Bass Guitar Mag Janek Gwidzala

[queenofthedepths]

[quote name='7string' post='156412' date='Mar 12 2008, 11:40 PM']I don't think that you can be genre-specific here. Can we say bassists from heavy groups, such as Rex Brown, don't put in just as much time as our beloved Janek ??

There are virtuoso bassists in every genre, not just jazz.[/quote]
I'm not denying his merits as a bassist - far from it; although it's not really my cup of tea, I don't mind playing some of his lines... I wasn't speculating that because he plays metal but doesn't play like Stephan Fimmers, he obviously doesn't practise much - he stated in an interview that he NEVER practises! So I thought he was a good example

[7string]

There a story which Billy Sheehan told about the monster drummer Dennis Chambers.

Apparently, during a clinic, Dennis Chambers said he doesn't warm up and doesn't practice. The audience gasp in amazement.

Dennis Chambers says "How many of you have problems with your playing ?". Almost everyone puts a hand in the air.

"How many of you practice" Same amount of arms go up

"See" he says...

[tauzero]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156188' date='Mar 12 2008, 04:57 PM']Bearing all that in mind, how is it possible to say "learning music theory makes you a better bass player"?[/quote]
Well, personally speaking, since I've taken a bit more interest in theory, I've played fewer bum notes and been a bit more exploratory because there's actually a few more notes I could have been using.

[aryustailm]

[quote name='"cheddatom"']Bearing all that in mind, how is it possible to say "learning music theory makes you a better bass player"?[/quote]

How could it not? I never understand this anti-theory mentality. Its like saying you could always speak coherantly with your own ideas when you were a toddler.
Obviously that isn't the case for anyone, and music is no different - You learn how to talk first (by imitation) then you realise why the things you are copying work, and can start to put together your own statements/ideas. Most people learn by listening and copying, and figure out how to use it for themselves instinctively. Some people figure out the intricate workings of the language, whether that's english or music, to understand how to say things more effectively without ums....errss.....or bum notes: they're the same thing. I don't see how knowing more about your chosen language/music could do anything other than make you better at getting your thoughts/music across?!

Also, remember bass is just a tool to make music. You can't have bass without having music. You can have music without a bass. Getting better at music makes you a better musician.

[quote name='"cheddatom"']While knowing the conventions inside out does not neccessarily restrict you to them, it may make you on average more conventional than a musician who is not aware of these conventions.

I would like to be unconventional in my playing, so I try to ignore everything I know and just listen to what sounds i'm making/make the sounds I hear in my head.

This seems to have at least a shred of logic to it?[/quote]

Various people say this quite often, but I think the logic is flawed: It still comes down to what you hear in your head, and that is dictated largely by things that you have grown up listening to.
If you thoroughly understand the common ground between all the music you like, you can start to pick and choose which bits you want to keep, and which you don't, which gradually defines your own style. Fumbling around is fun, but will very rarely result in something beyond your current abilities. You have to make a concious decision to understand what you (and other people before you) have played to be able to choose to NOT play those things, and try things outside of those. But that takes thinking and hard work

Some of the most startlingly original players DO understand theory, which enables them to know exactly what to avoid in order to sound unconventional. No fumbling around endlessly hoping for something groundbreaking to 'appear'. They can conciously avoid the norm when they want. Over time, those new territories become normal for them, which = individual style.
Some original players don't understand any theory, but they are truly a rare breed.

Theory is only to understand music that has ALREADY been made - it should never dictate how music SHOULD be made. But, understanding your favourite music means you can choose to invoke something similar, or choose otherwise. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want the choice?!

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='7string' post='156430' date='Mar 13 2008, 12:22 AM']There a story which Billy Sheehan told about the monster drummer Dennis Chambers.

Apparently, during a clinic, Dennis Chambers said he doesn't warm up and doesn't practice. The audience gasp in amazement.

Dennis Chambers says "How many of you have problems with your playing ?". Almost everyone puts a hand in the air.

"How many of you practice" Same amount of arms go up

"See" he says...[/quote]
I take it you see that as a joke? or do you wish there were a grain of truth in it?
whichever, if you like that:

How many people ever in the history world have eaten salad? answer: lots
How many of them are now dead? presumably also, lots.

it follows then that salad is definitely bad for you.

that employs the same logic as Dennis's quip. And I'm pretty sure it was a quip.
the difference being he can really play so he can afford to make the quip. I suspect there some people in this conversation who just don't like to admit that you can get better with knowledge, not exclusively of course, and in my wide teaching experience usually because they can't be arsed to do the work, and often have a quiet resentment for those that do.

Edited March 13, 2008 by jakesbass

[cheddatom]

[quote name='bass_ferret' post='156417' date='Mar 12 2008, 11:57 PM']Kinda gave up on all this TBH.

The thing is, learning theory and practicing lots will make you a better player, better able to work with others of a similar level of theory and practice. Whether you want/need/can be arsed to work on theory and practice is up to you, just dont try and justify your lack of effort, theory and practie with bs.[/quote]

Is that directed at me? I never tried to justify my lack of effort theory or practice. I might be talking BS but that's just your opinion.

[quote name='aryustailm' post='156452' date='Mar 13 2008, 05:00 AM']How could it not? I never understand this anti-theory mentality. Its like saying you could always speak coherantly with your own ideas when you were a toddler.
Obviously that isn't the case for anyone, and music is no different - You learn how to talk first (by imitation) then you realise why the things you are copying work, and can start to put together your own statements/ideas. Most people learn by listening and copying, and figure out how to use it for themselves instinctively. Some people figure out the intricate workings of the language, whether that's english or music, to understand how to say things more effectively without ums....errss.....or bum notes: they're the same thing. I don't see how knowing more about your chosen language/music could do anything other than make you better at getting your thoughts/music across?!

Also, remember bass is just a tool to make music. You can't have bass without having music. You can have music without a bass. Getting better at music makes you a better musician.[/quote]

So did learning English at school make you better at speaking it? It didn't for me. I did try to learn Spanish at school, but I found it very difficult. However, I honestly believe that if I had done a Spanish exchange for 3 months, without ever having learned the language, I would have been able to speak it and with far more authenticity than if I had learned in a classroom from an English guy.

[quote name='aryustailm' post='156452' date='Mar 13 2008, 05:00 AM']Theory is only to understand music that has ALREADY been made - it should never dictate how music SHOULD be made. But, understanding your favourite music means you can choose to invoke something similar, or choose otherwise. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want the choice?![/quote]

It should never dictate how music should be made - but does it? Maybe subconsciously, or maybe only the worst composers let it happen.

I totally accept your point, but I honestly think that music can be understood to as proficient a level without any theory at all. When i'm listening to music and analysing it in my head, I don't once wonder what that chord's called, or what time signature this is etc. I have no problem communicating my ideas about music without using the language of music.

So basically, you can still have the choice that you're talking about, but without the theory.

Queen - I will borrow my guitarist's copy of Kant's "Critique of Judgement" and give it a read.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156497' date='Mar 13 2008, 09:23 AM']I totally accept your point, but I honestly think that music can be understood to as proficient a level without any theory at all.[/quote]

Maybe not quite understood, performed yes. But those that can do it to astonishing levels without study are not the norm, and probably not the best examples to hold up as models of how to do it. (and probably just devise their own methods)
I think those unusual individuals are often prodigious and it seems to me, quite competent, or even brilliant by the time they realise there is theory to be learned.
If you are not making those around you stare open mouthed at your ability to play within a year or two of getting the instrument into your sweaty palms, then you're probably going to have to knuckle down like the rest of us.

Edited March 13, 2008 by jakesbass

[cheddatom]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='156506' date='Mar 13 2008, 09:32 AM']Maybe not quite understood, performed yes. But those that can do it to astonishing levels without study are not the norm, and probably not the best examples to hold up as models of how to do it. (and probably just devise their own methods)
I think those unusual individuals are often prodigious and it seems to me, quite competent, or even brilliant by the time they realise there is theory to be learned.
If you are not making those around you stare open mouthed at your ability to play within a year or two of getting the instrument into your sweaty palms, then you're probably going to have to knuckle down like the rest of us.[/quote]

Why not quite understood? What is there to understand other than what can be heard?

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156510' date='Mar 13 2008, 09:39 AM']Why not quite understood? What is there to understand other than what can be heard?[/quote]
I meant specifically conventional theory although I realise now I didn't make that clear.
To your "what can be heard point" I agree that that is the ultimate judgement.

Edited March 13, 2008 by jakesbass

[BigBeefChief]

I haven't read the last few pages of this, but there seems to be some confusion regarding the original criticism of Janek' article.

Firstly, of course practice doesn't make you a worse player. Thats insane. I wish I could practice more. Even up to 10 hours a day. Practice is good, y'hear me?

PRACTICE IS GOOD!

The issue is (for me) what you practice. For me, if the practice is too academic, it can detract from the musicality. I have suggested that this is perhaps why the majority of bass players I like are not classically trained. For some reason I tend to prefer the approach taken by those that haven't been overly concerned with theory. This is just an observation, I'm not sure why this is, how could I be?

Sometimes its about finding what works for you. This may not deemed classically/technically "right", but if it sounds good, go with it. If James Jamerson went to a modern bass clinic he'd get a few funny looks for his right hand technique. He would also be able to wipe the floor (from a melodic perspective) with everyone else there I should think.

Likewise, there are people on this forum that if siiting an exam about bass theory would wipe the floor with McCartney. And of course, by their own admittance, I'm sure these people are not half the bass player that Macca is.

A thought occured to me last night. A lot of these academic excercises don't sound particularly musical to me. especially the Jazz improvistaion stuff. Bilbo made a point during the "I hate Jazz" thread about jazz being a language and that in order to truly appreciate it, you need to learn it. Maybe that by doing these academic excercises, I would learn the language. I'd also start to appreciate Jazz. I'd then start playing Jazz. Maybe that is why a lot of technically gifted bass players end up playing jazz? Maybe they have reached a (technical/academic) level that means pumping 8th notes is no longer satisfying to them? This would certainly explain why I tend not to like the music of these type of players.

Who knows.

And once again. PRACTICE is not bad. I'd just rather practice with a drummer and a guitarist than sitting in front of Bass Guitar Magazine.


God, don't I go on?

[jakenewmanbass]

Nice insight, logical thinking and grounded conclusions.
I liked it.

[mcgraham]

[quote]Nice insight, logical thinking and grounded conclusions.[/quote]

Who are you and what have you done with the real BigBeefChief?

[quote]Maybe they have reached a (technical/academic) level that means pumping 8th notes is no longer satisfying to them?[/quote]

I know I prefer to move about, I get bored of staying and playing diatonic notes, they bore me something awful. That's just what my ear has done to me though. However I LOVE sitting in the pocket, I could do that all day. Unfortunately that requires a band or group (particularly the drummer) with an ear to work together with you to form a beautiful synergistic whole. And I've experienced few drummers that really do that.

SO frustrating when you're trying to achieve something and members of the group drag it down.

Mark

[Paul_C]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='156540' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:13 AM']This is where the confusion crept in.

The point of technical practice is to develop your motor skills, not to develop musicality. It is physical rather than academic.

To go back to the military training analogy, soldiers aren't trained on marching grounds so they look good on Trooping the Colour... they're not trained on assault courses so that they're good at running through tyres and swinging on ropes. They do that stuff because it gives them the basic physical skills and mental attitudes that will help them deal with new situations that occur in real combat situations.

The point of playing something like the Hanon exercises is that they give you all the permutations of finger movement that you're likely to encounter in a real situation. If you can play them fluently, you're going to have less problems playing difficult, real life musical passages fluently.[/quote]

Exactly.

I mentioned in another thread the Billy Sheehan clinic at the Bass Institute, where he showed us a few exercises he does regularly, pointing out that they're not for use on stage, as they don't sound particularly musical, but they are good for building up muscle memory to use to play, in his case, quick, melodic lines.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Paul_C' post='156544' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:19 AM']Exactly.

I mentioned in another thread the Billy Sheehan clinic at the Bass Institute, where he showed us a few exercises he does regularly, pointing out that they're not for use on stage, as they don't sound particularly musical, but they are good for building up muscle memory to use to play, in his case, quick, melodic lines.[/quote]

Yeh but wouldn't he do just as well practising his quick melodic lines? What's the point in non-musical practice when you can do musical practice?

[BigBeefChief]

dlloyd,

I would quote you, but it crashes my PC at work!

I agree there is a need to develop and practice motor skills. Its something that I'm working on currently. God knows I need to do.

However, I've found that I'm able to do this whilst still playing something "musical" (to my ears). The difficulty and confusion arises from definitions of musicality. One man's musical is another man's tuneless Jazz noodling!

I find some technical excercises to similar to those awful "hand trainers" you see advertised at the back of American bass/guitar magazines.

Maybe if I had the time, I would do both musical and purely technical excercises. Unfortunately, I don't have the time. I therefore strive to combine the two.

[Paul_C]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156545' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:20 AM']Yeh but wouldn't he do just as well practising his quick melodic lines? What's the point in non-musical practice when you can do musical practice?[/quote]

Look ! a kitten !

*runs away*

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156545' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:20 AM']Yeh but wouldn't he do just as well practising his quick melodic lines? What's the point in non-musical practice when you can do musical practice?[/quote]
I think possibly not as melodies are limited by the motor movements that are required to play them whereas execises have all the possibles in them to give even usage to each movement. Thats why study books exist and in the classical tradition (DB for me) exercises are interspersed with melodies that use the movements you've been practising and sometimes combine the two.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='Paul_C' post='156548' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:23 AM']Look ! a kitten !

*runs away*[/quote]

LOL

[cheddatom]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='156552' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:28 AM']I think possibly not as melodies are limited by the motor movements that are required to play them whereas execises have all the possibles in them to give even usage to each movement. Thats why study books exist and in the classical tradition (DB for me) exercises are interspersed with melodies that use the movements you've been practising and sometimes combine the two.[/quote]
If there are melodies that use the movements you've been practising then IMHO you should have been practising those melodies in the first place.

[Paul_C]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156555' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:33 AM']If there are melodies that use the movements you've been practising then IMHO you should have been practising those melodies in the first place.[/quote]

So you're suggesting playing EVERY melody in every position ?

Sounds like a late night to me ..

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='156555' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:33 AM']If there are melodies that use the movements you've been practising then IMHO you should have been practising those melodies in the first place.[/quote]
It seems to me that you will employ any answer you can come up with, to avoid taking on board hundreds of years of very successful refinement of musical developement, some of which has been devised by the likes of people you would seemingly aspire to be able to match for musical ability. By my judgement in a learning sense this puts you at a distinct disadvantage to those that do the work without procrastination, prevarication and refusal to accept the validity of systems that have existed for more than a hundred of your lifetimes.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Paul_C' post='156558' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:36 AM']So you're suggesting playing EVERY melody in every position ?

Sounds like a late night to me ..[/quote]

I obviously have no idea of what these technical practice regimes consist of! If you do one practice routine to develop a certain kind of movement for a while, you'll have improved using that movement. If you practice a melody for a while that uses the same movement you should also improve by the same amount?

I don't get why you would need to practice an infinite number of peices to match the attainment acheivable by these technical practice regimes.

Like I say though, it seems I don't know what i'm on about.

[mcgraham]

I agree with making practice as musical as possible, that way you're maximising your benefit.

I greatly dislike angular sounding exercises that are angular purely for mechanical reasons. Make everything as musical as possible. There are plenty of ways to make something that is very difficult mechanically also be a musical exercise.

Mark

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='mcgraham' post='156562' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:39 AM']I agree with making practice as musical as possible, that way you're maximising your benefit.[/quote]
me too

[cheddatom]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='156560' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:38 AM']It seems to me that you will employ any answer you can come up with, to avoid taking on board hundreds of years of very successful refinement of musical developement, some of which has been devised by the likes of people you would seemingly aspire to be able to match for musical ability. By my judgement in a learning sense this puts you at a distinct disadvantage to those that do the work without procrastination, prevarication and refusal to accept the validity of systems that have existed for more than a hundred of your lifetimes.[/quote]

No, I was genuinley just answering your post. I don't get why a technical practice regime that uses motor skill A and B would be better than a melodic bassline that uses motor skill A and B. I really don't get it!

I have never refused to accept the validity of music theory! I accept it for what it is. All I am saying is "I wonder if we really need it" or, would a player who didn't have it be a less conventional player? Does less conventional mean good? Do you have to be able to play harder things than you actually need to to be a good player? etc etc etc.

We're just discussing stuff aren't we?