jakenewmanbass

Ok, loads of the suggestons so far are really sound, Bilbo, rslaing, and XB26354 are hitting nails on head imo. So I don't have a great deal more to add other than to re-iterate a few important essentials. First and most important is: really learn to rely on the roots of the changes, they generally happen fast in be bop so a lot of the movement is taken care of simply by the passage of the chords. You should play through the tunes many times over just using roots and minims, where there is only one chord in a bar play the same root (or an octave) twice. Doing this will solidify the movement of the changes in your head. Once you have done this for a few tunes (and I agree you're in at the deep end with the tunes mentioned) you should start to feel a sense of anticipation of what the (chord) movement is, this is when you can (mentally aurally) predict an upcoming sound, then you can start to look for those notes (and hopefully find and play them) that lend themselves to making those movements successful, then your discovery of closely related harmonic possibility comes into play. As mentioned you should start with very obvious notes, root, fifth, third surrounding semi tones (or side slips). As your pallette of available notes grows you should investigate the theoretical possibilities and try some of them out (cycling in fifths and chord and root substitutions and alterations, re-harmonising using established alternatives and eventually delving into altered harmony and the many scales that will get you through these changes) Very important to remember that as a bassist you are anchoring the harmonic structure, as no matter what goes on above, it is only an (eg) F chord when you put an F at the bottom, this is actually quite a useful responsibility as it means you can go a very long way sticking to the core harmonic structure of a piece. Getting too 'interesting' too soon leads to a harmonic mess, unless you are very well crafted at relaying the changes via wider harmonic structure (think Dave Holland), however this concept is extremely advanced. A great set of changes for this process is Rhythm Changes (I got Rhythm) the possibilities are endless. But in any tune it's imperative that you learn to listen to the harmonic movement being employed by the pianist (accompanist) and solo instrument as you should after time be able to follow the movements and various substitutions that they will use to make the process interesting. A very important footnote.... A fundamentally critical element of this working well is how it feels..... My advice: get jaw droppingly good at minims and crochets, too much messing around rhythmically makes it sound like a mess. If you play with a swing feel right and really drive the band along you would never be criticised for your choices. If you mess around your whole playing will come under unfriendly scrutiny. I know some players that won't play four in a bar, and many people/players (often secretly) heavily criticise them for it. Feel free to delve into my ramblings and expose badly explained passages and where possible I will expand and I'm sure some of the other contributors will be able to also. Jake

As a teacher of many years I feel that it depends on where you're at, and what you want to achieve. When I taught at colleges I had some students, that were on a degree course every week doing hard study and covering a range of subject matter that would equiip for a pro world. When I have private students these days I tend to give them enough material in a 1-2 hr lesson that (if they do it right) will keep them busy for a while, which is essentially them teaching themselves, I think the single most important aspect of being taught is that a good teacher will spot what you need (when you can't see it) and give you ideas you would never have even thought of. Teaching yourself is perfectly good as music is just out there for you to work out, if you are good enough and work hard enough you will achieve what you need, anything less than good enough though, and you would save yourself a lot of time by getting a few lessons. Finally a really good teacher (which is what I [i]try[/i] to be) will make you feel good about what you do and encourage in just the right measure to give slight euphoria and slightly confused hunger leaving you wanting more.... and while you keep wanting more.... you're getting better... and you'll barely notice.

[quote name='bassace' post='484533' date='May 10 2009, 07:55 PM']BB do you really use a Sansamp with a Double Bass? I've searched all over and found plenty of refs re bass guitars but no instances of DB. Is it really that good?[/quote] I saw Tom Mason (London Bassist) on a gig and he had a sans amp for his DB, nice bass to start with, into sans amp into markbass combo.... great sound. I have the Fishman Platinum pro which I bought from a basschatter, it's absolutely fantastic. Most of the time I go direct into the PA and given that I keep a bass in the van of my main bread an butter gig it makes for very easy get ins' (think smaller than a bag of sugar) When freelancing I use it in front of a BK electronics power amp into a Schroeder 212L (sometimes with an Alembic pre in between for extra loud) The single best thing about the Fishman for me is that it can be wound right up til feedback occurs and then just switch the phase (it has a switch) to eliminate it so with a bit of tweaking of the eq a great natural sound can be achieved.

Been away for a few days, and on my way to a gig now, will post a lengthy answer to this tonight. Jake

Join the MU and they send you a certificate immediately and the cover, up to 10M, is automatically in place. Also there is an equipment insurance scheme where the first £1000 (i think) is free, plus they are a great resource for advice and will ultimately handle any issues you have of a legal nature, including recovering unpaid fees. I've been a member since 1991. Well worth it in my view.

I like it now it's calmer. There's a lot to be gleaned from the experience that resides in this debate

[quote name='rslaing' post='479571' date='May 5 2009, 12:05 AM']Don't take this personally. I have always found that if a "non reader" has talent, they can fit in ok in to an organised band of people who can follow the dots.[/quote] I couldn't take it personally I am a reader, and I agree with most of your points regarding it's value. [quote name='rslaing' post='479571' date='May 5 2009, 12:05 AM']Luck............is preparation meeting opportunity. Be prepared by being the best you can be, and create your own opportunities.[/quote] Totally agree. One final point, Ike ate music in a way that had to be experienced to be believed, he was no slouch in rehearsal and it would never have impacted on the efficiency. The other Zappa guy was Bobby Martin. He could read anything on five different instruments. evidence for both sides eh?

[quote name='AM1' post='479534' date='May 4 2009, 11:10 PM']Jake Thanks for the measured reply. It is nice to see that someone can still conduct themselves in a civilised manner here, whilst offering an alternative perspective.[/quote] You're welcome, I seriously enjoy this kind of interesting enlightening and informed debate. I will always find in others, however rancourously put, material to which I have hitherto not been party. [quote name='AM1' post='479534' date='May 4 2009, 11:10 PM']Different conductors interpret music differently - but the point this, they all start from the same written music but can offer varying creative input to an ensemble, - [b]because[/b] they can read.[/quote] Of course you are right and my earlier posts confirm that I feel this way, I am simply saying that there is more besides, and that is not on paper generally, it's in our hearts and souls.

[quote name='rslaing' post='479512' date='May 4 2009, 10:50 PM']And the conductor reads from a score, specifically in rehearsals, and as a reference in the live concert performance. And all of the musicians in the performance read music. They certainly aren't busking................so why doesn't the orchestra employ people who can't read music? And why did Frank Zappa orchestrate all of his music? At least for initial rehearsals? Its fairly obvious, isn't it?[/quote] If you read my posts you'll find that at times and for certain reasons I have been as strong an advocate for the necessity in music for reading skills as you have, so I wonder why you find it necessary to reiterate points that you have already made. I'm asking no more of this debate than that people find merit in what others have to say. I wholeheartedly agree with your points on convenience but having been as close to Zappas music as I have (played with 2 of his band members and toured a show of his music, and an orchestral premier of new music in homage to his classical side) But since you ask "why did Zappa orchestrate" you know I know the answer (unless you don't read my posts) I would answer with another question: Why through the history of his output did he employ non readers like Ike? Do you think it's because even someone of his standing ability and genius didn't consider non formally trained musicians to be "lazy, can't be arsed" and all the other extremely denigrating remarks you've made about non readers. Many of your points carry weight, some of your terminology is uncalled for. As for the conductor reading from a score, yes he does but the variety of performances emanating from the myriad recordings that have been made suggest that the score is not quite enough.... Why? because humanity, expression, personality is required... none of which is captured on the page.

[quote name='AM1' post='479383' date='May 4 2009, 09:04 PM']For musicians to become more learned, half the battle is overcoming this increasingly prevalent mentality that shunning the rudiments of music in favour of playing by ear, is the way forward. It is not, for many musicians who ignore the basic building blocks available, they will hit a wall and the difference between being average, or being outstanding is partly determined by mental attitude and how one progresses through those walls.[/quote] I don't see the evidence for this. In a professional career spanning 20yrs and most genres, I have encountered music and musicians from all denominations and paths of learning, the people who are sufficiantly motivated to become brilliant (and I've had the joy of performing with some truly world class musicians) will become brilliant through talent first and method second. The talent exists, the learning is a means to an end. I know many musicians who are trained to the very highest standards that are available in the entire world of music education, and they themselves in my experience have a reverence for sheer talent trained or not. Talent is understood and accepted by the very highest authorities. The people who lack talent but have a great work ethic will also do well but are generally not top flight performers in the same way. Talent and energy for work ethic combined is the most formidable category of musician, in my experience these people have a seemingly endless capacity for absorbing and reproducing music, Interestingly the work ethic is not necassarily a formal, training it might be years learning repertoire or simply gobbling up (very quickly) all music available. An example: I had the great good fortune to tour Europe with Ike Willis singer with Frank Zappa for 12 yrs, Ike was and is a ferocious talent. His methods of learning were not formal but on evenings off we would listen to music and it became clear that his knowledge is encyclopaedic, he sang every part from hundreds of albums, he knew all instrumentation, all drum fills, this guy was a gigantic musical sponge, I would say without hesitation he is likely more talented than any one person that has ever posted on Basschat, he had not a scrap of formality in his method, however he was as formidable a musician as you could meet. His tradition (the aural tradition) as I pointed out in my earlier post has every bit of equal integrity to the relatively nascent formal music training that western Europe has given to the world in recent centuries. His tradition (one which I hold myself and give great store to is handed down from thousands of years of hearing and re creating music. That my friends carries every bit as much, if not more value, depth, integrity as any system of notation. The best evidence for which lies in the question: Why does an orchestra need a conductor? The answer: cos there's not enough on the page to go off. A conductor brings the music to life. Check out five different recordings of a classical composition and you will hear that the aural tradition of hearing, feeling and interpreting music is very much alive...

[quote name='rslaing' post='479264' date='May 4 2009, 07:27 PM']Just my opinion................[/quote] Opinion it may be but as a *one time music education professional to another (Bass tutor and ensemble musicianship tutor Salford university. Bass, theory, business studies lecturer 'The Arts Centre' Liverpool) I'm challenging your positioning on impartiality in delivering material to the young musicians of this country, I feel it's more than a little 'Ivory Tower' to talk about the merits of a Jazz Guitarists output whilst feeling the need to place 'POP' music in capitals and quotation marks as though you feel dirty handling them, and describing Ray Charles as cornball and intimating that Stevie Wonders' worth is simply as a "good POP writer" these are serious and valid contributions to the history of music and in my mind carry a similar import to Bach, through Gerswin and into contemporary modern music. I am remembering that this is a forum for debate so please see this as an intellectual challenge, I am in no way wishing to descend into the insulting foray we have seen earlier, however my points are very seriously put to you for consideration. *I say 'one time music education professional' as I only had a teaching career while my kids were young I am now a full time bass player, producer, and MD.

[quote name='rslaing' post='479217' date='May 4 2009, 06:50 PM']I also suggest that if you want to listen to an alternative and brilliant interpretation of some of Ray Charles stuff, you listen to Jon Scofield playing his own interpretation of Ray Charles songs on "John Scofield - That's What I Say - John Scofield Plays the Music of Ray Charles (2005)" Betas the pants off the cornball originals.[/quote] I think the fact that John Schofield chose to re interpret those classics suggests he holds Ray Charles in higher regard than to call him cornball, and your 'POP' music description suggests that you seem to think you're thinking somewhere higher than all that, if thats the case then as a person employed in music education I think you should possibly re visit your reasoning. Music for people (indeed the populous) is valid. Cornball is your judgement only, and despite feeling your advocacy for reading has at times been well placed I'm beginning to see you more in an elitist light. You're welcome to your position on the integrity of types of music but you have no place being high minded about the value of music in the eyes or ears of the listener.

[quote name='The Bass Doc' post='479160' date='May 4 2009, 05:49 PM']I'm a tad surprised that no-one on the side opposite the 'should read' part of the discussion hasn't mentioned the talents of Stevie Wonder 'cos apparently he doesn't (read that is - unless there is a form of braille 'notation'? - Serious query that BTW)[/quote] There are tons of great musicians that don't read, that however does not undermine nor suggest any lesser musical ability for the reader (which I feel that some people would like to believe) It's all valid, reading or not, music is music. if it sounds good, it is good thats the only test... whether it was brought to you by readers or non readers or the soup dragon (google 'the clangers') If you want a career in music learning to read is and can be useful but it is not a pre-requisite to success.

[quote name='steve-soar' post='479126' date='May 4 2009, 05:20 PM']Apologies for last night. [/quote] No need to apologise Steve

[quote name='Musky' post='478910' date='May 4 2009, 12:21 PM']Hmm... [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signatures#.22Irrational.22_meters"]this[/url] would seem to suggest that's not the case.[/quote] I stand corrected post duly withdrawn... however there is enough info early on in the thread to get the OP through his question and as always it's good to have new info brought to one's attention. It's worth noting though that these examples lie at the very edges of music and even though theoretically accurate they often serve to confuse when introduced at this level. (they have literally been used by a handful of writers in the history of music). As the article itself points out: "It is arguable whether the use of these signatures makes metric relationships clearer or more obscure to the musician; it is always possible to write a passage using non-"irrational" signatures by specifying a relationship between some note length in the previous bar and some other in the succeeding one. "

[quote name='steve-soar' post='478687' date='May 4 2009, 12:04 AM']Here is a young bassist who needs advice and the last three posts are confusing, sarcastic and then less sarcastic.[/quote] Check out post No.4 Steve... (and then No.6) and I have to agree with OTPJ that his is a pretty straight up and down explanation (in graphic form) Possibly the "He must have invented a new note length" is a little sarcastic but the fact that it doesn't exist is true and it's just the british way to be a little ascerbic in imparting info (high definition culture and all that) so the guy gets to learn the subtleties of rhythmic subdivision and chivvying style in one go.... I really think it's all fine here mate

[quote name='doctor_of_the_bass' post='478632' date='May 3 2009, 10:45 PM']He must have invented a new note length value then - perhaps its me but there is no such thing as a Seventh note![/quote] +1

and another thing..... playing by ear is a bad idea as ears are not as hard wearing as fingers... ta bum tish bleedin 'ell talk about a tumbleweed moment.... where's everyone gone

[quote name='lowdown' post='478497' date='May 3 2009, 08:30 PM']I wonder if he sight reads well. [/quote] That subject is like swine flu...

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='478591' date='May 3 2009, 09:50 PM']I PM'd that post to Jake 10 minutes ago and he nicked it off me.[/quote] I hang on your every word... I would wear a dress if I thought you'd notice me... Oh Beefy... sigh...

My earlier post in this debate was regarding the commercial value of reading musicians and how merit of method is irrelevant when the music has to be down on tape.... NOW... In the earlier debate on this subject I remember saying (and I think it's worth remembering) that music as a means of entertainment, courtship, memory, nostalgia, feeling, excitement and whatever else it has done for mankind has existed for a very long time, probably started with banging stones together. On the other hand a written system of notation has existed for about four hundred years, so I would say that I disagree that higher standards of musicianhip can be attained by learning to read (and I am a reader) more music is available to you, thats true, more diversity is available to you, more immediacy is available to you.... [b]A better musician[/b]??? [b]Nah[/b]... no chance.... the integrity invoved in the aural tradition of music making has a pedigree probably going back tens of thousands of years and if neuro scientists are to be believed, our very evolution alongside music making has meant that music is actually embedded in our make up, and chimes with our core. Written music on the other hand is a convenient and (relatively) modern cerebral system to represent something much deeper than the notes on the page can ever convey. Listen chaps lets not denigrate one anothers points by assuming that we each of us have the definitive answer to this, which should be an interesting debate, rather we each of us have nuggets of info and experiences that open minds would allow us to find interesting in one another. Music goes beyond reading, but reading is a seriously useful and highly developed tool which can be used to create some wonderful things (and some sh*te), go to the south bank and see an orchestra, whatever you think of the music, you'll be impressed by the animal (the orchestra) that makes it....

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='478434' date='May 3 2009, 07:07 PM']? . And that's BBC, who doesn't count.[/quote] Now you've made me want to give that reprobate a hug jeez

[quote name='rockabilly drummer' post='478103' date='May 3 2009, 10:28 AM']Hi, im putting together a new band in glasgow sort of 50s style stuff with female vocals. anyone interested, age etc is not an issue. [email protected] cheers del.[/quote] dlloyd (memeber here) is a DB player in your area.

[quote name='lowdown' post='477685' date='May 2 2009, 01:43 PM']Good one Jake.. As always. How was the middle East? Was the 7 star food in the bins at the back of 7 star hotel to your liking, sir? Garry[/quote] Cheers Garry The trip was great, we had hotel rooms bigger than the ground floor of my house. Pool and gym on top of the hotel, fantastic food, as you can tell it was.... hell . Bahrain is much quieter than Dubai, nice people and lovely weather (bit of a breeze as it's an Island so not killing heat) Should be going back early next year the fixer likes us. Jake