Theory versus Groove

[xilddx]

[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]
I doubt anyone could argue with that, other than to challenge perhaps the notion that "groove oriented thumpers" are low brow, since to engage the audience there are very many more performance aspects involved, creating a rapport with the audience with such things a banter, image, movement on the stage, etc. Image management. These are also learned skills which many bands neglect to their detriment. I doubt I would be able to impress upon most jazz musicians the importance of such things, as they seem to be of little importance to the jazz musician, just as high levels of theoretical knowledge and ability to read notation are not as important to musicians like me and Pete, even though we play a lot more complex music than "groove oriented thumpers".

[Pete Academy]

[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'.

[Bilbo]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017267' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:16 AM']I doubt I would be able to impress upon most jazz musicians the importance of such things, as they seem to be of little importance to the jazz musician,[/quote]

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.

[quote name='silddx' post='1017267' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:16 AM']just as high levels of theoretical knowledge and ability to read notation are not as important to musicians like me and Pete, even though we play a lot more complex music than "groove oriented thumpers".[/quote]

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.

[Bilbo]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1017285' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:35 AM']Larry Graham...a perfect example of a 'groove-orientated thumper'. [/quote]

Absolutely. Great at what he does and usually holds my attention for at least half a tune

[Pete Academy]

[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.

[Pete Academy]

[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?

[Bilbo]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1017296' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:45 AM']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.[/quote]

FW is renowned as one of the best readers in the business, Go figure.....

[xilddx]

[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.



[b]Dan compositions are undoubtedly exceptional in terms of being a cut above but most of them are, fundamentally, quite simple. [/b]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]
And so are most jazz tunes.

[JTUK]

I have a star licks video..and alot of the NY and a few LA top dogs ( of that time ) were on it

Neil Stubenhaus
Larry G
Verdine W
Byron Miller
Chuck R
Abe L
Johnson .....IIRC

And I have to say that from those clips, Freddie comes second to NO ONE, IMV

From a stylistic POV.. there are more than a few who don't carry it off so well.

Edited November 9, 2010 by JTUK

[Bilbo]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017311' date='Nov 9 2010, 10:58 AM']And so are most jazz tunes.[/quote]

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.

[LukeFRC]

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

[Pete Academy]

[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?

[Pete Academy]

[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?

[xilddx]

[quote name='LukeFRC' post='1017338' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:34 AM'][b]Can I just ask why so many threads recently decend into this weekend rockstars who play bass versus pro musicians who play bass? [/b]
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]
Why don't you try to work out why? If indeed that's what is happening. I don't think that is what happens. What really happens is there are one or two people who like complicated and non-repetitive music and state that in order to play that music one needs an academic understanding of music. I tend to agree that such and eduction makes for a much more efficient musician. Yes sir. The problems start when certain black and white assertions are made that tend to polarise opinion.

No amount of practice or theory or reading will help you if you don't WANT to do it. A reasonably intelligent musician should relatively easily work out what is necessary for them to attain their desired musical outcome.

Beware of snobbery though. There are people about who genuinely look down upon the illiterate musician, regardless of their ability to emotionally move people with their songwriting or ability on an instrument, which is the primary purpose of music. "Yes!" they will pronounce, "but they would have been so much better if they'd learned thoery and how to read!".

[Bilbo]

[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.[/quote]

Its because we care, mate.

There are a lot of assumptions in there, Luke. I care passionately about the music I play (to my own detriment) and love where studying music properly has taken and continues to take me. I am not a pro and, at the moment, make next to nothing financially from it (one £50 gig this month). I turn down gigs that would bore me or when I know the music will be bad, the same as everyone else who doesn't do it for a living. I do know, from feedback that I have had, that I could compete with many out there that are professional but I can't deal with the hussling element and, unlike many out there (who I respect enormously), I don't enjoy playing every sort of music and get bored easily. So, as most of the music that is performed in this country is not stuff I actually like very much, most of the pro gigs that are available are not for me.

I care about music and hate to see it done badly the same way many people here hate watching the X Factor debacle (sorry, Mrs T). I advocate for proper study and believe that those who argue against it are sending out a bad message for young players who may have ambition and need a bit of direction that they can't get from 'proper' teachers who cost an arm and a leg. Internet forums are a great way of sharing enthusiasm but they are also a great way of encouraging bad habits and the illusion of the quick fix. Being a musician is hard work and takes hundreds and thousands of hours of dedicated practice. But hard work can be as much fun as a night out with the lads.... Fun doesn't have to mean wasted time.

My personal position is, if you aren't going to do this seriously (and 'seriously' doesn't mean 'professionally'), then get out of the way.......

[Pete Academy]

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

[Earbrass]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017365' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:51 AM']What really happens is there are one or two people who ... state that in order to play that music one needs an academic understanding of music.[/quote]

Can you point to any such statement? Or does it only happen inside your own head?


[quote name='silddx' post='1017365' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:51 AM']There are people about who genuinely look down upon the illiterate musician, regardless of their ability to emotionally move people with their songwriting or ability on an instrument, which is the primary purpose of music.[/quote]

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.

What I see are insecure people who feel the need to downplay and de-value the skills they don't possess themselves. 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 proves 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.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Earbrass

[Pete Academy]

[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?

[xilddx]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1017398' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:28 PM']Eh? [/quote]
My reaction is the same

Anyway, whatever, it doesn't matter how much theory you have or how good you can sight read, only certain people can play reggae, and there is absolutely no way to put down on paper how to play reggae that has the desired effect on the other band members and the audience. Funk is similar, it's a way of life.

EDIT: Disclaimer, this does not mean I am justifying illiteracy, that I am insecure or need to downplay the literate.

Edited November 9, 2010 by silddx

[Bilbo]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017412' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:41 PM']Anyway, whatever, it doesn't matter how much theory you have or how good you can sight read, only certain people can play reggae, and there is absolutely no way to put down on paper how to play reggae that has the desired effect on the other band members and the audience. Funk is similar, it's a way of life.[/quote]

You are probably right.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1017417' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:44 PM']You are probably right.[/quote]
I know I am right dearest Bilbo, it's simply a matter of you accepting that music theory and reading skills are not a panacea. And that being most versatile musician possible is not necessarily either a good or fulfilling thing, just as being the most versatile human being would be a ridiculous endeavour. Just be yourself.

Edited November 9, 2010 by silddx

[Doddy]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017439' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:58 PM']I know I am right dearest Bilbo, it's simply a matter of you accepting that music theory and reading skills are not a panacea. And that being most versatile musician possible is not necessarily either a good or fulfilling thing, just as being the most versatile human being would be a ridiculous endeavour. Just be yourself.[/quote]

I find being the most versatile musician I can be both good thing and very fulfilling.

[Bilbo]

[quote name='silddx' post='1017439' date='Nov 9 2010, 12:58 PM']Just be yourself.[/quote]

[xilddx]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1017442' date='Nov 9 2010, 01:03 PM']I find being the most versatile musician I can be both good thing and very fulfilling.[/quote]
Then you are being yourself, and that is wonderful, and to be celebrated. However, are you perhaps neglecting certain areas of your playing in your quest to be versatile?

I have to assume here that [b]what you mean by versatility[/b], is that you aim to both understand the role of the [b]bass [/b]and play it to a good standard whether improvising or reading off sheet, and be able to play to a high standard various styles of western music, on the bass.

AM I right in that thinking? Or do you mean by [b]versatile[/b] that you are learning to play all the instruments of the orchestra and understand their roles theoretically and be able to improvise and read off sheet for those instruments? Then you will no doubt progress onto the North and South Indian, Arabic, Chinese, Gamelan and other classical and folk styles.

What I am saying is that even incredibly schooled and technically adept musician is only versatile within the limits they have set themselves. In the grand scheme of music, one has to be a bit more philosophical about how to apply one's intellect and resources to the musical situations one wishes to encounter.

[Bilbo]

All good stuff but only if it is not used to justify NOT seeking to improve your knowledge and skill base ('I'll never learn it all so there is no point in learning any of it').

Just be yourself or try to be the best self you can possibly be? Your call.