Bilbo

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'.

[size=6][i]Run while you still can!!!!!! [size=6][/size][/i][/size]

I spent a few hours on it Monday and Tuesday. UInfortunately, it is a load of old b******ks so I have abandoned it and am having a rethink.

[quote name='timhiggins' timestamp='1430828442' post='2764921'] Thanks for the wisdom all its very welcome .. so am i to assume that when Paul Chambers first played/recorded' Giant steps 'he could look at the chart and improvise a walking line at that tempo ? if so i may stick to playing reggae as i'm not sure i will ever get there [/quote] Chambers did have sight of the Giant Steps chart in advance of the sessions and the version that was released was not take one of the first time PC played it. He had recorded it before six weeks earlier on a session that was not released until recently as part of a 'complete sessions' package. Tommy Flanagan played piano on the released session and he had seen the part in advance but had no idea that it would be as fast as it was (the sessions are discussed from p. 190 of Mr. P.C. The life and music of Paul Chambers). Cedar Walton played paino on the earlier version but neither he nor PC solo on it so the expectation that they get through it would not have been that unreasonable. I think Walton admitted that he struggled with it. It is important to acknowledge that some of the performances we hear on the great Jazz recordings can genuinely be take one but others can just as easily be take 26 or whatever. The 'magic' is borne of hard graft and solid practice not because these guys are 'Jazz ninjas'.

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1430810727' post='2764661'] I'm no expert and if it sounds good i'd just go for it [/quote] Yes but 'it sounds good' needs to be informed and the less time you spend with the concept of a walking line, the lower the expectations for it sounding 'good'. I suspect the musicians, producers and engineers who were there when Van Morrison recorded 'Moondance' would have thought that the bass line 'sounded good'. It didn't'; it sucked.

The answer to your question in yes and no (it would be, wouldn't it? ) There is an assumption that the content of a walking bass line is defined by the diatonic context and that, if the chords are diatonically related (i.e. in the same key), then any note in that key will work. Whilst this is techincally correct, it totally of misses the point of what a walking bass line is for and why the note choices matter. If, say, you line is in C major, the theory suggests that you can play a CDEFGA or B and it will be 'correct'. This is basically true but fails to recognise some pretty major issues. You can, in fact, play C C# D D# E F (yes, even F) F# G G# A A# or B depending on what effect you are trying to create. If, for instance, you play a G, it creates a massive amount of tension that you may or may not want in the context in which you are playing. A walking line creates forward motion in a performance and that motion ordinarily references chord changes, be they diatonic of not, so your lines need to reference some element of forward momentum as they move from chord to chord, Playing random diatonic notes will not create this momentum so, whilst the notes may not be 'wrong', the line will suck. A great example of this is the bass playing on 'Moondance' (which is why I hate it). It has no internal logic and doesn't contribute to the music (it detracts from it, if anything). There are also 100 other things to think about when determining your note choices; tempo and dynamics are obvious ones but you need to think in some way about the various approaches to generating tension and release, of supporting the soloist, of responding to ideas being put forward by the other instrumentalists etc. Random notes in the 'roght' key will achieve onoe of this. Ask yourself not whether the note is 'correct' but what it is there for and what it is seeking to contribute. Walking bass lines are the one aspect of Jazz bass playing that takes a minute to learn (what could be easier than straight quarter-notes) and a lifetime to master.

[quote name='UglyDog' timestamp='1430413482' post='2761217'] Bilbo's not in a tribute band, but I'm fairly sure he wants to be... [/quote] I am facing redundancy imminently and may need to be. 'What a marvellous night for a .........'

There are many musicians that speak in these terms and who are absolute masters; John Coltrane, John McLaughlin, John Pattitucci, Jon Anderson are a few that come immediately to mind but there are many many more. I personally think that the issue is hugely profound and what drives people to excellence is a very personal thing. Embracing something like 'a higher power' can be a real turn off for some and a real driver for others. I think the journey to nirvana has many routes but the most diffcult thing about finding your own path lies in the realisation that you are already on it.