• 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.

What am I missing in this measure?

Status
Not open for further replies.
#81
CatOnTheBass said:
What kind of transcription doesn't tell you what it's a transcription of? That's a seriously 4-dimensional chess move by your teacher, to withhold that information. "Your homework assignment is to learn this tune, but I won't tell you what it is."
Click to expand...
It's from a book, I know the name of the book, I know the name of the song, I know who played it, I know who transcribed it, I know who they studied with, I know where they studied. I don't think anyone's trying to be deliberately evasive on this. The transcribed version is likely out there - somewhere - but the only version I could find was different.

Again, it's not that big a deal. I can hear how the line goes, I just have ONE NOTE that I'm not certain about and that will be resolved in a few days. It doesn't impact my learning what is intended to be taught here. Nobody's losing sleep over this.

You guys are freaking hilarious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CryingBass and lermgalieu
#82
While we in the Paul Chambers Bass "Chamber":smug:, let's look at the following notation of PC's, "I could write a book."

What is the foundation of the Double Flat notation?
Chrom3.png


Or this one?
Chrom4.png
 
Last edited:
#84
LBS-bass said:
Well, I will mention to him that I'd prefer to play it this way, but I am not sure he want to hear about how I will improve on Paul Chambers. I am actually not sure he wants to hear about how I wouldn't do that, either. And I don't even know how Paul actually played it.

But there's a lot to be navigated.
Click to expand...

If this is a Chambers transcription, do you know the recording or name of the tune? then you could get to the "source of truth" on this one.
 
#85
sean_on_bass said:
If this is a Chambers transcription, do you know the recording or name of the tune? then you could get to the "source of truth" on this one.
Click to expand...
I've tried that, but apparently it's not the version that's common, because the only one that comes up on a search doesn't really sound like this line to me.

Honestly, I'm not that worried about it. I just told someone in a private message that I'm enjoying seeing how this line unpacks without using my ears as a guide. And I've told the teacher that my ears have always been the biggest obstacle when it comes to sharpening my reading skills - because I hear pretty well so I tend to stop trying to read once I know how something goes - so this is a good opportunity to avoid that pitfall and keep moving forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt-J2 and sean_on_bass
#86
Richard Lindsey said:
Well, maybe not technically incorrect in the most basic sense, but, let's say, bad notation practice. First, it obscures the fact that that note is simply the 4 in the key (and not the augmented 3). Second, the whole point of having key signatures in the first place is to cut down on the number of accidentals you have to use. As you say, if you have an Eb in the key sig, why not use it? Now, if we'd temporarily moved into another key without changing the main key sig, that could be a different story, but we haven't in the example given, so the D# helps nothing and actually gets in the way.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. It's not the best notation practice, uses unnecessary accidentals. And you should always prefer the more typical notation to an atypical notation that could throw a reader off.

I was making the comment more in response to people talking about the theory of how D# as a note fits into the key compared to Eb.

When I think of chromatic approaches up to a target tone, I'm not often thinking in terms of which of the chromatic approach tones is the 4. Once I see the D is leading chromatically up to the F, I don't care much about how each of the notes spelled, I'm just thinking about where it leads.

I would never argue that the D# should be the choice used here. But I don't think it would stand out as wrong to me if I were reading it.
 
#87
Whousedtoplay said:
While we in the Paul Chambers Bass "Chamber":smug:, let's look at the following notation of PC's, "I could write a book."

What is the foundation of the Double Flat notation?
View attachment 5124790

Or this one?
View attachment 5124795
Click to expand...
To give the following note an approach note from the note name above. That is, if you're landing on some kind of A, approach it from above via some kind of B. This isn't an absolutely ironclad rule, but it operates a lot of the time.

Alternatively, to indicate a flattening of the preceding note (in the first example) or an imagined chord tone (in the second).
 
#88
LBS-bass said:
It's the third measure in this line:

View attachment 5124273

It's a lesson, so my gut tells me it's just a test to get me to ask this question, and to see if I don't play two different notes there.
Click to expand...

Likely just a simple typo that comes from using software notation, or transposing a piece with software notation that sometimes makes things weird and hard to fix if we don't know the software well.
 
#89
I agree. It's a mistake. There should not be a D sharp. Two e flats over a Bflat?.. leading to F?. defnitely not. The second e should have a natural sign. The d should have not accidental. The last e would be natural because it resolves to the f and think I saw someone else write "leading tone" If an arranger writes out a bassline , A WALKING bassline in the jazz style, there should be a good reason for it, like they have a specific set of events, an outcome like a unison or harmonic 'lick' otherwise, just read the changes and play what you know. G flat would be cool... oh so many ways to make it happen Bflat A G Gflat, Bflat D Dflat C, Bflat D Eflat E natural.. an many many others Take care and SWING!
 
#92
I have not read the entire thread, but it appears to me, based on post #3, that what you have is a transcription error. In context it looks like bar 3 is a 1-3-4-#4 walkup to the F note in the following bar (Bb-D-Eb-E ->F). That D# should be an Eb on the space with the following note having a natural accidental sign before it.

What you are seeing could simply be a mistake. The late great Frederick Fennell spent a lot of ink writing about transcription mistakes in iconic concert band scores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBS-bass
#93
themickster said:
Half-diminished means it's a diminished chord with a 7. What did you think it meant?

Maybe the -5 is meant to mean there's no 5. If so, my mistake.
Click to expand...
I know what it means: -5 = b5. Half-diminished is a diminished triad with a minor 7. It's not what people typically mean when they talk about a diminished chord; typically they mean a diminished 7. (I always write dim7, because I consider it more correct.) "Full" diminished 7 is a diminished triad with a diminished 7. Two different chords, so it's not surprising that they're written differently. The C#m7b5/G could also have been written as Em6/G.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Febs
#96
LBS-bass said:
It's the third measure in this line:

View attachment 5124273

It's a lesson, so my gut tells me it's just a test to get me to ask this question, and to see if I don't play two different notes there.
Click to expand...
I bet it's been said ten times already, but here goes:

I think that D# is supposed to be an Eb, and that final note is an E natural. It's a "chromatic approach phrase" leading to the F.

Ever need/want help, my Skypeability is only a DM away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBS-bass
#98
LBS-bass said:
It's true (to my knowledge) that the signatures will contain sharps or flats, but never both. It just doesn't work that way for the notes that follow, though.
Click to expand...

When I see (as in your OP) on a walking chart,:
  • a note
  • followed by the same note # or b
  • followed by the next note a step away
I parse it as a 3 note chromatic run.

ascending chromatic : note, note(#), next note up
descending chromatic note, note(b), next note down

It's not a fast rule but seems to be common enough convention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charliethomas
#99
Whousedtoplay said:
I was trying to follow your explanation and see it as Bb7b9 resolving into Eb.
Click to expand...
If it was my chart, and the chord contained a b9, I would SPELL the chord "Bb7,b9", so that everybody in the group knew what was expected at that part of the tune.
Writing "Bb7"doesn't imply or specify a "b9".
But that's me, and many folks around here/there, would not agree.
IMFO, of course, as always.
Thanks, Who...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joebone and Whousedtoplay
#100
Don Kasper said:
If it was my chart, and the chord contained a b9, I would SPELL the chord "Bb7,b9", so that everybody in the group knew what was expected at that part of the tune.
Writing "Bb7"doesn't imply or specify a "b9".
But that's me, and many folks around here/there, would not agree.
IMFO, of course, as always.
Thanks, Who...
Click to expand...


I'd like to ask your opinion about Paul Chambers' choice of notes with G7(b9) in the following excerpt from his line of "My Melancholy Baby."
Chrom5.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back