• 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.

What's better 1234 or 124 style?

Whatever you say. You win.


George Carlin - "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Yet so many other people have a weak pinky

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f21/weak-pinky-282593/
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f21/incredibly-weak-pinky-442355/
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f21/pinky-strength-mine-incredibly-weak-i-need-help-advice-799902/

Clearly your the type of person that always has to be right, so I'll take your advice and stop arguing with an idiot :rolleyes:
 
124 is not a practical application for scales, it is a practical application using what is best for the hand, not the scales, it is a means to an end that's why it need to be practiced.

There is less chance of sagittal band damage, wrist damage and joint damage using 124 over 1234 because there is less strain.

+1

Add the ulnar nerve to the list. That's the one going straight to your ring and pinky fingers.

My DB teacher encourages both 124 and 1234 since I expressed a strong interest in 1234. For EB, I also practice using both. Listen to your hands and arms for numbness or tingling. I workout, grip a bicycle 100 miles a week in traffic, and at 6'2" have large hands. I still have a lot of respect for 124 and practice it to reduce a chance of injury.
 
Let me define what the weakest/under developed finger is,
It is the finger with the least stamina/durability on the hand.

Depending on how you use your hands as you grow up, will define what your strongest fingers will be and what your weakest fingers will be.
As will injury, disease, genetics etc.....so you cannot say,
It is, however, indisputable physiological fact that the ring finger is the weakest finger. Can you train it to be strong enough to fret by itself? Certainly, but electric bass techniques evolved from upright techniques, and the ring finger really isn't strong enough there. You need both ring and pinky together. (A least, this is the official position at Michigan State and Western Michigan Universities.)

The Ring finger is not weak as such, it is under developed......as you correctly say it can be developed, as can any finger that is weak/underdeveloped on the hand.

I deal with many players that choose not to use the little finger, in fact getting players to correctly use all their fingers is a challenge when the music is not challenging. :)

As for Michigan Universities stance on this i would like to read for myself what they say, so a link would be appreciated to read what they are actually saying. :)
 
I generally use 1234, but in the lower position 124 can be more comfortable and less strain. It seems to me it is better to know 1234, and drop into a 124 for comfort, than to only know 124 and suddenly need 1234.
 
As for Michigan Universities stance on this i would like to read for myself what they say, so a link would be appreciated to read what they are actually saying. :)

I went to WMU as a music major, my cousin went to MSU for same (he's classical, I went for jazz), and that is what we were taught. There was no such thing as online when we were in school, so I don't have a link to that. Mary Kay cosmetics also trains their consultants (my wife is one) to teach people to only work around their eyes with the ring finger so they do less damage to their skin.

The reason that it is weakest is that it shares its flexor muscle with both middle and little fingers, even though they have their own. This is why I said that it is physiological fact, not my opinion.
 
I went to WMU as a music major, my cousin went to MSU for same (he's classical, I went for jazz), and that is what we were taught. There was no such thing as online when we were in school, so I don't have a link to that. Mary Kay cosmetics also trains their consultants (my wife is one) to teach people to only work around their eyes with the ring finger so they do less damage to their skin.

The reason that it is weakest is that it shares its flexor muscle with both middle and little fingers, even though they have their own. This is why I said that it is physiological fact, not my opinion.

Thanks for the explanation and taking the time to post.
It sounds like old school philosophy is being used rather than any modern viable modern understanding of the real physical use of the ring finger. The shared tendon does not weaken the ring finger, it gives the Ulnar side of the hand the ability to work together for strength.
The hand has two very distinct sides, the Ulnar side is for power, the Radial side for dexterity, each side can be develop regardless of physiological features.
Each side has its own blood supply and nerves services to aid independent function, but they do have the ability to function as one unit all with the same potential in use.

In anatomy we see this in human physiology as handiness, one side of the body is dominant over the other, left handed or right handed, right footed or left footed. Some may feel one side is weaker than the other, but the truth is one side is only dominant in function. Those that are ambidextrous have dual dominance as a function rather than any one side....this is true of the hand. If a right handed person loses that dominant limb, the left limb will take over and become the dominant limb though need.
This is the principal of developing the hands two sides, the powerful Ulnar side of ring and little finger can be as dexterous as the radial side thumb, fore and middle finger.....as any trained piano player can show.

Most bass players development is stifled by their relation to the instruments physicality, not their hands physicality.
Brass players finger 1-2-3 not 1-2-4, piano player finger T-1-2-3-4 on both hands yet bass players seem to think 1-2-3-4 or 1-2-4 with one hand and 1-2 with the other.....??????
The reality is the instrument can be player 1-2-3-4 with either hand if the can be bothered to take the time and learn, but again the function of the music seems to determine that the time and effort is not worth it, why develop a 1-2-3-4 plucking technique when a 1-2 will suffice?

The problem stems from tradition, but music is always developing and as such so must the physical use of the hands, so what was once good enough to play bass in a traditional situation is not good enough by todays standards of multi string instruments and the heavily syncopated 16th note lines prevalent in a lot of todays modern music.
Today's modern players tend to favour the full use of the Radial side of T-1-2 for full dexterity, speed and control. Players such as Garrison will favour a T-1-2-3 use so he has no weak ring finger or chooses to use the stronger little finger over a weaker ring finger, so this idea of a weak finger can be viewed as a player not choosing to develop because their need is not there, not any physical weakness in any finger.

It is a very subjective thing the use of the fingers, i type using a 1-2 on each hand, because i have no real need to develop a 1-2-3-4, 1-2 does my function fine, the same applies to bass playing because function defines use, is see the shared tendon argument as a strength rather than a weakness as many musicians of various instruments prove, as do many people in daily life. :)
 
I can't say you're wrong, but I can't take the word of "some guy on the Internet" over that of my father (physician and pathologist) and instructors at two of the most respected music schools around. Besides, i am old and set in my ways. No offense, but let's agree to disagree.
 
I can't say you're wrong, but I can't take the word of "some guy on the Internet" over that of my father (physician and pathologist) and instructors at two of the most respected music schools around. Besides, i am old and set in my ways. No offense, but let's agree to disagree.

No probs, nice having a civil discussion with another "guy on the internet" who he says his father is a physician and pathologist and claims he got the information from instructors of two respected music schools.... i am also old school , but not set in my ways......no offence taken and happy to agree to disagree ;)
 
It's kinda funny. We argue 124 v 1234, with many explaining that 124 is due to the traditions of the upright. What no one mentions that above the 12th on a string, upright players use T123. Surprise, surprise. You need all your fingers.
 
It's kinda funny. We argue 124 v 1234, with many explaining that 124 is due to the traditions of the upright. What no one mentions that above the 12th on a string, upright players use T123. Surprise, surprise. You need all your fingers.

Very true Joe, but it is a side issue of function.
Again this is a DB technique due to the design and constraints of the instruments design. The fact is the Bass Guitar (BG) is seen as a development of DB not guitar.
DB design originates in the 15th century, with the materials available, to designs that were about the sound to size ratio of the pitch, but was its origins in Viola or violin?
Lower pitch needs thicker strings, thicker strings need more tension, more tension needs bigger and strong neck joints, bigger neck joints need a larger heal joint, larger heal joint needs a bigger body to fix to, and a larger body helps amplify and define a lower pitched sound.

So the techniques to play one develop from the need of the instrument, not the player. DB players would have had very similar physical similarities because they compliment the functionality needs to play the instrument, players that did not have these physical would be discouraged
from taking up the instrument and moved to another better suited.
This also saw players better suited to playing DB being encouraged to take it up, even players being switched to DB to fill a gap in an orchestra or ensemble.
Due to its size DB required the player to have the height, arm length, and hand size to handle the instrument, so the age of the player starting the instrument was older, because the older the player the bigger the player.
Through out its history the size of the strings and the tensions needed meant techniques develop to play the instrument as the music expanded and became more demanding.
The Simandl 124 is just one of these, it comes from an era of large instruments, no amplification, and overwound gut strings and targeted the players need.... not the instruments.
So it had a relevant use, but string development is tied very closely to what techniques need to be developed, the modern DB can use low tension steel strings with a core, this allows better tone producing and volume, it can be amplified in a number of ways, so it again can be EQ'd for tone or turned up for volume.

But with the development of the electric bas guitar came the opportunity for those not physically suited to playing bass to play bass guitar.
Those that were bass player just moved there techniques to it as it was heard to be a bass but seen as a guitar. In the early years of Fender basses in the 50's/60s and due to there popularity the electric bass was called a Fender bass rather than a bass guitar or electric bass, the name Fender was associated an over all concept of the instrument.

This led to trained experienced DB player switching and bring what they learned on a DB to the instrument, it also had guitarists bringing what the learned to the instrument. But the romantic idea of how a DB player who was a bassist developed over the practical idea of the guitarist playing bass guitar. More emphasis was being placed on the "bass" function of the instrument rather than the "guitar function of the instrument.
Ironic then that a pick was the preferred way to record and play for many, in fact the functionality of recording was a pick. There were exceptions to this, Jamerson was one, but why the single hook finger??....well any DB player will answer that.

The main difference in technique is 'plane'.
A DB is vertical to play (or up-right) and the guitar is more horizontal based. So in terms of how the hand can work are different, finger and thumb placement work more consistent in the vertical plane than the horizontal, because our own body design and body mechanics favour a vertical plane (evolution had use climbing up and down as the main function of our needs). The wrist, elbow and shoulder can hold and maintain vertical planes more consistent, the muscles that service this can do so with less strain, the closer our limbs are to our bodies the less strain is put on them.
The problem with bass guitar over guitar is the over all length, basses are longer to produce the tone, but that design was back when the technology did not exists that we have today to provide tone, but the romantic idea over came the practical idea.
Players seem to think that if a smaller scale bass is better suited to them then it in someway reduces their worth as a player.
It is like the old British Class System of lower, middle and upper class has developed with the reference being short, medium, and long scale.
If you play a short scale bass you are perceived to be lacking for some reason. This leads player to choose instruments ill suited to them and leads to taking longer to master the physical side of techniques and of course injuries.
Ask yourself this if you were 5'6" would you but a suit for a 6'6" person?
If the answer is no then why by a bass that does not fit and compliment your needs?

DB instruments have remained relatively un-changed since there inception in the 15th century, so they have had hundreds of years to allow the development of ideas and techniques. More has happened to this instrument in the last sixty odd years than ever happened in the centuries before because technology and function fuelled the need for change.
Bass guitar (BG) has only really seen its needs and functions change within the last twenty or so years. We are seeing the results of what those early long term players are suffering in the ways of injuries, so CTS, Rotor Cuff, Lower Back, Upper Back, Shoulder, hearing etc are there to examine, look for cause, and re-define techniques and use.
With the new technologies available, BGs are lighter, easier on the touch, better amps and pick ups means no need to pluck hard or strain for volumes, better strings mean better playing actions, and companies like, Torzal Guitars, bring radical new designs such as the 'Torzal Twist' to the fore.

But all this means nothing if you have a teacher or school that wants to remain entrenched in 'tradition' and not employ new ides and new teachings in music.
Science it seems will explore and develop new ideas, but when i visit music schools or collages there music department do not have a R&D programme.
They do not look at or explore that what they are teaching is viable, or if there is a better way, they only teach what they themselves were taught...whether it was right or wrong. There budgets do not allow for this, so it is the manufacturing industry does this work, but there job is to sell ideas that are profitable, not always functional.

So in the end whether you adopt a 1234 or a 124 use will be debated as futilely as French or German bow, pick or finger, gut strings or metal strings, roundwound or flatwound, standard DB or Cut away DB, Precison or Jazz, 4/4 or 3/4 size, short scale or long scale, five string over four string etc etc and so it will go on.
But the good player knows what works for them, the romantic notions of other or the promotional material of companies does not matter to them. As experience develops so does techniques and needs and as such so does the information we can draw on to study and compare.
Such information becomes valid, information that in playing BG there are many levels of functionality because there are many levels of physically demanding music. What we do accept now more than before is the idea of a floating thumb, straighter wrists, a neutral thumb, posture, strap thickness etc....all these things were not of importance in the past, but now are being understood more as to how they fit in with modern use and needs.

As i said in this debate 124 or 1234?
Look at it this way develop the less strenuous one first, tone, condition the hand to deal with it and you will find that the more original more strenuous one is not such an issue.
The only factor in this is time, so the art of playing or the romantic notion of playing comes in.
Can i play 1234 from the start....sure you can, but can you maintain it though out your life?......only you will answer that question and only you will carry the consequences of it.
Common sense is you just do not go and run a marathon because you can run, you develop the ability to cope better with the stress and strain running a marathon puts on you. You start easy and build into it.

See 124 as the easy and 1234 as the objective, mix and match them, 1234 is less strenuous the closer the frets are together.....funny that is also where the arm comes closer to the body, the hands joints better line up, the elbow come to the side, the whole body gets into a more relaxed and stronger position to cope.
Think, why is it more stressful in the lower reaches of a bass that is horizontal than one that is vertical?
The angle of the neck can be a big factor as can set up and instrument, so again 124 or 1234 only you can decide what is for you. :)
 
"Can i play 1234 from the start....sure you can, but can you maintain it though out your life?......only you will answer that question and only you will carry the consequences of it. "

I have been playing guitar 1234 for 53 years; and bass 1234 for 15 years. No left hand problems - at least not from electric bass.
 
My first formal instructions taught 124 fingering. I had an DB bass playing teacher. That worked well. Over time I found the need to be able to use 1234 fingering. At this point I use all, 1234 and make an effort to choose any one finger over another at any time. I've actually find the 123 fingering in the 1st and 2nd positions to work well for me depending on the music. I guess it boils down to what works best for you. I like the spider exercise. I do that everyday. Peace!
 
"Can i play 1234 from the start....sure you can, but can you maintain it though out your life?......only you will answer that question and only you will carry the consequences of it. "

I have been playing guitar 1234 for 53 years; and bass 1234 for 15 years. No left hand problems - at least not from electric bass.

+1 started on guitar first, I have been trying the 124 method since I hear so much about it but I screw up too much trying to use it, I can see the comfort of it though. It was much easier to learn floating thumb, love not having unwanted notes ring out anymore.