• 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.

Tips for playing Melodic Bass anyone?

#22
Originally posted by thrash_jazz
...Many, many melodies were first "composed" in hum format.
...
Click to expand...

So true.

But when writing it down in tablature or sheet music. You will always notice they fit in a theory, in a sudden scale, or a sudden chord progression.

You'll always hum something that feels musicly right to you, and you know it will feel right to other people. Every melody you'll think of will fit in a scale.

And those who say arpeggios are better then scales make no sense; arpeggios are fitted in a certain scale.
 
#23
Originally posted by Ed Fuqua


And those who say "arpeggios are better then scales make no sense; arpeggios are fitted in a certain scale."

I say that it makes more sense when trying to play melodically through harmony that you will be better served by working on chords (as arpeggiated exercises and ear training) than working on scales.

And in giving the counterpoint to this argument, I want to make clear that I don't disagree with it. Just "dicking around with a scale" is NOT playing melodic bass. I'm one of the people who - unlike FOGHORN and PLANKMAN - believe that the scalar approach is more inclusive of the overall tonality of the moment (or of the song, if that also happens to be the tonality of the moment).

But when I think of a progression like a ii-V-I in C, I'm not just thinking of playing the C scale randomly. It's more like the following:

D-7
CDEFGABC

G7
CDEFGABC

CMa
CDEFGABC

So that you can hear the overall tonality AND the chord tones at the same time. It's a small distinction, but one well worth making - and one that should NOT be confused with "just dicking around with the scale".

Because, at the risk of repeating myself, a scalar approach is only part of the picture when you are playing a melody. If I play the notes D E F G A B C D, what chord am I defining, what's it's function? If I am approaching a C-7 chord in SOLAR, how do I make it sound different than a C-7 chord in HOW DEEP IS THE OCEAN, if all you are doing is playing notes from a scale?

Well, for one, on SOLAR, you're definitely dealing with a miMA7 chord, whereas on HOW DEEP, you might or might not be.

Yes the notes from a chord will be contained in a scale. But that's about as useful as saying that the words in a book are going to be constructed from letters. Melodic playing conveys meaning and intent, if all you're doing is picking notes out of a scale, you're speaking gibberish.

 Unless you are picking notes out of a scale with meaning and intent. :)

But again, DON"T MISS THE POINT. There is no better than, if you're going to make sense as a musician you gotta have it ALL: scales, arpeggios, understanding, technique, an ear, a conception, time...there's NOTHING that you can leave out.
Click to expand...


Agreed, no ifs, ands, or buts.
 
#24
Play Melodic and don`t care about the scales or modes. Just play melodic on just one scale. Chromatic scale..After a while you will start to play melodic in every scale you want.
And another advise: hear a melody on a commercial etc. sit down and play it. That`s the way I still do.
 
#25
Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
And those who say arpeggios are better then scales make no sense; arpeggios are fitted in a certain scale.

I say that it makes more sense when trying to play melodically through harmony that you will be better served by working on chords (as arpeggiated exercises and ear training) than working on scales. Because, at the risk of repeating myself, a scalar approach is only part of the picture when you are playing a melody. If I play the notes D E F G A B C D, what chord am I defining, what's it's function? If I am approaching a C-7 chord in SOLAR, how do I make it sound different than a C-7 chord in HOW DEEP IS THE OCEAN, if all you are doing is playing notes from a scale?

Yes the notes from a chord will be contained in a scale. But that's about as useful as saying that the words in a book are going to be constructed from letters. Melodic playing conveys meaning and intent, if all you're doing is picking notes out of a scale, you're speaking gibberish.

But again, DON"T MISS THE POINT. There is no better than, if you're going to make sense as a musician you gotta have it ALL: scales, arpeggios, understanding, technique, an ear, a conception, time...there's NOTHING that you can leave out.
Click to expand...

Yes, ofcourse you're so right.

I actually get upset by trolls who say you must only play by chords. If you only use one aspect of music theory, you can't call yourself melodic minded.

It's like you said: use everything.

I myself am fixated on scales when I begin something, but then I end up not using every note of that scale afcourse. If I leave out the 2nd, the 6th and so, I wind up in modes, arpeggios and chords. That's what I mean, in my personal interpretation of music theory everything progresses from scales.
 
#26
Blackbird said:
Transcribe solos played by non bassists.

By "transcribing", I don't mean notation, but learning the solo or the vocal melody. Try to reproduce the same inflections on your instrument. John Patitucci says he transcribed a lot of John Coltrane to become a better soloist.
Click to expand...

I Agree
Even learning vocal lines give you melodic phrasing ( I mean playing the vocal line on bass )
When you think about it your inner voice is as melodic as they come try humming phrases either in your head or singing to yourself you come up with the funkiest lines that you can think've
I mean try it when you're Listening to a song hum phrases of the vocal melody but imagine it as the sound of a bassline along with the song you'll surprise yourself what you can come up with

Then the next step is to get what you hear out on your instrument
That means alot of shredding :D
 
#28
jazzbo said:
I'm also gonna put it a vote for "play more melodies."

I would also like to add to the "listen to:" list, jazz. While the rhythmic part of jazz bassplaying is king, the melodic element is never given it's worth. No other music genre I can think of has a bassplayer that pays as much attention to the harmony, interacting with the melody of the tune. A natural lineage from there would be James Jamerson.
Click to expand...
Big +1 here. Get some Jaco and Weather Report stuff. Then work your way backwards into more traditional stuff -- get stuff by Christian McBride (bassist for Jane Monheit), and then have fun with stuff from Charles Mingus, Ron Carter, Roy Brown (Oscar Peterson Trio), Charlie Haden (solo, and he has a CD with Pat Metheny). That'll get your melodic BASS down.

However, I'd reccomend listening to just as many horn, piano, guitar players, and singers as well. John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, Oscar Peterson, Art Tatum, George Benson, Pat Metheny, Eva Cassidy, Marcus Belgrave, Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, and if you can get it, Greg Runions. You can get some here -- [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] -- and even get some clips and the Big Band's CD "Sweet Home Suite" Invalid Link Removed. I own this one, and it's absolutely fantastic. The melodies on these CDs are just fantastic, and Dave Barton is one of my favourite jazz guitarists (and he doubles VERY well on upright and fretless electric bass) and he plays on both of these CDs. You probably won't find his stuff in a local record store, which is why I included links.
 
#29
That's Ray Brown, Govitoy.... I don't want to say that the sun rises and sets with Ray, but it comes pretty darn close!
 
#33
Bruce Lindfield said:
The thing I have read as a tip for melodies is to get the line to flow. So - most catchy melodies don't necessarily jump about all over the place - each note follows naturally from the last.

As Doryan says - you need to practice scales, but linking them logicaly together to form tunes. Play scales so they sound like music and then try to put parts of scales together in "musical" ways - so it sounds like music rather than just bits of scales.

The thing that helps you to achieve this is thinking ahead to where you are going and achieving a smooth line that makes sense, both in terms of the linear flow and the appropriate scales for the harmony/chords.
Click to expand...

+1
I think what you're touching on here is what some classical composers might call "vocal writing" vs. "instrumental writing"; melodies written for humans to sing typically move largely stepwise, with a minimum of skips. Like, most people have trouble jumping up a ninth. :hmm:

Vocal writing also allows for breaths, and in my lifelong struggle to solo like a sax or trumpet player (I'm still struggling) I hit upon the idea that leaving spaces to "breathe" makes a line sound more melodic.

I go along with the people who suggest listening to a lot of Paul McCartney-- he's one of the most melodic humans ever to walk the earth, and it manifests itself naturally in his bass playing -- and I also suggest writing parts away from the bass, by listening to a song and singing or humming ideas... then picking up the bass and finding the notes.
 
#35
BehindTheMoon said:
...rip off everybody else's melodic bass playing.

Then try like hell to understand it.
Click to expand...

This would be my suggestion as well, especially the "understand it" part. Learning to play an existing melodic line is one thing, but breaking it down into its parts, phrase by phrase and chord by chord, and seeing how the same ideas or fragments thereof can be applied to other situations...that's how you increase your range of choices in a practical way.
 
#37
Playing melodic accompaniment. I think that is what you are speaking of.

I call it echo melody. Our lead guitar plays echo melody while the vocalist is singing -- and our bass (I'm rhythm guitar in this band) accents the echo melody, i.e. he accents the lead guitar's melody accompaniment. Our lead guitar is an old pedal steel player, call up some video with a pedal steel working in the background to see what I'm talking about.

Really neat to hear how they work together. This does not come over night Ted and Tom have been playing together for about five years.

In both cases you have to be able to play melody by ear, which both do, and know how to do this in an accompaniment venue. Neither one is competing with the lead vocalist, or each other.

Takes a really good musician to pull this off.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back