Bilbo

1) I'm treating the first bar as a lead in bar, so no crochet rest is required - is this correct? [b]YES[/b] - [b]you could add the rest and it wouldn't be wrong but what you have is perfectly acceptable. [/b] 2) The double bar-line is correct as it indicates the start of the tune excluding the lead in? If it was the case that the tune were to continue, and repeats included for a second verse, then this bar-line would be a repeat sign [b]l[/b]l: and the 3 lead in notes of the melody for the second verse would be in the last bar before a repeat sign :l[b]l[/b] [b]YES but scores tend to have a double bar at the start (like the one you have put at the end of your paragraph but WITHOUT the repeat dots). Given the context, you just have to choose whether you want to honour the tradition. I do have Bach scores where the lead in for the B sections are AFTER the repeat bar and do not feature any rests etc as with your opening bar. I think both options are reasonably common.[/b] 3) Should the accidental be a Bb (followed by a B preceded by a natural sign) instead of A#? I think the song may often be sung with an A natural but I think the accidental sounds nicer. [b]No - the A is sharpened not the B flattened as you are in the key of G which is defined by the F# rather than a Gb. In truth, the original melody note is probably the A anyway, rather than an A# - both make a form of sense but the A# is more 'jazzy' and unlikley to have been in vogue when this tune was written (1939). Unless you access the original tune as a piece of sheet music, you will have to make a decision that you are happy with.[/b] 4) I'm leaving the last bar open to indicate the song should continue, and not filling the bar with rests, or cutting it all together. Any thoughts? [b]I think it works best as you have it [/b] I don't want to get this wrong. [b]Understandable but I think some of these 'wrongs' are not wrong in the way a spelling mistake is, just different. Many staff notation 'rules' are not universal and each composer has their own nuances.[/b]

Sutton, Surrey http://www.healeyviolins.co.uk/

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1441215460' post='2857036'] Sorry Bilbo, I'm missing your point! You seem to be saying that bands that don't rehearse and rely on charts only produce "a poor approximation of the original". Quite obviously, the same said band [i]that rehearse[/i] would a make a better fist of things! Are you just saying that the musicians that you're involved with don't rehearse, and that you're not enjoying it for that reason? [/quote] Yes and no. Obviously a band that rehearses would be a good idea but, in truth, properly produced charts and reading musicians can achieve the same outcome but then they would have to have music stands on the stage and we wouldn't want that now, would we?

Very good points. I am thinking that the problem isn't what I thought it was. It is the lack of an arrangement that is the issue. When I do function gigs, I am often presented with a chord chart that says F, Bb, C7 etc and then, occasionally, not always, something like 'Funky', or 'Shuffle'. The band never rehearses but just launches into a version that is based around some sort of shared consensus of what the thing kind of sounds like nearly. I have an idea of the bass part (from a distant recollection of hearing the tune once on a radio or even just on some concept of what 'Funky' or 'Shuffle' means) and everyone else has a nearly but not quite concept of the tune in their own mind. Because the end result is inevitably a poor approximation of the original, it sucks. If someone comes in with a properly prepared chart or some specific arrangement ideas ('let's do X in 5:4', play the A section with bass and vocals only or whatever), then it often works. It's not the production on the original that is the problem, it is the lack of thought put into an arrangement for teh actual ensemble that is about to play it. I am glad we had this conversation.

I was thinking about this in realtion to the Uptown Funk tone thread started a couple of days ago. One of the problems I increasingly experience with popular music of the current era is the relationship between the material being performed and the production vlaues thereof. The issue I have is not that there is a problem with it in itself but that, when people want to 'have a go' and reproduce the hits of the day, the sounds being made are unattainable. The tone of the bass in Uptown Funk is one example obviously but there is much more to this that a bass tone. I did a gig recently where they played Uptown Funk and a load of similar hign production nuimbers and what was obvious to me is that it is all but impossible for a four or five piece band to even begin to approach the feel of the original. A Jazz quartet sounds like a Jazz Quartet, a big band like a big band, a two guitar heavy metal band sounds like a two guitar heavy metal band and so on into Folk, Reggae etc etc. But with Pop recordings littered with complex and layered production, it is almost impossible to get the sounds, the horn parts, the weird production effects, massive vocal harmonies etc etc. As a result, when you play them at gigs, they sound, well, naff; empty, shallow, a shadow of the original. I think we did Happy and that Daft Punk Up All Night thing and, although we were tight and played something approximating the original, they all sounded a but s***. The Beatles Curse thread is interesting also in that the band resutled in a generation or three of guitar based bands knocking out A Hard Days Night but, as it went forward and got more and more intense in terms of the Martin productions, the bands they originally influenced probably got left behind as they couldn't afford to cart along a string quartet or full orchestra and tape effects (hence the Mellotron ). Even if you want to try, the outlay in terms of the kit necessary to pull some of these things off is prohibitive. I am not criticising these productions; it is an art form itself and can be wonderful. Nevertheless, it does make it hard for bands to play convincing versions. Maybe that's the point. Simple arrangements can be done reasonably well, big production numbers can be a nightmare of compromise. I think my problem is that a lot of bands lack the critical sense to know when to leave something alone. And tonight, I am playing 'Close To The Edge' arranged for double bass and harmonica.

The tumbleweed is more about me that it is about the picture It'll come.

PS nothing to do with me. Not even in jest.

I wuz robbed....

Guess. Go on, guess.

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1441101015' post='2855973'] I'm going to guess that your performances are a little less physical than Flea's though. I imagine that sort of thing wouldn't get you asked back to jazz gigs! [/quote] Say you don't know.....

How Bass works has tied us all up for decades. You need to see it as a journey rather than as a destination. FOr a start, the bass works very differently depending on genre so a reggae bass player will have a different perspective that a metal head and so on.

Good solos, bad solos. That's the only distinction.

I never got the issue about Wals and weight. It may be because I am 6'1" and 17 stone and that the 'extra' weight of a Wal is, in percentage terms, relatively minimal. It may also be that I have played one almost exclusively for 29 years and cannot remember what a lighter bass feels like. Compared to manipulating a double bass, it is a dream.

And he's coming up on the inside....

They are idiots?

Three way tie! Unprecedented!!!

[attachment=199696:Signed Sealed Delivered.pdf] Having played this tune 1,000 times on gigs, I thought I would transcribe the thing. No chords (F, Dm7 and Bb mostly!!) just the dots

Try my piece 'Calypso Zoom' on my Soundcloud page (below). It's simple but fun.

Henri Texier played with Steve Swallow in the band and Coltranee Africa has two bass players. Ron Carter had a quartet with him on piccolo bass and another bass player in the rhythm section. Stanley Clarke had a band with Jimmy Earl on bass. The kid is not pushy, he just knows his Jazz history.....

And as for Vanessa Feltz, my seven string bass can lie on the floor.

I always think that this is a loaded question. I prefer Jazz (I know that comes as a surprise to many of you) and would only ever buy Jazz or pay to watch Jazz or even (mostly) accept gigs playing Jazz. On the face of it, I look narrow-minded. The truth is that I would be perfectly willing to listen to good examples of most other genres if I was locked in a lift or sat in someone elses house but, if I have a choice, based in the finite time I have for listening and playing and the finite budget I have for music related products, I would, in most instances, [i]prioritise[/i] Jazz. I downloaded The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway last month!!

Goddamn brilliant!!

Slash chords are generally (but not always) simple the first chord with a defined choice of 'root'. C/E is a C chord with the third in the bass Cm7/Eb is a Cm chord with the flattened third in the bass C/G is a C chord with a fifth in the bass C/Bb has a flattened seventh in the bass and so on. As Ras says, in this case, the Bm7b5 chord is played with the b5 in the bass.

In the US, bands used to have residencies where they played the same venue every night for two weeks. Alternatively, you have people like Mike Stern who has played the 55 Club every Monday for decades. Take the gig.