TimR

Same song. Different bass player. http://youtu.be/GqWObKeoET8 http://youtu.be/zO6D_BAuYCI

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430892838' post='2765550'] See this is what I'm talking about. There have been occasions when a drummer might have started a piece slightly too slow or quickly. You as a bass player will obviously follow to a certain point , but you will try and influence the way you want it to go by edging slightly one way or the other. The thing that gets me is, you would be wanting the drummer to , say, slow down, so once he has done this, you would be back on the beat. [/quote] Almost. The drummer doesn't change tempo and the difference between you is almost imperceptible so it feels like you're pulling the drummer along. If the drummer actually sped up you would lose that feel and the tune would sound boring. Often inexperienced musicians will speed up a song because it feels slow, even though they're playing it at the same speed as the original. A close analagy would be if you were driving a car at 40mph and it feels slow. You put your foot down and can feel the acceleration which is exciting but when you reach 70mph you stop accelerating and it soon starts to feel slow again. Obviously you can't keep accelerating as the tune/car would just end up going stupidly fast. It's the tension that gives the effect of urgency.

[quote name='Weststarx' timestamp='1430855518' post='2765345'] I think I get it now... If I were to record myself say playing Smoke on The Water on Guitar against a metronome, and then zoomed in massively on the waveforms I would see whether I am ahead or behind the beat because as humans we all have a sense of rhythm and interpret it differently onto an instrument. It sounds on time in person but on a computer you can see exactly where you are in relation to the beat. Is that about right? If so that was completely pointless spending time trying to work it out because it hasn't helped me in the slightest knowing what I do. [/quote] That is exactly right. Apart from the last bit. In the (patronising?) video I posted earlier, the guy goes into detail about how, and why, we should spend a lot of time getting our internal metronome as close as possible to the metronome. How we should put our timing under the microscope. That even though we think we're pretty good and have been playing for many years, we may be just following the drummer (or other musicians) and not actually influencing the feel of the tune ourselves.

[quote name='fretmeister' timestamp='1430845948' post='2765157'] ... I wonder if the problem is that in rock / pop etc the Mood of the music is dumbed down to Ahead Of the Beat / on The Beat / Behind The Beat rather than the huge amount of terms used to describe the mood that appear in classical music. ... [/quote] I think most of the problem is that in most bands you get a rock drummer who just bangs out a basic 'four to the floor' rhythm and expects everyone to be in time with him. Anyone not in time is 'wrong'. I've played with drummers like that. It's ok for out and out rock or marching bands. But it's no good if you want to dance to the music. It's a revolution when you play with a drummer who has great feel and once you've been spoiled you become very particular with which drummers you play with.

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430845171' post='2765142'] I didn't mean that he was patronising. I thought you were being patronising by posting a video of a guy explaining how to play in time to someone who has been playing in bands for a very long time. I've got no problem with playing in time. It's this playing out of time that I can't handle [/quote] Did you watch the first 10minutes of it? How he explained that no one is controlling the time during a piece of music and that is down to how the individual players rub off on each other?

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430843711' post='2765124'] Very patronising, cheers! [/quote] I thought he explained it wry well. Particularly when he talks about looking at where you place the note, in relation to the pulse, under a microscope. And how playing ahead and behind the beat gives a different feel. If you're finding all this patronising then you are missing out on one of the most important parts of being a musician. Playing in the groove.

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430841173' post='2765082'] I agree that when you have music digitalised and you can actually see the music in front of you, say on a computer screen, then you can move the bass swell to the left or right of the drum swell, which would make the bass behind or in front of the beat, and could alter the feel of the piece,but what I'm saying is a human playing live would struggle to play constantly behind or in front of the beat without sounding out of time. As shown by the clips that have been added to this thread. I agree that it could be done subconsciously I.e. you can get the feel of the piece and drag or rush without thinking. I will carry on playing in time with my drummer and I promise never to delve into the world of jazz to spoil anyone's behind the beat experience! [/quote] It's not jazz. It's all music. This guy explains what playing in a group is all about. http://youtu.be/cYVCfb5Ou88

[quote name='Weststarx' timestamp='1430827611' post='2764901'] Or is it a way of explaining whether a bassist really drives a song forward or whether they sit back and let someone else do it? [/quote] Yes. You can call it drive. Sometimes it's the drummer.

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1430820982' post='2764791'] So where do the fairies come in exactly? [/quote] Just after the bass in the fourth bar.

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1430820626' post='2764784'] I'm going to treasure that sentence. [/quote] If you work with Digital Audio Workstations, there's lots of talk about getting the Latency down. That's the difference between when you play a note, when it's recorded and when you hear it fed back to you from the workstation along with the guide track. In some cases (particularly vocalists and guitarists) it can be pretty big before the musician has a problem with it. In other cases (particularly drummers and bass players) it gets noticed a lot sooner and causes a lot of problems. Particularly because of what we are talking about here.

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430818939' post='2764766'] Yes it's a choice. If you want to sound like you've picked up the instrument for the first time! I think in a studio where you can alter the attack of notes, you could minutely bring the note forward or back, but to consciously play ahead or behind will make it sound out of time. Every example I've heard either sound right on the beat or so far out that it's laughable! [/quote] Think of the beat as a hole where you play a note. That hole is fairy big in terms of time on a millisecond scale. Think of the note you play as a snooker ball. The ball can drop into that pocket a number of ways, from slightly to the left, through dead centre to slightly to the right. All of these are 'in time' to our ears because our brain pulls them into where they should be. If the ball is too far left or too far right, it misses the pocket. Our brain can't pull that in and flags up as 'wrong'. However. If you fire enough balls in, one after the other in a regular pattern, you start to get a feel for where the balls are going. They're all 'in time' but have a different feel and give a different sense to the player. If you're playing behind the beat, your brain will want to push the bass forward and it'll feel lazy, if you play in front of the beat the brain will want to put the brakes on and it'll feel pushy or fast. That has nothing to do with tempo slow or fast and everything to do with how the musicians are playing. .

Maybe he was practicing his hammer ons and pull offs.

[quote name='JoeEvans' timestamp='1430687077' post='2763779'] Another interesting experiment would be to record a track with a band, then push the bass parts back and forward against the drums to see how it sounds when the playing is literally and precisely behind or ahead of the beat by different amounts. Has anyone done that? Better still, does anyone have a multi-track recording of a track they could doctor in that way then post a link to here? [/quote] No. Because it would sound wrong and artificial. Each note isn't a precise amount out each time. As has been said, it's all about feel. There is another thing that we do that no one questions. Internal dynamics. That's where each note has a very slightly different volume and attack. All these things are what we hear when we hear someone who has been playing for a long time verses a beginner. They're what makes a tune come alive.

[quote name='JoeEvans' timestamp='1430684311' post='2763734'] This is interesting - when you look at the audio, to what extent are the notes played by the different instruments actually in different places? Does the drummer tend to define the beat, with the other musicians in front of or behind that? For what it's worth, I've often thought that although we talk about playing in front of or behind the beat, for bass players at least, it might also be to do with how sharp an attack we put on the notes. A slap or a plectrum pick has a much more precise attack than a softer finger action, let alone a double bass note. In jazz, the DB player might well be going at the note on the beat, but because of the soft attack and the tone of the instrument, we hear it as being somewhat behind the beat. [/quote] Sometimes no one. The beat can be implied. Sometimes maybe just the ride cymbal or something. We're human beings and the thought that we are all playing the notes exactly at the same time is nonsense when you actually think about it. It'll always be a few milliseconds out. As commented above. Listen to programmed sequenced music and it will sound like it is being played by a robot. Which it actually is.

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1430680479' post='2763676'] Ok man, I appreciate your links. This one is dead obvious. When the bass player plays behind the beat, it sounds dreadful and out of time and I'm sure jazz is the only medium where you could get away with this. To my ear, ON the beat is the ONLY way to sound completely in time. As I've said before,it has to be about feel. If you consciously play before or after the beat in most genres of music, you are going to sound like you have no clue what you are doing. Maybe it's because my background is rock and indie with a bit of traditional thrown in, which is regimental in its rules, that I stick to these rules. The "pretentious" musicians I am talking about do not play jazz. I tend to suspect the majority of advocates of the term have a bit of emperors new clothes isms about them . I'm not trying to start an argument by any means, so forgive me if my views fly in the face of yours [/quote] Have a listen to Queen's Crazy Little Thing Called Love. John Deacon's Bass drives the song along. Compare it with practically every cover, even a live version of Queen playing with Lambert and the new bass player. It just won't drive in the same way. And that's rock.

Rushing is rushing. It happens when the musician isn't in control. Either playing a hard bit and 'trying too hard' or playing an easy bit and not using the correct note values. It really has to be something you feel. I don't think you can 'wait' because it's so subtle that you'd be far too late. It's more of an anticipation or a relaxing of your playing.

The beat is implied and constant. How you play against that beat is called feel. As has already been said, laying back or playing behind the beat gives a relaxed feel to the music. Pushing or playing ahead of the beat gives the music a feel of urgency. You'll find drummers that don't understand the concept will often say a piece of music is too slow and suggest the band plays the tune quicker. It's known as the amateur's disease. To make a tune sound better, they play it faster and louder. If you find a song doesn't have the energy it's something to look at. .

I have my own personal delivery monitoring person. When it arrives I get a phone call from 'The Wife' - "What have you been buying now!!!"

[quote name='tom skool' timestamp='1430257006' post='2759665'] wouldn't the audience be losing their perseption of bass also anyway? and probably more so! I had a drunk girl come and turn me up near the end of our set the other week, which fits with the findings. [/quote] Yes. But they're not in control of the volume knob. What happens, if the whole band has had a beer each, is each member loses their ability to discriminate their own instrument and so turns up. This can't solve the problem because it's their perception that has altered, not the acoustics. The volume just gets louder and still no one can hear anything. I've witnessed it happen lots of times since I became aware of what was going on. It's fatal to your practice if you're drinking in a small room.

Bands are generally too loud. I have one rule. It has to be loud on the dance floor and not at the back of the hall. If you're playing a function not everyone there wants to dance. I does depend on the size of the hall but you're not aiming to fill the whole room with sound. The best gigs I've played are when we've got the volume right. We had a drummer who always complained it wasn't loud enough. This is the guy who sits at the back of the band. Behind the speakers!

I think you have to be inventive with your setlist and get the right mix of 'tired old songs that have been done a million times before that all the punters want to hear' and some fresh unexpected recent hits. If you can do that successfully then people will cme to your gigs as word should get round. If you just play tunes from one of those two categories you'll lose part of your audience. Playing any obscure tunes off an album that only your guitaris tor singer likes should be avoided where possible. It's hard work getting a band that draws a crowd.

Here's a more detailed study. http://m.alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content/34/5/741.full.pdf Alcohol is a depressant and affects your frequency discrimination. So you start to have trouble picking out individual parts of the band. And it'll all turn to mush. It starts very quickly as well (well below the legal driving limits) and affects frequencies above 1000Hz which are the components of the bass (and other instruments) we use to determine pitch and definition. Probably why it gets impossible to have a conversation in a big pub as the night progresses. Also partly why drunk people shout a lot.

[quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1430216376' post='2758967'] the point is more about how alcohol affects your hearing, as opposed to your playing. I'm surprised that the alcohol would have more of an effect than the deafening sound levels at most gigs these days. If you're not wearing ear plugs then your ears will be as good as a drunks' within a few minutes IMO [/quote] Yes. It's a well known phenomen for a while. I used to have a singer who complained that at some gigs the sound would gradually get worse throughout the gig and by the end she couldn't hear herself and at others it was fine. The gigs she was driving to were always fine but she didn't like my explanation.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1430127159' post='2758112'] But most people who are older than 6 don't want to watch the same movie over and over again. I'm quite happy to pay to stream a movie once, and if I thought it was any good I'll be happy to pay in couple of years time to watch it again. Songs that I like I will want to listen to all the time. If it's through a streaming service you are totally at the whim of the service and the artist allowing their music to be on that service. At least with a CD ripped onto my computer and iPod I can listen to the song whenever I want. [/quote] Isn't this just like the BBC radio though. Technically you pay a license fee to listen to the radio/ watch TV. If you hear a song you like on the radio, you go out and buy it. I don't know many people who buy songs from previously unknown artists without hearing them first.

People pay £90+ a month for Sky to watch that Football thing. I agree, if it's a platform for aspiring artists then it has to be priced accordingly. If they want to get more money then maybe they should mix in some 'specailly selected' 'millionaires' records. Someone should look at the business model a bit more closely. A lot of musicians (even just looking theough this thread) don't really get the money side of things do they?