Bilbo

Your point is valid, though. In the 80s and 90s, after studying for years and successfully learning things like Jeff Berlin's stuff on Joe Frazier, his intro to Bruford's Five G, Donna Lee, Portrait of Tracy, Teen Town, Achool Days, Stu Hamm's Country etc, I always operated on the belief that everything was learnable given enough time and attention. I still believe that is the case broadly speaking but, over the years, I have met and played (one gig mostly) with some astonishing musicians and I really got a sense that there is a whoie 'nother level that cannot be reached by rote learning but which requires 'insight' as well as 'knowledge' and 'motor skills'. The problem, as I see it, is that, in order to develop this additional insight and to move up to that level, you need total immersion in the genres in question; Jazz in my case but I have no doubt that the same applies to other genres like classical etc. My three hours playing a week isn't going to get me there,

I wouldn't say most music, just most popular music!!

[quote name='visog' timestamp='1431606469' post='2773087'] I love your examples of 'Pop' (a term not used by anyone under 20 since 1983) are both from the '60s. Late '60s mind so you're not too out of date. [/quote] Gigs I do also include Good Times, Valerie, Mercy, a couple of Jesse J tunes, Maroon 5, Happy - it's all in there. My point was that most of it was playable by me when I was two or three years in .

Hate Canteloupe Island and Watermelon Man. Always pulled out by Jazz bands that want to pander to a crowd by playing something 'funky' but they invariably aren't.

Here we go..... https://soundcloud.com/robert-palmer-1/wrong-key-serenade

Ref: Dad's Four track. I have to agree. There are times when old fashioned hardwear is so much easier to use. I have some old cassettes of things I did on one and they sound great. I am not altogether covinced that progress is anything more than going round in circles faster. It's all good.

Biggest audeince ever - 4,000 at a Jazz gig. Smallest - nil (bar staff excluded) at a Rock gig. Same band also drove from Wales to London to play for 3 people. We did have an audience at some gigs though, honest. I don't do nerves. I am a bass player. No-one knows what I am doing so they don't know if I have done it wrong.

I do like these basses. I would never have thought it but there you are.

No worries, mate. I have merged the two threads as I didn't see the longer one and missed your earlier explanation. Your points on why a female teacher are perfectly rational. Good luck with your search. Is Evelyn Glennie in London?

You will probably struggle to find one locally but there are drum female teachers across London. Lorraine Baker and Corrina Sylverster are both brilliant and were in London but have moved out Greenwich and Hertfordshire respectively. I don't know of any others. There is another angle on this, however. Can I ask why the need for a female teacher? I understand the issues on one level but wonder what messages you are sending? Most teachers now have criminal record checks to prove they have no convictions etc. It's pretty tragic if the working assumption is that male teachers are a potential threat when, statistically, this is highly improbable?

Four knobs on a Wal; volume, mixer between pick-ups, bass, treble. Volume on 4, mixer slightly, but only slightly, favouring treble, bass up full, treble on 9. I keep the volume low because, in the musics I play, an 'awesome' bass sound doesn't work. It needs to sit comfortably in the mix rather than overwhelm it. Actually, reviewing the above, I realised I do change it at times. I do a pop gig with the occasional reggae tune and then I pull the treble back and increase the mix in favour of the bass pick up. I also, once in a while, do that guitarist's trick of using the volume control to mirror the effect of a volume pedal. The controls have an incredible range on a Wal and I can actually recreate a wah pedal as well, albeit less effectively than the volume trick. The bass tone knob is less accessible.

Andy Watson and Simon Hurley. Here is the webpage for the gig. http://jazzeast.vpweb.co.uk/This-week.html

Lovely Jazz quartet gig with two guitars, bass and drums. Beautiful playing from all parties and some sublime interplay across the piece. Big smiles all round.

For my money, the problem with Yamaha instruments is that, when they first started appearing in the lates 70s/early 80s, they were essentially all copies, both guitars and basses. As a result, the mind set was (and, to my mind, remains) why buy a copy when you can have the real thing (be that a Fender,. Gibson etc). They have undoubtedly moved on but, a bit like Skodas, it remains difficult to shake the historical rep. People who came later are less likley to recognise that history and just hear/see what they hear/see, clearly a more sensible approach. So, in response to the OP, the 'best' Yamaha would, in many people's eyes, be starting with a compromise. Unreasonably so, I am sure, but there you are.

I had an interesting discussion with a musician friend last night after doing two gigs with him in three days. The first gig was a 'pop' gig on electric bass, a function full of generally run-of-the-mill pop standards; Alfie, Son Of Preacher Man etc. The second was a Jazz gig on double bass playing charted arrangements of standards. The discussion related to the fact that, as most of my gigs are now on double bass, I commented that I had found my electric chops were more than a little rusty on the earlier gig and that I felt that I needed to get them back up to scratch. THe problem is that I only seem to be playing about 4 gigs a year on electric and, as those are pop gigs, the question was 'how much technique is enough'? I am not going to be doing Victor Wooten stuff or even 'Rhythm Stick'; it's all a lot more 'functional' than that. My friend suggested that, as I was doing so few electric gigs, it didn't matter that much. We got talking about the concept of a musicans 'fantasy life' versus their 'real life'. I have spent decades playing music and, thoughout that time, have invested a lot of time and effort in developing my technique. I listen to the best players and try to emulate the best qualities of each. Whilst I generally fail in the absolute sense, this is more a case of 'if you reach for the moon, you may get to the stars' (or whatever the saying is) and that, whilst I cannot quite cut Jaco, I can play most of the more difficult stuff within reason and, with proper rehearsal, can usually nail the rest. The problem is that I never will. I 'real life', I live in an East Anglian seaside town with a population of a few thousand. The quality of local Jazz is defined pretty much by me in that I put the main gigs on around here and no-on else is doing anything in which I am likely to be (or even want to be) involved. There are a couple of guys working locally who are cool players but they are certainly no better than I am. The other (non-bass playing) musicians are just doing their thing and mostly use double bass players like me; no better and no worse. All of them require functional bass players and never write/arrange anything that requires Neils Henning Orsted Pederson quality playing, just the usual quarter notes with the occasional written part in arranged sections. We came to the concusion that, as we live in the sticks, we are never going to get called to dep on a Weather Report gig or the replace Matt Garrison with Herbie Hancock, nor are we likely to get Miguel Zenon turning up with a set of charts that massively catch us out. These 'fantasy gigs' are for London players, New York players, people whose lives have taken them to the large population centres where these tough gigs are born. For the kinds of gigs I do, I probably had the requisite technique when I was about 20. Knowledge of music, knowing what works in making good music, is much more important than chops. (For the record, last night's gig was a real pleasure).

I used to knock around with these guys (if you look closely on the credits on the album, I am mentioned as 'the other Rob Palmer); they toured with Magnum and had Grant Nicholas from Feeder as lead vocalist for a period, They have reformed and are about to play some Prog festivals etc. Some ok material and I don't like to be disloyal but the name....?

Remember when singles were 7" and we all had the pleasure of an unexpected b-side? Occasionally, you would get what they called a 'double A side' with the two faces alternating in air-play etc but, mostly, the b-side was an album track or even a track not available anywhere else. A couple I remember being quite impressed by were 'Own Up, Take A Look At Yourself' by The Sweet and, a song that I have loved for years now, 'Evidence of Autumn' by Genesis (b-side to 'Misunderstanding'). There will be others but I always remember thinking that, often, the b-sides were the better songs.

I would say at the D also. Try blowing over it and you will find the scales you use change at the D not at the A.

There are millions - Queen - This Thing Called Love - that faux rockabilly thing just hacked me off at the time and ever since Moondance - nuff said With a tiny number of exceptions, most 'sixties' music - just hated the bubblegum nonsensicality of it all (is that a word?) Most Motown - great bass lines, crap lyrics Good Times - Chic - never got what the fuss was about 'groove'-wise but the lyrics are the pits Rod Stewart - always want to like him but his material is all so lame espacially the worst abomionation We Are Sailing Mull of Kintyre - hated it then, hate it now. Love 'Silly Love Songs' and 'Live and Let Die' but MoK? Icky beyond belief!! Hit The Road Jack - utterly pointless I could go on AAAAAAAAAAALLL day (and often do)

I always take out the mid-range. Bass on 8, Treble on 9, mid on 2 - tweaked to deal with the room. Of course, everyone talks about my sound. Everyone.

I remember watcing the Eurovision contest when the Riverdance thing was first seen. It was absolutely breathtaking and a total gamechanger for Irsih dance, culture and music. I remember that haunting vocal opening the piece and it building from there to that massive finale with a million dancers, it really was spectacular in the real sense of the word. I have seen videos of the shows that have grown out of the phenomenon and they are never less than brilliant. Shame if they are dropping live music, though. It cheapens the product.

Of course it would but there are 1,000 other songs that wouldn't and which don't have words that are made up like fantabulous and, indeed, moondance. You could also clear the floor with any number of great tunes. A full dance floor is not the only way to entertain people. I have never seen a full dance floor at a Billy Connolly gig. Doesn't mean it isn't entertaining.

Acoustic Image Clarus. They come up quite often on here. Perfick for double bass. http://mobi.acousticimg.com/products/clarus.php

You should listen to Trilok Gurtu soloing. He does astonishing things with the time when he is soloing against a figure.

Not read the whole thread but I am astonished that someone refers to pros as 'pretentious' for discussing a well established musical phenomenon. PLaying ahead of or behind is perfectly recognisable and anyone with any experience can choose, in any given scenario, to play one way or the other. Of course, there will be a natural tendency, just as there is a tendency for people from one area to speak with a local accent. That doesn't mean that we cannot learn another way of speaking. If you play a lot of reggae, you will get comforatble playying behind the beat. If it's be-bop, you will proably play ahead of the beat. It's not set in stone and it is entirely comp[etence based rather than 'in your DNA'.