Covering bass lines exactly? No need?

[steantval]

[quote name='Roland Rock' post='1081593' date='Jan 7 2011, 10:28 PM']I'm playing in a tribute band at the moment and at first I was trying really hard to get the basslines spot on as per the original recorded version. Then you hear a live album version and it can be completely different! Now I tend to play with the original sprit/style but add my own flourishes/simplifications where I deem appropriate.


I think it has a lot to do with the other musicians in the band; e.g. the drummer may play with a slightly different feel to the original version, so you play something that's more in keeping with what's happening in the moment.[/quote]

I play in a Tribute band and a pub/clubs covers band.

In the Tribute I play all the bass lines as they are and usually worked out from live versions of the songs, IMO if you play in a good tribute band then all the players should be doing their parts correctly.

In the pub covers I manage to get away with playing any old sh*t.

[TimR]

A can't think of many basslines that can't be picked up within 15minutes of listening and playing along to.

You really need to [b]understand[/b] how the line you are playing fits with and affects all the other musicians before you decide to change it and consider whether it really needs changing.

In my old band we had a problem. The vocalist and I really struggled with one line of one verse in one song. Everytime we played it in practice we seemed to stumble over it, when we played live sometimes the tune would almost fall apart. In the end I recorded us playing it, took it home and compared what we were all playing to the original.

On the original and the recording, I played triplets along with the vocal melody. On the original the drums, guitar, and keys all played a single note underneath the triplets. On our recording, the drums, keys and guitar were [b]all[/b] putting in fills without the triplet feel. I asked them about it and they all said it sounded empty so they were adding to it The mad bit was that they obviously were not listening either to each other or to the vocal line.

This wasn't the only song I had to resort to listening to the original because of car-crashes.

They're having real bad problems with the new bassist who continually ad-libs and doesn't stick to the bass line. OK in maybe a three piece but not a 9 piece! Poetic justice.


The car-crashes happen in my new band for the same reason, the guitarists haven't listened to the original closely and are playing something that aproximates (or doesn't!)


I went to an audition where I had been told that the guitarist auditioning me was a stickler for accuracy. I had spent a long time leaning 5 songs very accurately. We played through the first tune and at the end he asked "Is that how you think it goes?" At the end of the third song he says "Ok I don't think you're what we're looking for." Win some lose some.

A problem that I see a lot is that you learn a tune and over the years embelish it a bit here and a bit there. After a couple of years the tune bears no resemblance to the original. "That's how we've always played it" No mate actually it isn't!

[bassmachine2112]

hiho,This is a good question that has no answer.
Play for the track I say-lock in with the drummer and everybody listen to each other you never know where it will go,sometimes it works.
How many times have you heard a tune then went to see the band live and they play it at a 100 miles an hour and overplay it death ?.Then you wonder why they didn,t do that the first time.Maybe it,s because music evolves even within the framework of a tune just as we evolve as musicians or their havin a blast and revvin up the tune without a producer in the studio sittin on their shoulders.
Take a chance,go out on the edge you never know it might just make the difference and if your enjoying yourselves then the audience will pick up on it and join in and you all feed off each other.
If you have the chance have a listen to China Drum doin Wuthering Heights not everyones cup of tea but it,s China Drum not a tribute band just guys havin a blast.

[Pete Academy]

Interesting thread.

Firstly, I would agree with the feel of the song being of prime importance. An example would be 'Sweet Home Alabama'. Three chords that can be played as root notes, but it has to have the right feel, even if it's embellished. Whenever I've played this song, I've always stuck to simple root notes, and sometimes by the end I've improvised it a little, but been careful to keep the feel right.

If I were to use 'Good Times' (my favourite ever bass part) as a benchmark, I personally don't like to see this messed with. There was a thread a while ago where someone featured Jamiroquai playing the tune live and pointed out how good the bass player (Zender, I think) was in improvising it. Personally I hated it. There's a difference between bass riffs and bass parts in a song. That line is perfection and I just don't like to see it improvised. I can't see the point. Certain riffs have to be left alone, IMO. 'Peaches', 'Sunshine Of Your Love', etc. Certain bass lines are, for me, so integral to the song that I just don't like to see them embellished. 'Billie Jean', 'Good Times', 'I Wish', etc. I once saw someone playing 'Boogie Oogie Oogie' his own way and I just couldn't listen to it.

When we first did 'Kid Charlemagne' I used to do my own take on it, but retaining the feel. Then after a while I felt that I was cheating both the song and myself. I felt lazy not learning it. I still don't play it 100% like Chuck Rainey, but I try to play the major parts as close as I can. But saying that, there are probably some players that would still dislike it, and I couldn't really blame them.

These are just my opinions, of course. I'm a firm believer in playing for the song and having space to let it breath.

[Conan]

So the general consensus seems to be that there is no simple answer to this, and that it depends on the context, the band, the situation, the musicians, the track in question, the type of gig, the complexity or simplicity of the original bass part, the attention span and technical ability of the bass player.... anything else I've forgotten?

To simplify things by further complicating them; I think it also depends on the stage the bass player is at.

When I was young and starting off playing bass, I used to try to play every part note-perfect. As I was starting off with predominantly Rush tracks, that took a while! The process of learning a certain player's lines note-for-note is what contributes to the individual "style" that we all develop later in our playing careers. If the range of influences is wide, then so will be our own final (if it ever is final) style.

As noted over in the "most influential bass players" thread, my style is probably an uneasy blend of Geddy Lee, Mark King, Steve Harris, Marcus Miller, David Margen and Stanley Clarke! Of course, I don't really sound like [i]any[/i] of them ( I wish I could!) but many fellow bass players familiar with their work would be able to spot certain licks that they would associate with some of those players in my playing. I hope!

Now that I have my own "style", I tend not to play cover tracks note-for-note any more. Not [i]exactly[/i] anyway. I will get them close enough that everyone in the audience (bar the bass players) will think that I've nailed it. In most cases that's enough. Also, because my style is different from, say, John Myung - I may [b]never[/b] be able to play "Pull me Under" as he plays it. So why bother? Sometimes, [i]close enough[/i] is close enough.

As others have said, most punters would far rather watch a tight band enjoying themselves than a complete set of note perfect copies. I guess its down to the subtle difference between a cover version and a copy.

Edited January 9, 2011 by Conan

[ironside1966]

From my experience the bands that busk tunes rather than learn them properly tend to be in the in lower paid gigs.

[thepurpleblob]

I think it's actually a personal thing and depends on the way you work. I have no clue about improvisation - the only way I can learn a song is to copy it note for note. I actually enjoy getting it spot on and trying to figure out what the original player was thinking.

I have played with many people who just turn up and bluff it. Good for them - I wish I could do it. However, I have also played with people who turn up and bluff it and can't quite manage it. In many cases protesting that you don't need to play a part note-for-note is more of an excuse for being too lazy to do your "home work".

[Conan]

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='1083281' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:47 PM']In many cases protesting that you don't need to play a part note-for-note is more of an excuse for being too lazy to do your "home work".[/quote]

Possibly in some cases. Again it depends on the gig. If you are a pro or semi-pro then I would agree, but for those of us with full-time day jobs that play in a band for recreational purposes I think the law of diminishing returns holds. Why spend three hours getting one bass line note perfect if you can do a "good enough" job (so that nobody will notice the difference) in half an hour? Unless you are a perfectionist of course...

[TimR]

[quote name='Conan' post='1083290' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:53 PM']Why spend three hours getting one bass line note perfect if you can do a "good enough" job (so that nobody will notice the difference) in half an hour? Unless you are a perfectionist of course... [/quote]

Because in most cases you only need to do quarter of an hour and it's clear that some don't even do that.

[Pete Academy]

[quote name='Conan' post='1083290' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:53 PM']Possibly in some cases. Again it depends on the gig. If you are a pro or semi-pro then I would agree, but for those of us with full-time day jobs that play in a band for recreational purposes I think the law of diminishing returns holds. Why spend three hours getting one bass line note perfect if you can do a "good enough" job (so that nobody will notice the difference) in half an hour? Unless you are a perfectionist of course... [/quote]

I think I would agree with this. A lot depends on the musical situation.

[Conan]

[quote name='TimR' post='1083295' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:57 PM']Because in most cases you only need to do quarter of an hour and it's clear that some don't even do that.[/quote]

Depends on the track as well If I am already familiar with it and know the arrangement, nailing the bass part may only take one play through. If it's a track I don't know it might take many listens until I am comfortable with its arrangement. That's what takes me the time in my current band, because we play a style of music that I don't actually spend much time listening to, therefore most of the tracks I am totally unfamiliar with.

[risingson]

[quote name='Conan' post='1083290' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:53 PM']Why spend three hours getting one bass line note perfect if you can do a "good enough" job (so that nobody will notice the difference) in half an hour? Unless you are a perfectionist of course... [/quote]

Sometimes I think the lack of enthusiasm and empathy towards certain bass lines where specific parts have simply been approximated translates quite strongly in a live context, it really can drag the energy out of a band. If something is worth doing then a lot of the time it's worth doing right, depending on the context.

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='Conan' post='1083290' date='Jan 9 2011, 04:53 PM']Possibly in some cases. Again it depends on the gig. If you are a pro or semi-pro then I would agree, but for those of us with full-time day jobs that play in a band for recreational purposes I think the law of diminishing returns holds. Why spend three hours getting one bass line note perfect if you can do a "good enough" job (so that nobody will notice the difference) in half an hour? Unless you are a perfectionist of course... [/quote]

Not exactly what I meant (although reading back I don't think I expressed myself very well). I more mean the business of claiming that you can bluff a song in 10 minutes and then wasting half a studio session listening to the track twenty times. Whatever you plan to do with the line you need to learn the original well enough not to make a complete arse of it before you can "do your own thing"

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='ironside1966' post='1083165' date='Jan 9 2011, 02:30 PM']From my experience the bands that busk tunes rather than learn them properly tend to be in the in lower paid gigs.[/quote]

Good job I don't do it for the money then!

[Pete Academy]

I've just started playing with a local jazz-funk band. The set is instrumental-based, and includes 'Pick Up The Pieces' and 'Chameleon'. I would never play these lines other than how they are on the record. 'Chameleon' is an example of the bassline being the song, and 'PUTP' has a bass part that complements the song perfectly. I've heard players make that part busier, but for me it adds nothing.

For me, making a recorded part busier is asking for trouble. 'Sex Machine' and 'Play That Funky Music' are prime examples.

[jakenewmanbass]

My take is... be able to play the original exactly in a 'to die for' way. And also be able to add the odd thing to enhance. If you're not enhancing some of history's great bass playing moments (and lets face it thats at least possible) then KISS (keep it simple stupid)

[TimR]

Going back to my example with my previous band. There are a lot of musicians who will listen to one verse, one chorus and the mid and then announce that they've got it. Hence the problem when it all falls apart in the third verse, or when the band can't get the bit where the mid section goes into the chorus instead of the verse.

Now most tunes have differences in each verse and each chorus. So where I'm coming from is not necessarily nailing the parts exactly but understanding where and why the parts differ in each verse and chorus.

Usually the bass line can be picked up in one or two bars, it's the subtleties that take the time to pick up and it's those bits that people don't bother with. Hence blandly busked tunes.

[TimR]

[quote name='ironside1966' post='1083165' date='Jan 9 2011, 02:30 PM']From my experience the bands that busk tunes rather than learn them properly tend to be in the in lower paid gigs.[/quote]

Is this chicken and egg?

Do you get better paid gigs because you have put the effort in or do you put more effort in because you are getting paid more?

[Pete Academy]

[quote name='TimR' post='1083548' date='Jan 9 2011, 08:26 PM']Going back to my example with my previous band. There are a lot of musicians who will listen to one verse, one chorus and the mid and then announce that they've got it. Hence the problem when it all falls apart in the third verse, or when the band can't get the bit where the mid section goes into the chorus instead of the verse.

Now most tunes have differences in each verse and each chorus. So where I'm coming from is not necessarily nailing the parts exactly but understanding where and why the parts differ in each verse and chorus.

Usually the bass line can be picked up in one or two bars, it's the subtleties that take the time to pick up and it's those bits that people don't bother with. Hence blandly busked tunes.[/quote]

Good post.

[thumperbob 2002]

[quote name='TimR' post='1083552' date='Jan 9 2011, 08:27 PM']Is this chicken and egg?

Do you get better paid gigs because you have put the effort in or do you put more effort in because you are getting paid more?[/quote]


Good post this one. Looks like there are two camps- one on the "I can learn a tune " and one camp in the " I can learn a tune properly"

I have made a career out of despising most of our audiences but do want to play the correct line. Having not sold any records myself I do know that learning the correct bass line- ( for the whole song- not just a few bars of verse and chorus )- will be good for me and my bank balance. You may think that the audience will not notice a line that approximates the original- but it is strange what people notice. They may not know exactly the problem- but they will notice something -----" not quite right"

I think everyone should put the effort in - doesnt take long and your ears will thank you for it. Seen too many mediocre players.

Bob

[dlloyd]

This might merit a whole new thread, but to what lengths do those of you in tribute bands go to perfect your basslines? Do you transcribe from a single source, say, the best known studio version... or do you go further and hunt out numerous live recordings and make a more studied analysis of how the original artists tackled the tunes?

[El Bajo]

I watched a documentary on Nigel kennedy the other night (he seems slightly unhinged). He, and his orchestra, play with different feel and embelish some parts in some of the greatest 'covers' ever created, i.e. 4 seasons. He says whats the point in getting up everymorning to play if its the same thing day in day out.

As long as its sounds ace, do it! Most bands never play it the same live anyway,

[Bilbo]

It depends on a whole lot and especially the gig. I once got called for a one off £120 gig playing 32 cover tunes, 90% of which I had never played and the rest rarely. I settled for 'good enough' because, a, it was a one off gig and I was not going to need these tunes again, b, I didn't have the time to learn that many tunes that well and, c, the audience would not actually have been listening to that level of detail (a wedding).

Other gigs require a greater investment. Its like all walks fo life. If I am speaking to a room full of people, the amount pf preparation will depend on the context, the people, what's at stake etc. I guess, if you are in a tribute band (:vomit:), you will need to nail the details but if, like me, you primarily play jazz, 'learning' the bass lines is anathema. Covers are a grey area as some are about replication whilst others are about interpretation. Personally, I would love to get to a point where I never play anyones lines but my own but that's nirvana I am never likely to reach. I guess it matters a lot sometimes and matters less at others. The only driver should be 'is the music the best it can be'.

As for whether or not Bernard Edwards line on Good Times is perfect and cannot be improved? It isn't and it could. This is art not science. Good times is, subjectively, a shallow, nothing little tune (listen to the lyrics, ffs) that all of us could quite easily live without. And, yes, I play it on every wedding gig.

[Doddy]

[quote name='El Bajo' post='1084222' date='Jan 10 2011, 02:06 PM']I watched a documentary on Nigel kennedy the other night (he seems slightly unhinged). He, and his orchestra, play with different feel and embelish some parts in some of the greatest 'covers' ever created, i.e. 4 seasons. He says whats the point in getting up everymorning to play if its the same thing day in day out.

As long as its sounds ace, do it! Most bands never play it the same live anyway,[/quote]

But then you're talking about doing a complete arrangement of a piece,not covering a song and making up a different bass part.

[TimR]

[quote name='El Bajo' post='1084222' date='Jan 10 2011, 02:06 PM']I watched a documentary on Nigel kennedy the other night (he seems slightly unhinged). He, and his orchestra, play with different feel and embelish some parts in some of the greatest 'covers' ever created, i.e. 4 seasons. He says whats the point in getting up everymorning to play if its the same thing day in day out.

As long as its sounds ace, do it! Most bands never play it the same live anyway,[/quote]

He's a solo violinist. Same territory as lead guitarists.

That aside, it's a good point. However, and its a big however. People go to see Nigel Kennedy and HIS orchestra perform, they don't go to see Vivaldi's 4 seasons being performed. Although knowing some Classical Music buffs I wouldn't be surprised if there's a forum somewhere discussing how Nigel Kennedy ruined Vivaldi's 4 Seasons by playing a C# on the third semi-quaver of the 147th bar.