Pete Academy

[quote name='silddx' post='1017723' date='Nov 9 2010, 03:57 PM']Run that by me again EDIT: I have a fence for sale if you want it.[/quote]

[quote name='algmusic' post='1017718' date='Nov 9 2010, 03:49 PM']This exactly the point I was trying to make.. I personally read the musicianship stuff as non-theoretical stuff.. well in my eyes, it's not, some might think it is though, which would be fair argument also[/quote]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='1017702' date='Nov 9 2010, 03:43 PM']It's an interesting point Pete. The basic idea is that a large amount of the information is contained within a score and it takes rehearsal, a conductor/MD or even a producer to have an overview and express to the band exactly how it should be conveyed. There are many examples of classical conductors working their own interpretations from scores that were written by long dead composers. I guess the point is that the dots mean you can arrive without having spent hours memorising music, but can still apply all the skill and craft that your musicianship will allow making for very complete renditions of music that would otherwise require a large amount of time to learn.[/quote] Thanks for that, Jake. I honestly didn't understand the concept.

Regarding Silddx's reggae-playing comment, I think I have to agree to some point. When I first started playing as a teenager, me and a percussionist started a band. He was part of a local black community, so the band consisted mainly of Jamaican musicians, including his very charismatic saxophonist dad. These guys would often push to play reggae, and I was totally out of my depth. They had grown up with the music and had an unbelievable feel for it that would take years for anyone else to master. There's a thread running at the moment about a rock player struggling to play funk. You are what you eat, and in music terms, you are what you listen to. I too struggle with the concept that a sheet of musical 'language' (ie dots) will contain all the information to miraculously enable the bassist to play the piece with the required feel. If it's a well-known song, then I can understand the concept. But if I were to turn up at a rehearsal with a written score for my new jazz-funk tune, how would the players interpret it if I hadn't told them how I wanted it to sound? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[quote name='51m0n' post='1017438' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:56 PM']If you want to be funky listen to funk. Sounds glib, but its the only way. I dont mean have a quick listen to a couple of tracks either, I mean immerse yourself entirely in funk music, listen to only funk for a few months, practice along to it always. Avoid anything that isnt funk during this time. That will make you funky. In the mean time, save you money.... And remember, you gotta wear your sunglasses in here [/quote] He's right, you know.

[quote name='paul h' post='1017422' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:47 PM']Last night, while playing Good Times I realised I sound like a rock player trying to be funky. Not good. Obviously this is mostly because I am really a rock player but I want to change, I really do. So technique is something I will have to work on but in the meantime I am going to swap my ceramic P pickup for an Alnico one (I have already swapped the J) and raise the action a touch. I am also considering heavier gauge strings or flatwounds but I am little bit loathe to do that because my current strings have plenty of life in them still and I'm a tight wad. I also realise I need to use a lighter touch and turn the amp up instead. Message ends.[/quote] I have a similar problem in that if I try to play rock I tend to syncopate it too much. Try listening to just funk for some time instead of rock.

[quote name='chris_b' post='1017424' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:48 PM']None of that will work. Gear is just gear. You'll have to change your feel.[/quote] Exactly.

[quote name='Earbrass' post='1017386' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:20 PM']Can you point to any such statement? Or does it only happen inside your own head? Really? Who are these people, and where have they said such things? I don't see it. I see thread after thread about how reading and/or theory isn't important. I don't see any stating that no matter how much feel or groove a player may have, they aren't worth anything unless they can read music. [b]What I see are insecure people who feel the need to downplay and de-value the skills they don't possess themselves.[/b] I used to hang out on a sampler/groovestation website, as I used to use a hardware sequencer for MIDI arranging, and you'd find the same thing there - kids who could only work a beatbox going on about how just because they'd never bothered to learn to play a musical instrument that didn't make them any less of a musician than anyone else and decrying the "snobbery" of those who thought otherwise. All just a bit sad, and reminiscent of the scene in Time Bandits where Napoleon, trying to demonstrate that shortness is no impediment to greatness, sits and reels off the names of every diminutive commander in history he can think of, along with their precise height, and in the process simply demonstrates that he is deeply obsessed with his own lack of stature. EDIT: just for the record, although I have a fair knowledge of theory and can read music, I am a rubbish sight-reader, and not a particularly accomplished musician. If I had to rely on my musical ability to make a living I'd go hungry pretty quickly, and I have no doubt that either Pete Academy or Nigel silddx could play me under the table any day of the week.[/quote] Eh?

The way a lot of jazz musicians found a much larger audience was by mixing it with funk. Just a thought...

[quote name='LukeFRC' post='1017338' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:34 AM']Can I just ask why so many threads recently decend into this weekend rockstars who play bass versus pro musicians who play bass? If you go and play some great music you like with your mates and are happy with it then be happy. Listen to more types of music if you want but thats fine, but why knock guys who do it as a living? Yes you probably sound great but why the inferiority complex with guys who make their living from this so need to know their theory, notation etc.? Equally for a lot of types of music you don't need to study massivly. If you can play bass apropiate for the music you're playing then great. Personally- I'm self taught and of a moderate standard. I don't put so much of my identity in bass playing that i act like a t!t every time a better player turns up, I try and learn from them, whilst at the same time realising unless I put all my time into it they will possibly always be better. My girlfriend studies liguistics, she knows all the theory of english (and german) languages and how sounds work and lots of stuff, she's pretty clever. I'm an art graduate who used words in my work, I know little theory and are not massivly widely read. She could do stuff I can't and has a way with words. Except we could both write you poems that would be pretty good. Just in differnet ways[/quote] Who's knocking pro players?

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1017328' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:31 AM']A crap tune is a crap tune, whatever the genre. The thing that tends to turn me off a lot of stuff is repetition (that's one of the main reasons I don't like slap bass and tapping; both are generally based upon repeated figures). IME, a lot of groove orientated stuff is the same two bars repeated again and again or the same riff played in different places all over the neck (often a fourth above etc). Jazz tunes tend to require a little more from the performers and repetition is (and I generalise) seen as a cop out. When I refer to a thumper, I am refering to tunes that require the players to just keep whacking away at the core riffs, be that a shuffle, straight roots on the beat or just a repeated ostinato. The Fez is based on a repeated riff. Black Friday is a root note shuffle etc. Cousin Dupree, Haitian Divorce, Rikki Don't Lose That Number, Reelin' In The Years' its cool but its all pretty basic. Aja is a different kettle of fish, yes, but a lot of it is exceptionally well executed mediocrity.[/quote] Haitian Divorce, a thumper?

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1017291' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:40 AM']Absolutely. Great at what he does and usually holds my attention for at least half a tune [/quote] We must thank Larry. Imagine a world without slap?

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1017287' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:37 AM']It is an issue that jazzers are dealing with more and more although there are barriers - the budgets for international touring jazz musicians are probably less than that of Cetera's 'Dressed To Kill' package so light shows etc are usually pretty basic. There are many jazz musicians who are great at engaging the audience but it is true that when you are playing your butt off on a complex set of compositions, the concept of 'putting on a show' in the sense you mean it is a secondary consideration. Dan compositions are undoubtedly exceptional in terms of being a cut above but most of them are, fundamentally, quite simple. I played Black Friday at a recording session last week and, frankly, its a thumper Some of the more complex Dan tunes may take a little more work but they are not actually that difficult to pull off. To play them like the Dan do is another matter and I am in awe of their performances but a lot of that is down to the calibre of the (mostly jazz) musicians they employ and the massive amounts of rehearsal time they put in not the innate qualities of their compositions.[/quote] Once you've got all the changes in your head, the hardest part of the Dan tunes is getting the right feel. But when you consider the bassists they use live, they go more for groove-orientated players, such as Freddie Washington. Saying that, the session guys were always 'complete' musicians, like Chuck Rainey.

Bass players are often the bands' musical directors. I asked Janek about this, as he has been musical director many times. For the JEM tour he chose the band members, put the band together, arranged parts, programmed stuff, arranged rehearsals, etc.

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1017236' date='Nov 9 2010, 09:51 AM']You write it out, I'll play it. I think one of the aspects if the argument that has not been mentioned relates to the complexity of the music being performed. Most rock/pop music etc is pretty basic and being able to groove by ear is a credible prospect as the core of the music to be performed is very simple and idiomatically familiar. Some forms are, however, more complex and require a considerable amount of detail the learning of which is problemtaic. A sax player playing a solo over a 12-bar jazz blues may be possible with no knowledge of theory but playing over Lush Life, Chelsea Bridge, Upper Manhattan Medical Group or Giant Steps 'by ear' is a different prospect altogether. Is it credible to expect orchestral musicians to learn Stravinsky's Rite of Spring 'by ear'. Or a trumpet player to learn a full big band so they can play it live without charts (to create that illusion that someone mentioned )? So, if all you ever play is low brow groove orientated thumpers, as most do, then you can get away with it, especially as a bass player. If you want more (and I certainly do), your going to struggle without some form of knowledge of notation. I find that the number and type of gigs I do militate against the kinds of familiarity you get from playing regularly with just one band. I am rarely playing anything often enough to learn it by rote. The dots help me to play more and more music and to stay fresh and interested. Another aspect is improvisation. Improvising over simple forms is possible by ear but more complex structures will require more academic knowledge in order to avoid boring yourself and the audience with cliches.[/quote] Larry Graham...a perfect example of a 'groove-orientated thumper'.

Use the tab as a guide only.

The Beatles were a massive part of my musical upbringing.

[quote name='the_skezz' post='1016872' date='Nov 8 2010, 08:26 PM']Here is a plea to peteacademy to never tell us otherwise. I prefer it this way.[/quote] Conor, your avatar...would I, wouldn't I?

[quote name='skej21' post='1016848' date='Nov 8 2010, 08:05 PM']Nice way of dodging the question Fact is, you know music theory without knowing it if your ear tells you the right notes to play. Would you play the right notes just by ear if you got lumbered in a indian classical orchestra? Unlikely, because you won't understand the [b]theory[/b] that is used by using just your ear, because you haven't been exposed to it in the same wasy as you have with western tonal systems. The same is said of children. If you gave them a small bass/guitar/instrument, they don't play all the "correct" notes and rhythms, they just bash the instrument, because they haven't had enough experience (on ANY level) to understand the theory behind our tonal system (or the way in which you produce sound from the instrument), and then take that theory and apply it appropriately in a musical setting (like you or I can). Fact is, if you can play "correct" notes by ear, then you know the theory behind it on [b]some[/b] level.[/quote] Another good point. I was actually just trying to lighten up the thread a bit.

[quote name='Soliloquy' post='1016842' date='Nov 8 2010, 08:03 PM']No, you should 'know' if the note is right or wrong. Your ear can only tell you after you've played it, when it's too late. "Hey sorry for the bum notes there guy's, but the groove was great wasn't it !" Having even a basic knowledge of 'notes' should mean that it's right in the first place. I'm not trying to antagonise you. I'm merely stating what I think, or aren't other people supposed to have opinions in your thread ? Surely that was the whole point in starting a thread like this anyway wasn't it ?[/quote] Fair enough.

[quote name='chaypup' post='1016846' date='Nov 8 2010, 08:04 PM']Those sexy avatars really confuse me - in my mind peteacademy is a sexy redhead. [/quote] That's me.

[quote name='skej21' post='1016825' date='Nov 8 2010, 07:55 PM']How does your ear know what the correct note/s?[/quote] Ears are clever things. And they keep your glasses from falling off.

[quote name='lojo' post='1016832' date='Nov 8 2010, 07:56 PM']The answer to the OP question is "groove" is more important the "theory" But only because I assume by "groove" it means "natural feel" or "talent", where as "theory" can be learned by both the natural and the not so Air is more important than Water, but only for about around 5 days, then it does not matter either way [/quote] Good post.

[quote name='Soliloquy' post='1016779' date='Nov 8 2010, 07:20 PM']What audition ? Where's there a mention of an audition in your opening statement ? You're suggesting that playing in time, with 'groove' is more important than the actual notes that are being played. I'm saying that that's crap. Both are to be treated with equal importance. You need the correct notes, played with 'feel' and in time for the music to work. To play the correct notes you need a knowledge of theory, no matter how basic that knowledge.[/quote] I think that's the general concensus. But playing the correct notes doesn't need a knowledge of theory. Your ear should tell you if the notes are wrong. And of course I didn't mention 'audition' in my opening statement. It wasn't needed. So please stop trying to antagonise me.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1016774' date='Nov 8 2010, 07:16 PM']The band decided to transcribe to another key to suit a guesting horn player. The bassist doesn't know what transcribe means, but can groove like a mofo. Not an impossible scenario.[/quote] Good point.