"just Keep It Simple"

[risingson]

[quote name='The Bass Doc' post='1097124' date='Jan 21 2011, 09:19 AM']"Keep it simple"

If you're hearing this a lot, it's probably right.[/quote]

+1.

The best bass players in this world are revered for being able to assess what's right for the song. If this means playing 1/4 notes on the root of the chord, then so be it. If it means having something that moves a bit more, then that's fine too. It is seemingly the easiest thing as a bass player to do, yet probably the hardest thing to actually understand, and I continue to see loads of players that don't quite get this concept.

[chris_b]

[quote name='4000' post='1097335' date='Jan 21 2011, 12:04 PM']....Of course Jamerson springs to mind here too....is he considered too busy?....[/quote]
He was.

Most people appreciated JJ’s bass lines but some of the road bass players complained to Motown that they couldn't play what he was playing on the record. Also some arrangers tried to tame him by writing specific bass parts.

[derrenleepoole]

Over the twenty years of playing bass, I've noticed more and more in my playing a desire to keep the bass line right for the song. So less ego, and more discipline in my approach. This doesn't mean however, that I always succeed in doing this This is called maturity.

Turning off part of your brain that's saying 'do this here, and put that in there' sometimes is a very hard thing to do. Especially, if you've invested lot's of time in rehearsal and practice and in getting your chops right. There's a desire to be seen to be heard. This isn't just a bassist thing, it applies to all musicians across the board.

Thing is, most everyday people probably can't identify the bass part in a song, they'll only notice it's not there when it's gone. Or they'll notice it more if it's playing something that doesn't quite fit with their expectation and understanding of the song, but they might not be able to explain why it's not quite right. Does that make sense?

At the end of the day, it's about being mature enough to know that what you're doing is right for the song. If you can't do that, then all you're ever going to do is nothing more than musical masturbation at the expense of true musicianship.

[endorka]

[quote name='fatback' post='1097299' date='Jan 21 2011, 11:44 AM']A well-formed melodic part can sound simple where a bad part with the same number of notes sounds busy. Also, a part supporting a vocal line won't necessarily sound busy either. And there are always plenty of gaps you can work with other than the usual spots for fills.[/quote]

Indeed! I gave this quite a bit of thought some time ago, where I came to the conclusion that a simple bassline is considered by many to be one that, for example, plays a simple rhythm using only root notes, or perhaps roots and fifths.

Many bass players attempt to make this more apparently interesting by adding "fills", which in practice usually amounts to plodding along on the root note with the simple rhythm mentioned above, until they unleash a flurry of mid to upper register notes aptly described as a "widdle", before settling down to the simple root note pattern again.

I have come to the conclusion that for the most part, these "fills" do not make a bassline any more interesting. Indeed, they can be annoying and musically irrelevant - listen to poorly executed jazz for good examples of this. You'll note that any gaps in the melody will be consumed by every single band member simultaneously contributing a "fill", and a cacophony ensues. It's as if they were all waiting for their chance to make a musical "Hello Mum!" statement, and indeed, that is exactly what they are doing.

Needless to say, this is not a good approach to making music.

In my opinion, the basslines that succeed the most in terms of making a musical statement, as opposed to those fulfilling a purely reinforcement role, are those that do not rely on "fills" to spice them up, but have interest built in. The aforementioned John McVie and James Jamerson are like this. Some others are Paul McCartney, Jack Bruce, Peter Hook, Geddy Lee, Pino Palladino.

Mahler also wrote some great basslines :-)

Jennifer

[Conan]

[quote name='endorka' post='1097565' date='Jan 21 2011, 02:23 PM']Many bass players attempt to make this more apparently interesting by adding "fills", which in practice usually amounts to plodding along on the root note with the simple rhythm mentioned above, until they unleash a flurry of mid to upper register notes aptly described as a "widdle", before settling down to the simple root note pattern again.

Needless to say, this is not a good approach to making music.[/quote]

Great post!!

[Michaelg]

keep it [i]dynamic[/i] is a phrase i would agree with.

[HMX]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1097406' date='Jan 21 2011, 12:54 PM']Keep it [i]musical[/i]

Sometimes that means simple. Sometimes it doesn't.

'Being a bass player means getting off on making other people sound good' - Robert Hurst III (Branford and Wynton Marsalis). It takes what it takes. If the part screams sixteenth note unison lines, then nail it. It its minims, nail it. If its triplet 5's against 4, nail it. Play the music, not the instrument. The more I study music, the more the notes matter and the less important the instruments and players are. Serve the music not the id.[/quote]
Have to agree with all of this. I'm starting to understand it, now.

[Wil]

Whenever I write a song, the basslines I compose are almost always simple. I want the bass to underpin everything, to me it's a support instrument and in contemporary pop music that's how I like to use it.

When I'm playing bass to songs others have written I might liven things up a bit more to keep myself interested, but in the last few years I've found my lines getting simpler and simpler and I'm gleaning my enjoyment more from the sound of the band as a whole.

[Oscar South]

Keep it simple <---> Keep it tasteful

The key is in the relationship between those two phrases, one is a generalisation and one is context sensitive

Edited January 21, 2011 by Oscar South

[algmusic]

[quote name='lojo' post='1097181' date='Jan 21 2011, 10:21 AM']If you've been asked to keep it simple because


1. your timing is not as solid when you play more, or your fills etc don't fit, then fair enough, keep it simple and solid until you can do more

2. the band want it that way (whatever the reason be it ego or a good reason) then decide if you want to find another project that frees you


Sometimes, the simple lines are the hardest as they really rely on great feel to sound nice, but if its root note rock, then that would bore me for a whole set, so it really depends on what simple means in the context of what you are doing


If you listen to a lot of simple pop songs (good ones) you'll find the bassist may only play a fill once or twice during the whole song, but that moment really comes through[/quote]


+1000

If you get asked to keep it simple, you are usually playing to much and should be in another band that let's you play more.. or start your own.

Simple doesn't mean stupid, it just usually means you're doing something wrong. People only notice bass player when they are doing it wrong and rarely when they are doing it right.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='endorka' post='1097565' date='Jan 21 2011, 02:23 PM']Indeed! I gave this quite a bit of thought some time ago, where I came to the conclusion that a simple bassline is considered by many to be one that, for example, plays a simple rhythm using only root notes, or perhaps roots and fifths.

Many bass players attempt to make this more apparently interesting by adding "fills", which in practice usually amounts to plodding along on the root note with the simple rhythm mentioned above, until they unleash a flurry of mid to upper register notes aptly described as a "widdle", before settling down to the simple root note pattern again.

I have come to the conclusion that for the most part, these "fills" do not make a bassline any more interesting. Indeed, they can be annoying and musically irrelevant - listen to poorly executed jazz for good examples of this. You'll note that any gaps in the melody will be consumed by every single band member simultaneously contributing a "fill", and a cacophony ensues. It's as if they were all waiting for their chance to make a musical "Hello Mum!" statement, and indeed, that is exactly what they are doing.

Needless to say, this is not a good approach to making music.

In my opinion, the basslines that succeed the most in terms of making a musical statement, as opposed to those fulfilling a purely reinforcement role, are those that do not rely on "fills" to spice them up, but have interest built in. The aforementioned John McVie and James Jamerson are like this. Some others are Paul McCartney, Jack Bruce, Peter Hook, Geddy Lee, Pino Palladino.

Mahler also wrote some great basslines :-)

Jennifer[/quote]

Excellent post.

[LukeFRC]

i used to play in a wee art school indie pop band. we had a drum machine, synths and guitar.
the bass was the bit that made people dance. i could play dead simple stuff and if it worked.... well why mess it up?

[TheGreek]

to play devils advocate...

Aren't some songs memorable because of the basslines?? - Think "Money", "The Chain", "Taxman", "Down in the Tubestation" - in each of these the song is driven by the bassline - would the songs have benefitted by a less complex bassline? - would they have been more/as memorable?

Most bass players accept that it's as much about what you don't play as what you do - unfortunately most guitarists aren't of the same mind. By KISS, bassists just leave more space which Guitarists will inevitably think is theirs to fill - "I'll just "chuck in another solo" - when we listen to Motown/Atlantic/Stax, etc the attraction (for me anyway) is the basslines and the horns - NOT the guitars and keyboards.

I have no problem with much of what has been said and agree with quite a lot of it, however how many times have you allowed "cracking" basslines (which you've spent hours refining) be overwhelmed by the guitar parts? Sometimes the song has to give for the benefit of the groove/ bassline. IMO Basslines are as important (possibly more so today in the era of D& as the chord progressions - so shouldn't just be treated as part of the backing track for guitarists..

I'm sure there are many who won't agree with this but I'm equally sure that there are a large number who are of a similar school of thought..

[Doctor J]

All of those basslines leave room and, in truth, are fairly repetative. What pretty much everyone has said is play for the song. This doesn't mean play root 1/4 notes every time, it means play a bassline which fits in [i]musically[/i] with what the other musicians are doing.

[quote]IMO Basslines are as important (possibly more so today in the era of D& as the chord progressions - so shouldn't just be treated as part of the backing track for guitarists..[/quote]
No one will disagree with you. This still doesn't mean every song requires an example of all of your chops. The right bassline in the right context.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Doctor J

[risingson]

[quote name='TheGreek' post='1097806' date='Jan 21 2011, 05:07 PM']to play devils advocate...

Aren't some songs memorable because of the basslines?? - Think "Money", "The Chain", "Taxman", "Down in the Tubestation" - in each of these the song is driven by the bassline - would the songs have benefitted by a less complex bassline? - would they have been more/as memorable?

Most bass players accept that it's as much about what you don't play as what you do - unfortunately most guitarists aren't of the same mind. By KISS, bassists just leave more space which Guitarists will inevitably think is theirs to fill - "I'll just "chuck in another solo" - when we listen to Motown/Atlantic/Stax, etc the attraction (for me anyway) is the basslines and the horns - NOT the guitars and keyboards.

I have no problem with much of what has been said and agree with quite a lot of it, however how many times have you allowed "cracking" basslines (which you've spent hours refining) be overwhelmed by the guitar parts? Sometimes the song has to give for the benefit of the groove/ bassline. IMO Basslines are as important (possibly more so today in the era of D& as the chord progressions - so shouldn't just be treated as part of the backing track for guitarists..

I'm sure there are many who won't agree with this but I'm equally sure that there are a large number who are of a similar school of thought..[/quote]

I don't know what sort of guitarists you've worked with in the past, but the eternal struggle between guitar and bass shouldn't be something that happens and if and when it does, then it's proof of terrible musicianship on either party's behalf. There's no room for ego in a band. A guitarist overplaying is as bad as a bass player overplaying, and whilst the roles of either instrument are very different, the principle of being understanding towards the rest of your band members should remain the same.

There is no magic formula that bass players must adhere to when they play. No one should tell you to play down or play up, it's a decision you have to consciously take, and it's the point where a 'bassist' becomes a 'musician'.

[quote]IMO Basslines are as important (possibly more so today in the era of D& as the chord progressions[/quote]

Bass lines underpin chord progressions, they are synonymous with each other. Whilst it might not be common practice to hammer a chord out on bass, you still have the ability to use the notes that a guitarist has just used in a chord. It's why the notes you choose to play are so important. If I'm playing with my band in the key of C major and hit the maj3rd on my low E instead of the root note, I would completely change the colour of the chord. A bass line is an extremely powerful thing.

[Cat Burrito]

Keep it simple means "keep it simple". It doesn't mean "Only play root notes" and it is not a mandate to be boring.

I'm increasingly amazed by fantastic basslines which inspire me to work them out... resulting in me thinking "is that all he was doing?" D'oh!

[Pete Academy]

I reckon every bassist has gone through this. We are there to support the band, and most importantly, the song. The song is king. It requires a lot of discipline.

It's what you don't play.

[The Bass Doc]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1097952' date='Jan 21 2011, 06:58 PM']It's what you don't play.[/quote]

I've said it in a previous thread - there's a lot of great stuff I don't play.

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='TheGreek' post='1097806' date='Jan 21 2011, 05:07 PM']to play devils advocate...

Aren't some songs memorable because of the basslines?? - Think "Money", "The Chain", "Taxman", "Down in the Tubestation" - in each of these the song is driven by the bassline - would the songs have benefitted by a less complex bassline? - would they have been more/as memorable?[/quote]

Interesting choices to illustrate your point. In the same spirit:

[i][b]Money [/b][/i]- the main riff is simple and repetitive, the only non-simple aspect being the time signature. It's not complex.

[i][b]The Chain[/b][/i] - a two part song, in the first part the bassline is very simple and understated, in the second part you get the "F1" sequence which is repetitive and not at all complex.

[i][b]Taxman [/b][/i]- here's the joker in the pack, a bassline which sounds really simple and repetitive but in fact (as played by Macca) is a very challenging piece of riffing. I would describe Taxman, when played by Macca, as complex. Played by me, it's a simple variant on the box pattern.

Arguably, what makes those three basslines memorable is not their complexity but their simplicity (or apparent simplicity).

[Doctor J]

They're also entirely sympathetic to the accompanying vocals and instrumentation.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Doctor J

[Dave D]

Personally speaking, as i play in a covers band, i tend to play it as it is (if its not too tricky for me!! LOL)
Some of my fave songs are relatively simple, and have a lovely groove that people recognise.

At a recent open mic evening, there were some talented bass players (not me), who pretty much ruined some classics by adding in lots of fingerboard gymnastics and straying too far away from the basic feel of the number. Its ok to have a couple of clever bits in, but sometimes its almost like the duelling banjos!

Like its been said, less can be more, and the spaces are as important as the bits we play.

[niceguyhomer]

I had an audition for a band - a really good band. They sent me a cd and I learnt 5 songs as best I could in the time I had. I turned up and nervously played those songs with them and after the audition, they asked me how I thought it went and I said .."if you don't mind, I'll just pack my gear up and slither away". They all looked at me in shock and said I'd done really well and told me to stay and play some more.

I was in awe of their musicianship and the quality of the live sound - and there's me, a humble pub plodder as I refer to myself playing with guys who've played at Wembley, V-Festival, Ronny Scotts, jammed with Steely Dan you name it. I thought they were being kind and at the end of the session, I said thanks and loaded my gear into the car and said tara. The keyboard player followed me out and said " see you next week" which kinda floored me.

At the time I didn't know why but I got the gig and a few weeks later I asked why and was told it was because I played simply and sympathetically with the music and made the band sound solid and more 'together' than it had ever done before. I guess playing 'simply' has its benefits.

[xgsjx]

If you're playing an originals band then you should play what the song needs. During a song rehearsal listen to the rest of the band & just play the root on the 1 (& 3 if you wish) & ask the others to play their parts as normal. Listen to each part of the song. Do you stay out on the intro, play a bit of the vocal melody for the chorus, play in unison with the lead guitar, pull into a rhythm combo with the drums or pop a bass only intro there? What does the song want?

Depending on the feel of each part of the song & how the band want it to be, I'll either be tight in with the kick, syncing along with a guitar riff, part harmonising with the vocals or playing very little at all & then when the singer shouts "G on Bass", I get to do a wee solo & mess it all up

If I or any of the band members I play with say "that doesn't fit", then I take it away & come back with something that does (keeping the thing that doesn't fit & getting it in another song if I really like it).

If you're playing in a covers band then suggest a couple of bass orientated songs that you enjoy playing & that way you & the rest of the band should be happy.

[bassbloke]

My advice to any bass player that feels they are constrained by the demands of their band members and asked to keep things simple is to purchase a digital multitrack recorder or audio interface and simple editing package and write a load of bass solo tunes and fill them with double thumb slap licks, two handed tapping, harmonics and get it out of their system. Then, concentrate on producing great songs with your band by providing bass that enhances the song rather than your ego.

Edited January 22, 2011 by bassbloke

[EssentialTension]

'Keep it simple' or 'keep it complicated'.

It's simple to decide which of these is most effective.