Improvisation on Bass - Completely Pointless

[xilddx]

[quote name='dood' post='948848' date='Sep 7 2010, 09:32 PM']I have always truly believed that when it comes to trying to communicate or express a feeling through my chosen instrument, it should be as fluid as conversation itself - and that is what I strive toward. Hell - I have a long way to go but to build up a musical vocabulary that flows from the speakers like speech itself is like nirvana for me I reckon.

And what is day to day conversation? It's closer to improvisation than reading off the page for sure! So for me, improvisation is very important. You can still stick rigidly to the framework of a song in much the same way that a bunch of people will talk about a certain football manager or whatever - you'd look a bit stupid going off on a tangent about hatstands and hyperthirculators - but my point is - freely improv' in context.

I feel that if you never improvised - how would you ever come up with new ideas? It's jamming that can help gel musicians together and 'bond' musically too.

my thrupenny-bit[/quote]
That is precisely what I'm getting at, Dan. I come across very, very few musicians with those sorts of, and that developed level of, conversational skills. It is very rare and takes special people.

I freely admit I hear stuff in my head when I'm playing live, and play it. But it's usually for selfish reasons, vanity, adrenaline and the like. And it usually sounds wrong, Normally I reserve any improv for rehearsal and if it works well it gets incorporated into the song and becomes "written".

We have a proper job to do, us bassists. We are like bus drivers, and I do not want to get on a bus with a bus driver who likes to improvise.

[bubinga5]

We are like bus drivers, and I do not want to get on a bus with a bus driver who likes to improvise.

i dont think there is any thing wrong with playing an improved part out of vanity, as long as that vanity doesnt overtake the song...i love to hear great bassist showing off from time to time and so do some of the audience...

[Mykesbass]

[quote name='silddx' post='948904' date='Sep 7 2010, 10:20 PM']We have a proper job to do, us bassists. We are like bus drivers, and I do not want to get on a bus with a bus driver who likes to improvise.[/quote]

Could use that analogy another way - a bus driver is constantly improvising - he has to drive the same route every day but along the way there are many small but essential changes to his drive. Sure, we don't want him to go off route, but he has to take other traffic in to account and if he didn't improvise and drove on Tuesday in the rush hour the same way he drove on a Sunday evening we'd all be in big trouble! Likewise, we bass players should make subtle changes along the way to keep the music alive.

[bubinga5]

well said

[xgsjx]

My answer was in regards to a live situation & does depend on the song & how things are going, it's a feeling thing.

When a song is being improvised, the bass could be improvising on many roles... It could be a dynamics thing where the improvisation is to play less or even stop completely & do incidentals (normally found during a later verse, bridge or chorus), it could be how the bassline actually goes in the song that has parts improvised or it could be doing a solo. If done right it sounds good.

The only recordings that I can think of that are on the web to compare would be here...

[url="http://www.myspace.com/jellyrollmusic"]http://www.myspace.com/jellyrollmusic[/url]

Compare All The Rushes & Rushes, both the same song but played slightly differently to suit the set we was playing at the time.

[SteveK]

[quote name='silddx' post='948783' date='Sep 7 2010, 08:50 PM']Is there a point? Unless you play jazz I can't see one. The occasional inspired extra note here and there, sure, but studying improvisation on a bass!?! It seems ridiculous. Learn to cook instead, it's much more useful and pleasing for other people.

It sounds like a recipe for cheating your audience to me. Only musicians will feel any "magic" happening, and that magic will be VERY rare. The audience won't get it anyway, and why not compose something beautiful in the first place.

For me, improvisation on a bass is for jazz and pompous tits who convince themselves it's entertaining. I wish they would realise NO-ONE GIVES A sh*t.[/quote]
I understand the post is intended to be provocative.
So on that understanding... I've got to say...

Unfortunately, I can't say what I really think . But...

I couldn't disagree more.

In the 60s & 70s improvisation was commonplace and often made for some "magic" shows... and the audience certainly "got it". There are probably still bands out there doing it.
Because [i]you[/i] don't "get it" doesn't mean others don't.
My current band (only been 25 years ) are fairly well known outside the UK and have a reputation for a good live show - due partly to the fact there is a good deal of improvisation - no 2 nights are the same.
The keyboard player, guitarist, drummer are totally on top of their instruments - If I stuck to the parts played in rehearsals it just wouldn't work. Mostly the other guys lead the way, but then sometimes Ill play a groove that will take us somewhere else.
You can't really meddle with the main part of the song... but there is certainly a time and a place, and should be encouraged IMO

[thodrik]

I always thought that once you have a decent knowledge of theory and know how to play the bass, you realise that it is possible and fun to change certain parts of a bass line in a song without ruining the feel of the song.

There are situations where improvisation doesn't work or is a bit inappropriate, like playing the double bass in an orchestra, or in a project where the leader of a band (ie the guy paying you) wants the bass to play a certain line, a 'serious' cover band where everything has to be played as it was on record, or a certain line that is an integral part of the song.

Frankly I think that if none of your band can improvise it can make for a very dull band and often means that they are unable to adapt to anything unusual (string break, drummers skipping a beat etc) in the context of a gig.

The fact that 'only musicians' will notice improvisation is pretty much the point. Lots of people who go to gigs actually play instruments themselves and get great pleasure out of watching and listening to someone that is a master of their craft. Also if you can add something extra to a song without getting bad looks from your guitarist it usually increases your enjoyment of playing, which is possibly the main point of playing in the first place. Also if it is 'your song' then you can play it however you want, as it is 'your' song.

Not all improvisation is good of course, but I think if you took it out of most blues-based pop/rock/metal music you would ruin the feel, vibe and character of the music itself, which is often as important as the notes that are 'composed' into the song.

If I want to hear a brilliant composition, I'll probably listen to Mozart, Vivaldi, Stravinsky or some other guys that really mastered the concepts of theory, harmony and melody, not a person that attempts to justify boring simple plinky-plonk bass lines as being 'all that is needed', and that any deviation from root and fifth notes to be pointless and unnecessary. For me less is more only if you are capable of more or know why you need less, otherwise less is simply less.

[Sonic_Groove]

[quote name='SteveK' post='948960' date='Sep 7 2010, 10:59 PM']I understand the post is intended to be provocative.
So on that understanding... I've got to say...

Unfortunately, I can't say what I really think . But...

I couldn't disagree more.

In the 60s & 70s improvisation was commonplace and often made for some "magic" shows... and the audience certainly "got it". There are probably still bands out there doing it.
Because [i]you[/i] don't "get it" doesn't mean others don't.
My current band (only been 25 years ) are fairly well known outside the UK and have a reputation for a good live show - due partly to the fact there is a good deal of improvisation - no 2 nights are the same.
The keyboard player, guitarist, drummer are totally on top of their instruments - If I stuck to the parts played in rehearsals it just wouldn't work. Mostly the other guys lead the way, but then sometimes Ill play a groove that will take us somewhere else.
You can't really meddle with the main part of the song... but there is certainly a time and a place, and should be encouraged IMO[/quote]


+1 and to add...

"Jamersons style was a distinct departure from the typical bass role in previous years, which largely relied on the root and fifth notes, and was fairly rhythmically simple. Jamerson built on this foundation and incorporated more melodic lines, at times almost serving a complementary role to the lead vocal. He also tended to play a lot more syncopated parts, [font="Arial Black"]and was known to improvise many of his lines[/font]. It was these characteristics that informed much of the "Motown Sound"." {Enough said!} [url="http://www.bass-strings.com/james-jamerson"]Click for reference[/url]

B

[Doddy]

[quote name='silddx' post='948890' date='Sep 7 2010, 10:05 PM']I've been remiss in not making it clear in my OP that I mean in a live setting.

So if you play in a "popular music" type band, when is a good time to improvise on stage? And what is the reason for your improvisation?[/quote]

When is a good time to improvise on stage? Let's take a typical 12 bar rock and roll/blues changes. You may be playing a typical
I,III,V,VI walking pattern for the majority of the tune,and then during a solo the soloist might play a lick or pattern that catches
your ear,so you play a reacting line to it. Or you may start climbing into a higher register which then causes the soloist to play something
that reacts to your playing. In these cases you are improvising in 'popular music' and hopefully taking the music into a slightly different
direction,all by reacting to what you have heard and improvising a line.
If you have a large enough vocabulary on the instrument,you are more likely to be able to improvise 'musically' and be able to react to
the music being played than if you know two or three 'licks' that you churn out all the time.

[ShergoldSnickers]

I'm on tricky territory here as the band I'm in only ever improvises. That's the whole point in our case. With nothing to learn (except how to listen and how to play with restraint), we can just turn up to a gig and play. For as long as required. We make no claim to be fantastic musicians, but we enjoy what we do and it's immense fun. We keep getting asked back to various venues so we think we are doing something right - primarily managing to find venues that will have an audience that is more conducive to what we do.

It does vary in content sometimes sounding jazzy, sometimes like prog rock or moody film music. And sometimes just plain barmy or wrong - that comes with the job. We limit ourselves in time to each 'number' having a large clock on stage - the final minute concentrates the mind into having a stab at stopping together.

There's certainly no-one else in the area doing what we do, but if we thought for one minute that we were only torturing an audience - we'd stop gigging at least. None of us are too proud to be told the truth as others see it.

I'm not sure your comments would really apply to my band in any case silddx, as the whole point is that the entire band improvises and I'm therefore left with no option but to join in.

Edited September 8, 2010 by ShergoldSnickers

[xilddx]

[quote name='Doddy' post='949039' date='Sep 8 2010, 01:39 AM']When is a good time to improvise on stage? Let's take a typical 12 bar rock and roll/blues changes. You may be playing a typical
I,III,V,VI walking pattern for the majority of the tune,and then during a solo the soloist might play a lick or pattern that catches
your ear,so you play a reacting line to it. Or you may start climbing into a higher register which then causes the soloist to play something
that reacts to your playing. In these cases you are improvising in 'popular music' and hopefully taking the music into a slightly different
direction,all by reacting to what you have heard and improvising a line.
If you have a large enough vocabulary on the instrument,you are more likely to be able to improvise 'musically' and be able to react to
the music being played than if you know two or three 'licks' that you churn out all the time.[/quote]
And that is why blues evolved into jazz. There aren't many musicians around with a "large enough vocabulary on the instrument" who are content to continue playing 12 bar.

[xilddx]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' post='949085' date='Sep 8 2010, 08:12 AM']I'm on tricky territory here as the band I'm in only ever improvises. That's the whole point in our case. With nothing to learn (except how to listen and how to play with restraint), we can just turn up to a gig and play. For as long as required. We make no claim to be fantastic musicians, but we enjoy what we do and it's immense fun. We keep getting asked back to various venues so we think we are doing something right - primarily managing to find venues that will have an audience that is more conducive to what we do.

It does vary in content sometimes sounding jazzy, sometimes like prog rock or moody film music. And sometimes just plain barmy or wrong - that comes with the job. We limit ourselves in time to each 'number' having a large clock on stage - the final minute concentrates the mind into having a stab at stopping together.

There's certainly no-one else in the area doing what we do, but if we thought for one minute that we were only torturing an audience - we'd stop gigging at least. None of us are too proud to be told the truth as others see it.

I'm not sure your comments would really apply to my band in any case silddx, as the whole point is that the entire band improvises and I'm therefore left with no option but to join in. [/quote]
You sir, are exempt

[bh2]

I play a fretless in a Drum&Bass type setting... most of our stuff is completely improv... I have played jazz before so some of the mechanics are similar.
It's mainly just laying down a groove however.

[xilddx]

[quote name='thodrik' post='949030' date='Sep 8 2010, 12:48 AM']Frankly I think that if none of your band can improvise it can make for a very dull band and often means that they are unable to adapt to anything unusual (string break, drummers skipping a beat etc) in the context of a gig.[/quote]
This is what I mean, there is some prejudice here that if you [b]don't [/b]improvise that means you are not capable of doing so. My bands are eminently capable of improvising, but we don't because it would detract from the impact of the carefully crafted songs.

There is also evidence in this thread that improvisation should be used to tart up music which would otherwise be dull. So stop playing dull music.

[xilddx]

[quote name='thodrik' post='949030' date='Sep 8 2010, 12:48 AM']If I want to hear a brilliant composition, I'll probably listen to Mozart, Vivaldi, Stravinsky or some other guys that really mastered the concepts of theory, harmony and melody, not a person that attempts to justify boring simple plinky-plonk bass lines as being 'all that is needed', and that any deviation from root and fifth notes to be pointless and unnecessary. For me less is more only if you are capable of more or know why you need less, otherwise less is simply less.[/quote]
More lofty prejudice.

[xilddx]

[quote name='bubinga5' post='948911' date='Sep 7 2010, 10:25 PM']We are like bus drivers, and I do not want to get on a bus with a bus driver who likes to improvise.

i dont think there is any thing wrong with playing an [b]improved part [/b]out of vanity, as long as that vanity doesnt overtake the song...i love to hear great bassist showing off from time to time and so do some of the audience...[/quote]
Improved according to whom?

[xilddx]

[quote name='JMT3781' post='948898' date='Sep 7 2010, 10:13 PM']Check my earlier post Silddx Just my little oppinion

hope your well mate... used the Kopo on a recording. Pure sex.[/quote]
I am well mate, hope you are too

Glad to hear the Kopo is getting some love!

I'm going through all these posts now

[urb]

In general I agree - if I'm playing a song - and I mean in a song orientated band then I really only want to do a maximum of one or two embelishments but keep them completely within the context of the music - i.e. MAKE THEM MUSICAL! But if I'm playing with my funk band when I've played the 'head' and we're in to the solo sections then hell I'm improvising all the way - but it's the way I DO that, that counts - so I will focus on GROOVE and not soloing or excessive fills or anything that undermines the overall groove and feel of the tune.

Basically it comes down to whether you are playing MUSIC or your BASS........ there is a difference!

M

[xilddx]

[quote name='JMT3781' post='948861' date='Sep 7 2010, 09:45 PM']I did 3 years of a module called "Improv" at uni.. which taught you not only soloing on your instrument within a pop band.. but each week you would find yourself in a different band, even on the day of the assessment, the bands would shuffle round minutes before the exam, giving you two minutes to hastily come up with a structure between yourselves, and away you go.
Its been really helpful for me, both as a regular in a band and as a dep. It increases confidence and improves your ear... all in all getting you through some tough gigs and ones where the luxury of preparation wasn't available.[/quote]
Interesting, but that doesn't necessarily justify improvisation. What that is is training your ears and musical mind to adapt your playing to something unfamiliar, which is great. It allows you to get the structure of a piece of music and play within it.

I improvise all the time, just not on stage. I think in most cases it is completely inappropriate.

[BottomEndian]

[quote name='silddx' post='949156' date='Sep 8 2010, 09:37 AM']Improved according to whom?[/quote]
I think b5 meant improvved (or however you might spell the past participle of "improv")... i.e. improvised.

FWIW, I think the level of improvisation that a tune can "take" is often genre-dependent. When I was playing bass with heavy, sludgy, riff-centred stonery-doomy stuff (never really pinned down a genre satisfactorily ), any deviation from the riff would usually muddy things up no end. Now I'm drumming that stuff, I change things up quite a lot and it's never a problem.

One of my current projects involves working as a two-piece with a very chilled, mellow acoustic-guitar-toting singer/songwriter. Just me and her. Loads of room in the arrangements for me to undertake improvisations and experiments, and as long as they fit musically they can lead to all sorts of new avenues I wouldn't have previously considered for the song. When there are gaps for little melodic "solo" bits, I'll often try to bring in ideas from whatever spontaneous variations the singer might have introduced during that particular performance. Keeps things fresh.

All that said... we're yet to gig this thing. When that happens, I might just suffer blind panic and rein it all in. We'll see...

[tauzero]

I improvise all the time in the ceilidh band, insofar as I know roughly how the tunes go, and have a few set parts for some of them, but play most of it by ear, including corny fills and nice jazzy runs etc.

[Earbrass]

[quote name='silddx' post='949155' date='Sep 8 2010, 09:35 AM']More lofty prejudice.[/quote]


Kettle, kettle, come in kettle, this is pot.

I wouldn't do it myself because I'm not nearly good enough, but listening to John Wetton improvising out of his skin with Crimson (LIVE) was one of the things that got me into bass. I'd cite the live version of Schizoid man recorded at the Concertgebouw in Nov 1973 as my fave example, but there's loads of others.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Earbrass' post='949193' date='Sep 8 2010, 10:10 AM']Kettle, kettle, come in kettle, this is pot. [/quote]

[jakenewmanbass]

Sounds a little to me Nig that the only justification you seek is for your own state of understanding. I might also venture that your observations sound more like an argument raging in your head that any convicted position (I could be wrong) despite some quite convicted statements in your posts various.

My take on it is that music deftly and beautifully escapes the conditions you're trying to constrain it with, and I would cite the following as evidence. Early classical music was happily defined and along came Bach an arch improvisor, the world of Pop bass (having evolved from one of THE most improvised art forms history had known, Jazz) was plodding along in simple enough form and along came Jamerson... These are just 2 examples in the world of music that defy condition. Further, in every case and example between and there are millions, reside proponents great and small, (sticking to bass now) from a Jaco Pastorius, through a Marcus Miller, an Entwhistle ..................etc............... down to yo and I, All just trying to make the best music we know how. Sometimes that requires a bit of solid 'what I have always played' and sometimes 'a little flare'. What it doesn't (in my experience at least) generally require is a set of strict conditions to make it work (even though they CAN work) which makes for a tough definition... if you see what I mean..... or... Shut up

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='Earbrass' post='949193' date='Sep 8 2010, 10:10 AM']..... but listening to John Wetton improvising out of his skin with Crimson (LIVE) was one of the things that got me into bass. I'd cite the live version of Schizoid man recorded at the Concertgebouw in Nov 1973 as my fave example, but there's loads of others.[/quote]
That makes two of us.