Life) of a pianist who is a true musical genius. He can play anything ever written or recorded, in the style of the person who recorded it. He can do this at a moments notice. You name off the song, and the person the year and he can nail it on the spot. he can even mix and match styles with songs. But the poor guy can't take care of himself. He can['t do the most basic of non music related tasks like tie his shoes, clean up after himself and so on. This guy is as technical as it gets. And while I admire his abilities, I feel sorry for the guy. Just a few things to ponder. They may or may not be relevant to your situation, but just food for thought.:bassist:
 
#94
Roy Vogt said:
I'd keep pushing the envelope, myself. Where are we going to get the next generation of Stanley Clarkes, Jacos, Hadrien Ferauds, and Stephen "Thundercat" Bruners if you don't?
To quote Anthony Hopkins in "The Edge": "What one man can do, another man can do. I'm going to kill that bear!"
I've got a student who is just graduating from Belmont. On one hand he plays in the Heavy Metal Band Invicta and on the other hand he writes 20th Century Compositions and plays them on his new 6 string with a Willis ramp and uses techniques from Feraud, DiPiazza and Erskine. You can do both! When some one says, "You can have technique or "feel", which do you choose?" the correct answer is "Yes!".
Remember, those who can't have two choices:
1. Sit on the sidelines and criticize those who can.
2. Learn how to do what they can't do.
Play on!:bassist:
Click to expand...

Kudos for Anthony Hopkins quote.

I encourage study but not at the expense of passion. There are a lot of accomplished classical musicians in the world who are utterly terrified by the notion of improv.
 
#95
I think the idea of technical is sort of ambiguous. What I mean is, there's physical technique, and there's mental technique. To have complete control of your instrument you need to be confident in both.

And each of these have varying degrees as well. For example, something as simple as the placement of thumb, can be quite challenging at first, and is sometimes crucial in understanding how to perform a certain piece. To pivot or not to pivot.

Often times in my experience, being aware of your body and knowing what your body is trying to tell you, is a life long learning experience that is crucial in performing any kind of music well. For example, knowing when your squeezing and when to let up.

When I was heavily studying cello, I remember this Bartok piece. In this piece, Bartok created his own key signature! The tune was slow, 54 bpm, and most of the time I was playing long connected notes. This would be over a measure long. The tricky part was that these notes often times ended at odd times, say on on a 16th note in the very beginning of a measure. Now while this tune didn't take much physical prowess, I found to be as difficult to learn as any Primus tune I ever learned. An odd thing about this, was that in my struggle to grasp the changes in bowing, I would start to tense and squeeze the bow or my left hand.

Anyways, just a thought to add to the convo.
 
#96
I think why most veterans don't talk much about technical bass playing, is because (from what I'm finding) as you progress, the perceived line between technical, and groove oriented bass playing becomes blurred. At a certain point in your development as a musician, the business, style, etc of your playing becomes less and less important. What I mean is that different styles, and techniques, becomes second nature. As a result, you aren't as aware, or as interested in how busy, or simple what you're playing is, just that it sounds/feels right.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back