• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass third finger?

If you can make it sound good without injuring yourself and if it makes you play things that are impossible or much harder with 124 I see no reason not to use it and extend your basic Simandl or Rabbath technique.

This is basically how I feel about it as well. Certainly, with enough right hand control, a high level of left hand facility, and diligence, one can successfully play many passages which I choose to execute with low thumb position/four finger technique/pivots for. But often I find that, even when executed perfectly, these fingerings do limit resonance (especially in things like Bach cello suites) and/or make it more challenging to convey certain musical gestures convincingly. Those factors are often equally as important as technical ease in my decisions to use certain techniques.

Although 1234 is not necessary, it might be a good idea to introduce it earlier in pedagogy. Understanding the concept, its strengths and shortcomings and especially training your 3rd finger for power and independence early can't hurt. For me, it is less a special trick, but one of many elements , to understanding what works on double-bass bass, why and how.
1234 without pivot and solid shifting won't work.
134 and 123 need different hand shapes than 124.

I love how you put this, and absolutely agree. A big part of my exploration of these techniques has come down to, over time, distilling my understanding of the mechanics of the hand and the mechanics of the bass and how the two intersect. To explore any new idea in technique, provided that it is done safely and carefully (or if it is in an inherently unsafe approach, then very minimally and only to the extent that we can gain some understanding of what about it doesn't work so that we can then avoid it in other aspects of our playing), is to explore different ways of using the hand. If we are always critical, aware, and inquisitive, this then informs our technique in a way that strictly observing only one way of playing can never do. I very rarely utilize my third finger without also including a pivot--usually, 124 with a pivot will accomplish what my third finger would just as comfortably, but every now and then using my third finger enables me to make that pivot smaller and more precise instead of having swing far enough to get my second finger where it would need to go.


Though, I kind of agree with what damonsmith writes, as I feel the bass 'wants me' to learn basics well enough and only then delve to experiment with more advanced techniques, and it is important to say it is so. But still, I like to peek ahead, because if I know what's coming, I can focus. Knowledge doesn't mean it will automatically be misused. Even the time lost this way has its merit, IMO.

I like the idea that time lost to premature exploration can still have value--I feel the same about my own work. In an effort to try and catch up and audition for things like All-State orchestra, colleges, etc, I was exploring repertoire much too difficult for my own capabilities very soon after starting to play (Bottesini and Vanhal concertos, Bach suites, excerpts like Mozart 35 and 40 etc). Though I wouldn't articularly recommend that course of action to a beginner, I actually am glad I did it. I couldn't play those things well by my standards today and my fundamentals were fairly inconsistent, but given that I started late on the instrument I think forcing myself to work up the ability to even sort of hack my way through that material gave me a certain level of facility to get around the instrument and actually helped me minimize many left hand technique problems that I might have developed working on easier material without guidance, because getting any semblance of success in repertoire of that difficulty demands a certain amount of healthy approach in the left hand. Of course, the bow was another story... Harder to learn that one from the internet, at least at that time without the Discover Double Bass etc resources that exist now. But once I got with a teacher and rebuilt my fundamentals over the course of a year or two, the jumpstart I had on the repertoire from my early self-taught exploration really helped me get a much firmer handle on both those fundamentals and on that music. It's not a path I would recommend, but I don't regret it as it taught me a lot.


I can tell from experience of myself and my students that the idea 'bass guitarists all play 1-2-3-4' that keeps popping up here is not exactly true. In reality, it's more similar to DB: the player looks for healthy, effortless aproach, and there is never really just one way.

Yes, bass guitar certainly can use 1234 in all positions, but even before I started on double bass I often would go for the the whole step span in the lowest positions. It just was more comfortable and I realized pretty early on that comfortable was 1) healthy and 2) easy, which translated to speed and accuracy much faster than anything else.
 
I am all about premature exploration. I am less about using "avant garde" concepts to play the same old music. I think the lower TP is useful because we can play chords and shift up easier.
I use 1234 near the heel, if G is the highest note.

I feel Petracchi opening things up in the upper register by condensing the hand positions to be more stable rings true for the lower register.
1234 is just buying you one extra note at the expense of a less stable position. So, the instances where it will actually be worth it are going to really be rare, as in probably never!
If you need that one note you probably need 4 more as well!
As I have said, the very tiny percentage of people for whom this will actually be worthwhile, someone like Gary Karr will tell you in person.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: jj.833 and Dabndug
By today's standards I have never been as technically advanced as a lot of you guys. I started late at 23 , worked hard and won my position in the Sydney Symphony Orchestra when I was 28. My audition material was two movements from the Dittersdorf Concerto that the panel had never heard before (plus, of course , a pile of standard orchestral excerpts). My teacher had become Principal and had such huge hands that 1 2 3 4 seemed so natural. He encouraged me to use the same because of my hand shape and I have used this for 50 years on basses with average string lengths, combining it with a semi-pivot in lower positions. There have been times when I have acknowledged that I should have stuck to 1 2 4 and worked harder, especially when I see a fine player like Alberto Bocini doing Bottesini's Carnival of Venice on YouTube.

I often read posts here where people advocate using no, or minimal, pressure between the LH thumb and opposing fingers to stop notes clearly. I have always tried to use my body as naturally as possible, with careful use of alignments and posture, and question this.

My LH approach is like a pianist's, with a flat wrist (except E string) and arched fingers rising and falling from the big knuckles towards my opposing thumb. From hanging by my side I bring my cupped LH up to the neck as naturally as possible and open it to encompass the bass neck. Elbow height is when all four arched fingers line up nicely on a string around 1st or 2nd Position (Simandl). From there the clamping pressure is like wrapping fingers and thumb around a soft foam ball (stress ball?) so that they all play a part in stopping notes. Then it becomes working out how much clamping pressure is needed for clear notes by producing a "clicking" sound on the finger board with the string, first with all four fingers together and then with individual fingers. I find 1 2 and 3 are strong but 4 needs assistance from 3. Once a note is clear the is no sense in pressing/clamping harder. I also like to feel that my LH and RH efforts are in balance as naturally as possible as I play. I want things to feel SIMPLE.

I am quite comfortable with 1 2 3 4 from the 4th "fret" up, eg the D major scale, and use the semi-pivot in the lower positions. I encourage my students to explore 1 2 3 4 with F Major at the base of the neck then work backwards up the neck if they wish to. IMO what is needed is a clear system, a cross-over point between 124 and 1234. And what is REALLY needed is a clear understanding of the layout of notes on the fingerboard (which is why I wait until my students show they know what is going on).

Another big plus for 3rd finger not mentioned so far above is the ease of vibrato with its larger pad and greater strength than the pinkie. One downside of 1234 fingering is if you are the only one in a section using it, because the conductor sees less flurry of movement !!

I know all this sounds like my ego trip but using the body as naturally as possible forms the basis of any technique that I have and the basis of my teaching. We are all different, be it height, weight, strength, hand shapes...............

Keep safe and Best Wishes, DP
 
I think, you all got it wrong. (Sorry, got up on the wrong foot this morning ;-)

You have to have the next note/interval you're playing firmly in your ear/mind before your body moves one bit.
Every fingering technique without listening first brings you only in the vicinity of the correct note. If you're spot on all the time just by putting down your fingers 124 or 1234 or 134, you won the lottery - but those people exist, too...

Bass body shape, sitting/standing, string lengths, string heights, body positions, hand sizes & shapes, long/short, thin/thick fingers are all different from person to person and bass to bass, nothing is absolute.
But the next note to play is probably the same for everybody (unless you also want to address if you play string quartets, or with a piano or want to intonate your thirds lower just because you like it, etc.)

Another saying of Gary Karr is: good intonation is, when you adjust a wrong note fast enough before somebody notices.

Playing bass is a years long endeavor. Who can say that if you started out with 1234 right from the beginning, you would end up totally ahead from somebody who trained 124 and later realized that using 3 has benefits but is not able to incorporate it at that time any more. Or that 1234 right from the beginning will give you unstable hand shapes for the rest of your life or a broken hand.

And also (to paraphrase Gary again): too much thought is given on the left hand. Because the left hand is not where your sound comes from. And your sound should always come first.

Edit: but don't get me wrong, I'm all for consistency practice - use/train a certain fingering that works well in a given situation long enough that you can fall back on it all the time without much thought. But which one of the many possibilities out there - well that can be individually decided and not "one size has to fit all"
 
Last edited:
Using an unstable position to avoid shifting is to live in fear! Fear never helps art or music. Once you can shift, a strong stable position is best.
And to pour more oil into the fire: Once you can shift (in tune) it's actually totally unimportant what position you're in and what finger you started or end up with. Because you'll adjust during the shift until you hit the next note right.

Widening the number of notes you can play in one position comfortably is (for me) usually connected to speed you want (or have to have) to execute something. Lifting a finger or putting it down is usually faster than a shift. Depending on if you play pizz or bow other things come into play, too: a string change can be a much harder movement to execute with the bow than a shift on one string. Can be the opposite if you pizz.

So, if you do it because of speed of execution: I hear so much perfectly intonated fast fingered notes on Youtube I wonder quite a bit on when those players will start to add some musicality to it or wonder if it's actually possible to shape the line at that tempo at all. Or because it's over so fast it does not matter anyway.
 
Another saying of Gary Karr is: good intonation is, when you adjust a wrong note fast enough before somebody notices.

It is good that you can adjust fast. I agree that it is important but in a medium or fast passage there is no time to adjust. So correct hand setting/finger spacing does everything for intonation. The better the hand setting is the more in tune it will be.
 
[...] but in a medium or fast passage there is no time to adjust. So correct hand setting/finger spacing does everything for intonation. The better the hand setting is the more in tune it will be.
I am just of the opinion that you should address this from a musical point of view and not a technical. If the fast passage is played musically and has expression and all, it is usually (IMHO) more bearable if something is a little out of tune (remember, it's over fast) than the opposite: fast, 100% in tune and boring.
I'm not saying you should be sloppy. But your hand should follow your ears and not the other way around.
 
I am just of the opinion that you should address this from a musical point of view and not a technical. If the fast passage is played musically and has expression and all, it is usually (IMHO) more bearable if something is a little out of tune (remember, it's over fast) than the opposite: fast, 100% in tune and boring.
I'm not saying you should be sloppy. But your hand should follow your ears and not the other way around.

But it can be musical and technical correct and in tune at the same time. It doesn’t have to be one way or the other.
 
Last edited:
But it can be musical and technical correct and in tune at the same time. It doesn’t have to be one way or the other.
This thread started out talking about 1234 and took the usual way regarding positions etc. I just wanted to give a different view.

If you get all the parameters you talk about perfect all the time every time - good for you (There are people who win the jackpot in the lottery, too).
I can't ;-)... so for me it's working on all aspects all the time. But if I have to prioritize, playing musical always stays on top of the list these days and the rest is a little lower on the list. But mind you, I'm not saying that those other aspects are not important.
So I'm just saying: if you have a phrase and you have a musical concept about it in your mind, find a fingering that works for you and stick with it until you get it right. But it's not important if it's 124 or 134 or 1234 or 1212 or pivoting or... Because that is not music. If your musical concept changes, you might have to find a different fingering (phrasing, speed etc.) again.
 
I never find the "musical" argument a to be a good one. For me, the music I want to make is very clear and being musical" is not something to worry about in the practice room.
For technical practice, it is about being able to carry out these basic tasks and in many ways, creativity is not needed. That is one of the best things about it. Bass technique is something I can just get on with each day no matter how I feel!
Also, the phenomenon you are talking about, the power of music over human beings is very real. However, it isn't so dependable. The first melody I learned on the double bass was Good Bye Porkpie Hat in the original key of Eb minor. I loved it, I heard it, I was able to get it played. It took years before I could play an equally complex line in Eb on the double bass.

The idea is to condition ourselves so that we can hit these pitches no matter what. While I personally don't perform music I am not invested in artistically, many, many pro bassists do.
I like to think about the great symphony bassist who love classical music but have to play some utter drivel for a pops concert with Chris Botti or a soundtrack to a movie they don't care for.
They still have to get the line played well.

So, a fingering system is about having a reliable system of getting around the bass whether the music is striking us or not.

Also, all of us need to be able to play very musical "primary" material, other times we need to be able to play material related to structure that actually might benefit from being played in a more "matter of fact" way.

It is kind of obviously to say that it will be "better" when played musically. There is at least one LP that proves you can be one the most musical bassists that has ever lived, but, without an efficient fingering concept, you are going to get left behind when Dewey Redman and Paul Motian are ready to really get going!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogfightgiggle
Your post makes me a little sad. I kick myself in the arse because I was too lazy (again) the last time you came through Hamburg to play (at Westwerk?). I think we would have a wonderful discussion in person but it's so much less enjoyable in writing. I disagree with so many things you wrote because you either draw other conclusions than I do or you're just in a different place.

I never find the "musical" argument a to be a good one. For me, the music I want to make is very clear and being musical" is not something to worry about in the practice room.
And I see so many videos with high praised young performers on Youtube where I think: go back to the practice room and try to put some musical thoughts in it. Recordings of the Bach Suites are perfect examples for this.

For technical practice, it is about being able to carry out these basic tasks and in many ways, creativity is not needed. That is one of the best things about it. Bass technique is something I can just get on with each day no matter how I feel!
And for me it's not working like that. I have to listen closely so that I can correct the mistakes I make with technical stuff, too. So while it might not need creativity, it still needs concentration and focus. That is not a given for me every day.

Also, the phenomenon you are talking about, the power of music over human beings is very real. However, it isn't so dependable. The first melody I learned on the double bass was Good Bye Porkpie Hat in the original key of Eb minor. I loved it, I heard it, I was able to get it played. It took years before I could play an equally complex line in Eb on the double bass.
Does not sound like well invested time to me. Sorry. You could have worked on imagining and prelistening those other Eb lines first - execution could have been much easier then.

The idea is to condition ourselves so that we can hit these pitches no matter what.
Yeah. And does not work out (the recordings prove it) for a lot of high caliber bassists. The have off-days, too. But they are still musical doing it - otherwise they probably wouldn't have been invited back.

So, a fingering system is about having a reliable system of getting around the bass whether the music is striking us or not.
I'm not of a different opinion. I'd like to think that I'm just not as dogmatic as you are what a "reliable fingering system" is and give it a lower priority.
It is kind of obviously to say that it will be "better" when played musically. There is at least one LP that proves you can be one the most musical bassists that has ever lived, but, without an efficient fingering concept, you are going to get left behind when Dewey Redman and Paul Motian are ready to really get going!!
Yes, I think that happens to all of us when we place us outside our comfort zone. It only becomes a problem when somebody hit the record button and you have no saying on the publishing.
 
Yes, it was Westwerk. I think your post is just full of (sorry) Obvious truths we need in addition to clear ideas about fingering. I think you are adding artistic and aesthetic judgment onto a conversation that is just a bout technique.
Clearly, I prefer many bassists with sketchy intonation over un-creative classical players.
I don't think that should change any goals about fingering systems.
Also, If someone is just trying to get Bach played in tune and they do it, then they have have done.
If we are getting into a conversation about aesthetics and art, I might prefer hear zero standard pitches!


Your post makes me a little sad. I kick myself in the arse because I was too lazy (again) the last time you came through Hamburg to play (at Westwerk?). I think we would have a wonderful discussion in person but it's so much less enjoyable in writing. I disagree with so many things you wrote because you either draw other conclusions than I do or you're just in a different place.


And I see so many videos with high praised young performers on Youtube where I think: go back to the practice room and try to put some musical thoughts in it. Recordings of the Bach Suites are perfect examples for this.


And for me it's not working like that. I have to listen closely so that I can correct the mistakes I make with technical stuff, too. So while it might not need creativity, it still needs concentration and focus. That is not a given for me every day.


Does not sound like well invested time to me. Sorry. You could have worked on imagining and prelistening those other Eb lines first - execution could have been much easier then.


Yeah. And does not work out (the recordings prove it) for a lot of high caliber bassists. The have off-days, too. But they are still musical doing it - otherwise they probably wouldn't have been invited back.


I'm not of a different opinion. I'd like to think that I'm just not as dogmatic as you are what a "reliable fingering system" is and give it a lower priority.

Yes, I think that happens to all of us when we place us outside our comfort zone. It only becomes a problem when somebody hit the record button and you have no saying on the publishing.
 
Regarding the mechanical vs. musical, my best teachers always taught me that beyond a very basic mechanical stage, musical content (i.e. - phrasing, articulation, dynamics, rubato, etc.) should always be a focus of any practice session. This was for artistic, philosophical, and technical reasons. In order:

- Artistic: if a player is working on a conception of a piece, that conception should be in mind no matter what tempo is being practiced.
- Philosophical: we perform as we practice. If a player is always searching for meaning in any given moment, that is the ideal performing and listening experience. Practicing that way is also practicing for the performing state of mind, and like all practice makes that state of mind easier to recall than practicing mechanically and then hoping to be inspired when you walk onto the stage.
- Technical: certain musical passages and points within musical passages carry different weight than others. These should be approached with technique that is designed to carry that weight and impart that meaning.

That said, I often break down difficult passages into the mechanical component, but only so I can get them to where I can begin to practice them as above.

And in the end, I play and rehearse with all sorts of people. Some save their energy during rehearsals and then kill it during the performance. Others are full on all the time. Some, sadly, save their energy in rehearsal and then also phone their stuff in during performance. Experience has shown me that two of the above three ways of approaching the thing can be valid in the real world.
 
I think like the dude's rug and the dude's briefcase, we are talking about separate incidents. I think trying to be "musical" with scales and etudes is a big rookie mistake. You need to play them as clearly and as matter of fact as possible. There is a ton of preparation we can and should do before we even arrive at making music.
I cannot even begin to practice the music I play because I don't know what it will be until the concert!

Also, it is completely off topic. Yes, the power of music or lack thereof may well make any fingering system work or not work.
This is not a way to judge whether it is a reliable system. The building blocks of music the scales, pitches and intervals can absolutely be worked on in straight forward manner that is universal to all of us. What is musical or not is subjective.
Whether you arrived at one pitch from another is not.
 
I cannot even begin to practice the music I play because I don't know what it will be until the concert!
That is, why I said that you're possibly in a totally different place than I am. But you are the niche-player here (I guess).

I think trying to be "musical" with scales and etudes is a big rookie mistake.
This is not my experience with all the teachers I had.

Whether you arrived at one pitch from another is not.
What I said earlier: if you play to a piano or in a string quartet or just happen to like thirds intonated a little different etc. all those pitches are not always 100% the same.
 
That is, why I said that you're possibly in a totally different place than I am. But you are the niche-player here (I guess)
Any jazz player should have the same experience for anything not pre-given as well as any pro reading down music they don't love.

What I said earlier: if you play to a piano or in a string quartet or just happen to like thirds intonated a little different etc. all those pitches are not always 100% the same.
Those are musical decision to be made at a later date. One of the things about improvised music intonation is the the tuning of the more common extended techniques, for example, a saxophone multi-phonic become part of the collective music, in addition to the pitches needed to harmonize with it.
To bring it back on topic, practicing the western tuning is just about being precise, so when I need a another pitch, it doesn't get in the way. It is a lot like the metronome, it doesn't have to make your time stiff, it just gives you the ability to place a sound in a specific place.


I'll just leave these here...

Thanks.
You know I was thinking about you when I posted that one!