What makes a bassist a "hack"?

[Tony Bassplayer]

The occasion that comes to mind for me was watching a bar band cover Blondie's "One Way or Another." The whole hook of that song is the little chromatic runs between B and D on the verses, nothing fancy. The guy didn't bother to play them, just played B, then D, then B again, etc. The whole thing just sounded dead and lifeless, and this was a guy with lots of experience in gigging bands. That, to me, is being a hack.

I agree, this was the first thing that came to my mind. There are so many songs that depend upon certain bass lines, even simple ones, without which they just don't sound right. To me a hack is someone who doesn't care about that stuff.

Anybody who can't play with a pick.

I would've said the exact opposite. I'm not necessarily anti-pick, but they sure as hell ain't necessary to be a good bass player, or to avoid being a hack.

 

[MegaSwing]

This thread has jumped the shark.

 

[basschanges]

And I guess I might be ok with calling him a hack. And I say that with love and also some irony: being a hack doesn't mean you aren't good. It isn't synonymous with "bad." It simply means "untrained" or "unsophisticated." I mean, I like my music. So do other folks. I'm not "bad." Neither is Sir Paul.

Well this is where the definitions become really stretched with an conversational term like "hack."

I just think most bass players, no, most musicians, no, most people, do not think of McCartney as a hack.

 

[BASSKADET]

Is there a Hack club on here? LOL

 

[holdfast]

Hmmmmm. This is interesting. I consider the guitar player in my band a hack. He has very limited technique, but 'goes for it' all the time and fails.
There's a huge gap between what he can do, and what he wants to do. He eventually gets better, but it take a LOT of rehearsal.

I, on the other hand, know my limitations and work within them so that only makes me mediocre.

 

[holdfast]

My definition of a (musical) hack is: Somebody who is half assed about everything, has no desire to improve at all, doesn't care how songs sound...ie:—he/she learns a song wrong, and even when the correct way is pointed pout, they won't even attempt to correct their mistakes.

I engineered a session once with singer/songwriter who had some really catchy songs that he wanted to demo. After the first take we're listening to the tracks back and he'd made a few mistakes as well as speeding up and slowing down all over the place, and it's REALLY obvious (he was playing over the already tracked bass, drums and keys). So I asked him if he wanted to try it again, and his response was "why?" So I said, "well, maybe we can clean up some of the timing issues and correct some of the mistakes". He was reluctant, but eventually gave it another shot... and proceeded to do EXACTLY the same thing again. So half way through the playback, I stopped the tape and said, "OK, one more time?" And he says, "nope, that one's fine, I'm not doing it again". I even suggested that he could take a mix of the bed tracks home with him and work on it in his own time and then come back and nail it, but nope, that was it. I consider this kind of person to be a hack, as well as lazy—I don't know, maybe the two go hand in hand.

I think that as long as you're attempting to improve yourself you will make progress, and nobody can call you a hack. Nobody's perfect, and everybody makes mistakes—even seasoned pros—so just do your best.

Yes. I think you've possibly nailed the essence of hack as I have felt and observed it with your story.

I have a modest studio set-up in my basement. I volunteered to mix some songs that the guitar player/singer and drummer in my band had recorded before I joined. I pointed out issues very similar to those you mention in your story, and the guitar player/singer's eyes would glaze over like he had no idea what I was talking about. I used to think it was laziness, and self-denial or ego/conceitedness, but I honestly think they can't hear the mistakes when you point them out.

Interesting. Hack is hard to define as shown by all the varying opinions in this forum topic, but I think it's one of those things where you kind of know it, when you see it.

 

[hrodbert696]

Is there a Hack club on here? LOL

There's lots of entries in the Mediocre Bassists' Club. Over in Humor and Gig Stories, I believe.

 

[rtslinger]

I can only assume it would be playing off time and the wrong notes in a given scale.

 

[scottfeldstein]

Well this is where the definitions become really stretched with an conversational term like "hack."

I just think most bass players, no, most musicians, no, most people, do not think of McCartney as a hack.

Fair enough. To some people, maybe even most people, being a hack means being no good or lazy. To me it means something different primarily because I have referred to myself as one--and I'm not bad or lazy.

What's a good word for a musician who's untrained and whose playing is unsophisticated?

 

[basschanges]

Fair enough. To some people, maybe even most people, being a hack means being no good or lazy. To me it means something different primarily because I have referred to myself as one--and I'm not bad or lazy.

What's a good word for a musician who's untrained and whose playing is unsophisticated?

you can just call an untrained musician untrained no? And unsophisticated playing you can call unsophisticated. Those words in and of themselves I feel don't conote the same negative meaning as hack.

I'm so used to comedians using the word hack to describe comedians that have little ability or talent.

 

[Weberman]

My interpretation of a "hack" is someone whose gear, gigs, and perhaps persona, far surpass their actual abilities. That is, they aren't honest about their playing. It isn't a novice player. They are merely developing. It isn't just a bad player, with no pretension. They are at least honest. Even a bad player with high-end gear, who is admittedly just a collector, doesn't really cross over into "hack" territory. They don't claim to be real musicians - just gear enthusiasts.

So, when I think of a "hack", I picture someone who plays music that they really have no business playing, while trying to pass their playing off as great. They may hide behind an aura of conceit, flashy theatrics, or a wall of high-end gear. They probably use session musicians, or copious amounts of editing on recorded tracks. Whatever the case, when it comes time to perform, they just can't keep up with the music, or possibly the other band members. Yet, they still go on as if they really belong. They ruin the music, and bring the band down without apology. Never do they say "gee, maybe I should really get back to the fundamentals, and TRY to do a better job." They just find an excuse, or shrug off any criticism, and continue to stink up the stage.

Possibly, hacks might also include players who are very technically gifted, and can play other people's music very precisely, but write absolute garbage. Their music is all show, and no go, or just completely uninspired. They aren't "bad" players, but can't see their own lack of creativity, or emotion (which is, admittedly, very subjective).

One thing that comes to mind is an anecdote from a friend. He was really into a band, whose music was really precisely recorded. One day, he saw them live, and realized that they actually couldn't reproduce the music live. I don't mean due to layering, and backing tracks. They actually could not play the music they had written. They were sloppy, and unprofessional.

The StSanders "Shreds" series of parody videos, if real, would be perfect examples of what I think of when I hear "hack".

 

[Lee Moses]

Maybe this needs to be made a poll . . .

What is a hack?

A. A poseur
B. An amateur
C. A lazy player
D. Someone who can't read music and knows little theory
E. A boring or trite player
F. Someone who gets paid too much
G. A current or former Van Halen or U2 bassist

What options am I missing?

 

[mellowinman]

A bass player who drives a cab?

I'm really hearing that comment about "One Way or Another." There is only one way to play that song, because it was played correctly on the record.

 

[friendlybass]

I saw this guy once at an open jam. Listening to him warm up, I thought I might be witnessing the coming of a new bass genius. Once the real playing began, he needed directions to every downbeat. IMO, he wasn't even a hack.

A hack is someone who is competent but not ridiculously talented—someone who can do his job, just not headline the show.

Me and my dad, who's a drummer, always joke about those guys saying they are "burdened with great chops"

 

[klokker]

My definition of a (musical) hack is: Somebody who is half assed about everything, has no desire to improve at all, doesn't care how songs sound...ie:—he/she learns a song wrong, and even when the correct way is pointed pout, they won't even attempt to correct their mistakes.

I engineered a session once with singer/songwriter who had some really catchy songs that he wanted to demo. After the first take we're listening to the tracks back and he'd made a few mistakes as well as speeding up and slowing down all over the place, and it's REALLY obvious (he was playing over the already tracked bass, drums and keys). So I asked him if he wanted to try it again, and his response was "why?" So I said, "well, maybe we can clean up some of the timing issues and correct some of the mistakes". He was reluctant, but eventually gave it another shot... and proceeded to do EXACTLY the same thing again. So half way through the playback, I stopped the tape and said, "OK, one more time?" And he says, "nope, that one's fine, I'm not doing it again". I even suggested that he could take a mix of the bed tracks home with him and work on it in his own time and then come back and nail it, but nope, that was it. I consider this kind of person to be a hack, as well as lazy—I don't know, maybe the two go hand in hand.

I think that as long as you're attempting to improve yourself you will make progress, and nobody can call you a hack. Nobody's perfect, and everybody makes mistakes—even seasoned pros—so just do your best.

+1 Half assed about the effort. It's not about your musical ability......it's about who you are. Your soul.

 

[Hues]

.................

 

[offhand35]

My interpretation of a "hack" is someone whose gear, gigs, and perhaps persona, far surpass their actual abilities. That is, they aren't honest about their playing. It isn't a novice player. They are merely developing. It isn't just a bad player, with no pretension. They are at least honest. Even a bad player with high-end gear, who is admittedly just a collector, doesn't really cross over into "hack" territory. They don't claim to be real musicians - just gear enthusiasts.

So, when I think of a "hack", I picture someone who plays music that they really have no business playing, while trying to pass their playing off as great. They may hide behind an aura of conceit, flashy theatrics, or a wall of high-end gear. They probably use session musicians, or copious amounts of editing on recorded tracks. Whatever the case, when it comes time to perform, they just can't keep up with the music, or possibly the other band members. Yet, they still go on as if they really belong. They ruin the music, and bring the band down without apology. Never do they say "gee, maybe I should really get back to the fundamentals, and TRY to do a better job." They just find an excuse, or shrug off any criticism, and continue to stink up the stage.

I agree with this description. Some one who makes him/her self out to be more than they really are, and either cannot see or refuse to see that they need to be accountable for their own (lack of) talent , and do not see the need to make the effort to change their attitude, improve their music, or get out.

 

[fishdreams]

Seeing some of the comments in this thread, I'd be proud to be called a hack.

 

[Dogghouse]

It's a lazy person's slur, saying he doesn't like you.

 

[DaveLS]

Overplaying badly

Awesome! I remember my first bass.