Why play a 6 string?

[vilkai]

Just to make a quick cavalry charge through the argumentation which sadly prevails on the fora we build... Ok I'm being flippant here.

and in the words of marcus miller,

"it helps if you play the right notes too"

Amazingly, mr. Miller thinks it's better to play the right notes and not wrong ones. If only he gave fool-proof guidance as to what the right notes are!

Isn't it amazing that the most respected bass players "generally" play an old fender or similar 4 string.

Most respected by whom? I can assure you the players I most respect have probably owned an electric bass at some point in their lives but cut their seminal tracks long before fender bass meant anything but a crutch for those lacking in technique or intonation. On instruments featuring keyboards.

I always figured the B can be used no problem but going up in pitch just means you really should become a guitarist.

I guess the Berlin Filharmoniker are all guitarist wannabes then? They play in 444 these days! Jaysis what amateur clueless gear whores.

Also, I heard some comment that as soon as the B is there the E is weaker. So they prefer no to do it unless that B will get some use.

I thought we were talking about bass, not treble.

I think you may be taking excuses at face value here. Certainly from a psychological angle the .100 or .105 string loses in importance when a .125 is added below it.

Some of the most trebly tones I've heard come from bassists playing on 4-string fenders - Steve Harris for ex.

 

[Stickk]

The intonation suffers alot? What?

 

[aludrachaos]

Oh, and JT, I don't know what's more impressive, that bass collection or the couch they're chilling on. More cushion for the plushin'!

The cats sniffing 'em.

 

[mlowe]

I think the miller comment was more a case of string numbers and equipment simply isn't the point when it come to creativity or talent.

As for six string bass, is there a right or wrong answer in any case? Isn't it a good example of the word subjective. My answer to the original poster would probably go like this,

1. Who's to tell you what kind of instrument you should play. Your the bass player. Do you tell the drummer what cymbals to use or the guitarist he should be playing a gibson instead of a fender.

2. Given your six string still has the range right in the middle that a typical 4 string p or stingray etc etc had what would they know.

3. Given it's metal wouldn't pickup type and preampts etc play a bigger part in how you sound in the mix? Not the string count.

Each to their own I think but the argument about being a better player because your scales cross more strings imo is total BS. The bass by nature in a band has its place as part of a whole and I guess the name of the instrument may give that clue away.

No I still understand the point of everyone different and there is no "correct" definition of how everyone should be the same but when you need a hammer why pickup a screwdriver?

I guess an 11 string bass if it was a tool would be a chainsaw with a built in spray gun. lol.

I don't mean at all any disrespect to those who play bass with high string count and can see that it would be a challenge. But wasn't it also a bigger challenge to come up with a killer groove using least notes that make people move?

Audience?

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Each to their own I think but the argument about being a better player because your scales cross more strings imo is total BS.

Did someone say that in this thread? That's pretty ridiculous if they did....just look at my user title

The bass by nature in a band has its place as part of a whole and I guess the name of the instrument may give that clue away.

I agree that it certainly has its place in most "normal" band contexts though. I associate "bass" with the sound of the instrument though- it's a deeper-sounding guitar. I've brought this up in the past before- I once jammed with someone playing percussion and a didgeridoo player. While the five-string I was playing could have gone lower than the didgeridoo, my instrument became the melodic one as it was the only one capable of creating a melody. I've also heard many badass, low register grooves played on guitar, so a bass guitar playing higher than it would be very complimentary. It all depends on what you're trying to achieve.

No I still understand the point of everyone different and there is no "correct" definition of how everyone should be the same but when you need a hammer why pickup a screwdriver?

If only music was so specific If your only goal is to play low register grooves and nothing else, then it would make a lot more sense to pick up a four-string and be done with it. If your goal is to do more though, then it would make sense to broaden your options. I love the sound of bass in all of its registers, from the bottom of the low B to the top of the high C, and even with some nuance the sound of a high F. Getting a different instrument wouldn't give me all those sounds that I like. If you like chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry ice cream, then why only get chocolate if Neopolitan is available to you?

I don't mean at all any disrespect to those who play bass with high string count and can see that it would be a challenge. But wasn't it also a bigger challenge to come up with a killer groove using least notes that make people move?

Audience?

I don't play sixes because they are a challenge. I wish they were less challenging in fact It's just as much a challenge to make a killer groove on a six, but keep in mind that there's a whole lot of music out there that doesn't involve trying to make people dance. Lots of music doesn't try to groove, either.

 

[SGD Lutherie]

I always figured the B can be used no problem but going up in pitch just means you really should become a guitarist.

You are a guitarist... a bass guitarist. The two instruments pretty much overlap in their most used ranges anyway. Guitar players often solo in the upper range because it's not used for rhythm playing. Even upright jazz players solo in the upper range, probably because it's easier to hear. Where does a pianist solo? Not usually in the bass register! They play melodies with the right hand in the upper registers. That's just the way music is. We are used to hearing melodies in the upper octaves. Same with singers.

To say if someone solos in the upper range of their bass that they should become a guitar player is like saying if you can't solo on bass you should become a drummer!

Soloing is just playing an improvised bass line. It's another skill. Improvising is an important skill to have, unless you only want to play other people's lines. It's composing on the spot.

Personally I solo in the full range of the instrument, if that's where I happen to end up. It's a misconception that a six string bass goes up as high as a guitar or something. It really doesn't. You only get a hand full of higher notes... and in my case only about 4.

But it does allow you to access wider intervals without shifting positions as much, which is why Anthony Jackson invented the thing.

As much as I solo, I still play a 5 string, because I love the low B. But I can also play lead guitar, so...

Also, I heard some comment that as soon as the B is there the E is weaker. So they prefer no to do it unless that B will get some use.

I've heard that nonsense too, and it's just that; nonsense. If someone really knows how to play, they will see that they can play things on the B that they would be doing on the E, but higher up on the neck. If people are only using the B as a finger rest until they play notes lower than E, well then they have lousy technique is all.

More than likely having the low B makes some players attack the low E differently, and it seems weaker. That's back to lousy technique. But there's no scientific reason why the E would be weaker, just because you stuck a lower string next to it. That's just silly. Some people play a 5 string with a high C, so is the G now weaker? There is a lot of FUD on the internet.

 

[wideyes]

I think wider intervals with less motion is the best reasoning I've heard to own a six-string bass. When I first saw a 5 stringer, I thought it was a lesson in hi-fi modern bassist excess. I have since come to respect these instruments for the options they open up, but remain myself skeptical of owning one. The assertion that you should just put down the bass and pick up a guitar if you want to play higher notes is ludicrous -- having said that, to MY ear, notes start lacking clarity when approaching the upper end of the pitch spectrum on the bass. Perhaps those who solo on their 6/7 string basses use specific gear/settings to bring that range to life on their own rigs - any comments about that, 6+ stringers? And when people talk about playing chords on theirs, are we talking 6-string barre-chord strums here? To my mind that would be poo-soup, tonally! It's the same thought I've had when hearing piano compositions that have a heavy low-end chordal presence -- it actually lowers the impact and punch of the music, IMO. I see the logic behind stratifying instruments into their respective octave groups and discouraging too much pitch-overlap. The orchestral strings are a good example of this. Interestingly, they all have 4 strings. I'm sure that leaving space for bowing has something to do with this, but I've noticed they all lose something when players try to achieve pitches beyond the range they are optimized for. Our hi-fi modern electric basses are not necessarily subject to the same limitations, but my ears have told me (in the private language we share) a similar story regarding them.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

I think wider intervals with less motion is the best reasoning I've heard to own a six-string bass. When I first saw a 5 stringer, I thought it was a lesson in hi-fi modern bassist excess.

Really? The first mass-produced five-stringers were the Fender Bass Vs, and they came out in 1965. I wouldn't call those either hi-fi or modern

-- having said that, to MY ear, notes start lacking clarity when approaching the upper end of the pitch spectrum on the bass. Perhaps those who solo on their 6/7 string basses use specific gear/settings to bring that range to life on their own rigs - any comments about that, 6+ stringers?

Thinner strings will, in general, add clarity. Playing on any part of a C string will likely be more clear than playing on any register of an E,A,D or G string. I often add fuzz/distortion when playing solos higher up to thicken up the sound a bit as it can be too clear at times and to add sustain.

And when people talk about playing chords on theirs, are we talking 6-string barre-chord strums here? To my mind that would be poo-soup, tonally!

Three and four-note chords comprise the majority of chords that I've seen/heard bassists play, much like jazz guitarists. 6-string barre chords on electric guitar often sound fairly muddy as well.

The orchestral strings are a good example of this. Interestingly, they all have 4 strings. I'm sure that leaving space for bowing has something to do with this, but I've noticed they all lose something when players try to achieve pitches beyond the range they are optimized for. Our hi-fi modern electric basses are not necessarily subject to the same limitations, but my ears have told me (in the private language we share) a similar story regarding them.

That's only currently. Orchestral instruments go through phases throughout the centuries of having different numbers of strings. I'm sure within another 150 years, the popular number of strings on orchestral instruments will vary themselves again. Many orchestras require bassists to have either a five-string double bass or a low C extension on their four-strings even in this time period.

 

[groooooove]

any doesent anyone ever give piano players a hard time about having too many notes?

its the same thing.

six strings have no drawbacks. you can do everything on a 6 that you can do on a 4. you cant do everything on a 4 that you can on a six. even if the option goes unused (ie chords and solos) isint it nice to know you COULD if you wanted too, or if it was appropriate?

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

six strings have no drawbacks.

I play sixes exclusively now, and even I wouldn't say that Muting is a bigger concern with a six, no two ways about that. And there will usually be at least a 1.5+ pound difference between a six and a similarly designed four-string. That's not a big deal for most people, but it can be an issue for anyone with back/shoulder problems.

 

[BananaKing]

Really? The first mass-produced five-stringers were the Fender Bass Vs, and they came out in 1965. I wouldn't call those either hi-fi or modern

And it had a High C string and 15 frets.

There is all this talk that Basses HAVE to have a Low B. The first real electric ERB of any kind had an extra high string.

Thinner strings will, in general, add clarity. Playing on any part of a C string will likely be more clear than playing on any register of an E,A,D or G string. I often add fuzz/distortion when playing solos higher up to thicken up the sound a bit as it can be too clear at times and to add sustain.

Very, Very true. I love the clarity, as it sits somewhere (to my ears) in between a guitar and a piano.

Three and four-note chords comprise the majority of chords that I've seen/heard bassists play, much like jazz guitarists. 6-string barre chords on electric guitar often sound fairly muddy as well.

Usually, I play a root, 3rd, 5th and 7th. If I need more color, I generally replace the 5th with a 9th, or 11th, etc.....

That's only currently. Orchestral instruments go through phases throughout the centuries of having different numbers of strings. I'm sure within another 150 years, the popular number of strings on orchestral instruments will vary themselves again. Many orchestras require bassists to have either a five-string double bass or a low C extension on their four-strings even in this time period.

Remember the Viola Da Gamba?

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Remember the Viola Da Gamba?

I wonder how accurate the rope frets that some of those had were

 

[MrKlaus]

I say listen to your obviously extremely smart band mates. Don't get yourself a six string!
Get a 7 string instead!

 

[Buogon]

Go for it man ,don't let anyone tell you what type of bass to play, unless it is with a major artist and they signs your check $$$$$$. i was once playing with some cats and they were Ibanez crazy, and i had a Fender they told me told get a Ibanez i just laughed at them.

 

[BananaKing]

I wonder how accurate the rope frets that some of those had were

Hahaha.

Probably about as accurate as the Buddha Rope!

 

[SGD Lutherie]

The orchestral strings are a good example of this. Interestingly, they all have 4 strings.

Well they didn't! Here's the ancestor of the upright bass (which is not itself descended from the violin family, which is why it's not turned in 5ths), the Viola da Gamba.

SEVEN strings and FRETS!

Link Removed

The electric bass is really in the guitar family.

 

[wideyes]

The electric bass is really in the guitar family.

True. But I've noticed that few contemporary western stringed instruments feature more than 4 strings unless chords are intended to be played. And those instruments, in my experience, usually suffer tonal degradation as the result of having more strings. The low "E" on most guitars, for instance, usually has less tonal integrity than the rest of the strings - it's approaching the lower bounds of the instrument's useful range. Ever listened to a 7-stringed guitar's low B? It's certainly not to my taste.
Re: the piano, it doesn't sound good across its entire range! And it can't, ever. The same properties that enhance and enrich the lowest piano tones will prevent the higher tones from ringing true, and vice versa. A masterfully built stringed instrument can be, at its best, a good compromise between the demands being made of it, and the trick with each is to see how well the compromise has been handled. It's hard for me to see how a 7-stringed bass guitar could produce good tonality across its entire range, but I'm in no way suggesting it can't be done, just as I am in no way suggesting pianists use shorter scale lengths.

 

[Bocete]

True. But I've noticed that few contemporary western stringed instruments feature more than 4 strings unless chords are intended to be played. And those instruments, in my experience, usually suffer tonal degradation as the result of having more strings. The low "E" on most guitars, for instance, usually has less tonal integrity than the rest of the strings - it's approaching the lower bounds of the instrument's useful range. Ever listened to a 7-stringed guitar's low B? It's certainly not to my taste.
Re: the piano, it doesn't sound good across its entire range! And it can't, ever. The same properties that enhance and enrich the lowest piano tones will prevent the higher tones from ringing true, and vice versa. A masterfully built stringed instrument can be, at its best, a good compromise between the demands being made of it, and the trick with each is to see how well the compromise has been handled. It's hard for me to see how a 7-stringed bass guitar could produce good tonality across its entire range, but I'm in no way suggesting it can't be done, just as I am in no way suggesting pianists use shorter scale lengths.

Piano strings have different scale lengths. Like a harp. That's why their range is so great, and they sound pretty balanced to me. I recall that my piano at school has had 2-3 strings per note that complement eachother.

 

[Doodaddy]

And those instruments, in my experience, usually suffer tonal degradation as the result of having more strings.

Based upon what? Having more strings changes what?

 

[spade2you]

It's hard for me to see how a 7-stringed bass guitar could produce good tonality across its entire range

Fanned frets, careful string selection, shorter overall scale length, etc.