Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

over rated bassists ?


jojoagogo234
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1331560876' post='1574767']
[b]So,you've never looked at a copy of Bass Player (for example) and though "Bloody Hell..not him(again)!
He sucks!"?[/b]
There are bands/albums that I really like where I would never call the individual players amazing (or even good in some
cases)by any stretch,and vice versa. There is nothing wrong with saying "I like......." or "I think....... gets too much
attention" or whatever. Everyone does it.
[/quote]

I'm usually thinking "Who the f*ck's that??!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331561667' post='1574792']
I don't read any music publications currently, but no, I don't do that. And the reason is that variety in music interests me much more than only listening to one style of music, whether I enjoy it straight away or not. The other reason is that I've learnt better than to equate seemingly poor performances with bad music. I'll never like the bass part that John Lennon played on 'The Long and Winding Road' for example but will it stop me thinking that it's one of the best records of all time? Probably not.
[/quote]
But the thread is about 'over rated bassists' not do you like the band/song.
Possibly my favourite band is Primus,but I still think that,in a way,Claypool is over rated because
he gets lauded as a bass playing genius when there are big aspects of his playing that are very
sloppy. Marcus Miller is probably my favourite bass player,but I don't think that his last couple of
studio solo albums have been particularly great.
I think Flea gets lauded waaay to much,but it doesn't stop me digging a bunch of the Chili's albums.
There is a big difference between liking/disliking a song/band/album and saying that the players are over/under
rated. Just because I like a band doesn't mean I rate the players highly and vice versa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1331562520' post='1574813']
But the thread is about 'over rated bassists' not do you like the band/song.
Possibly my favourite band is Primus,but I still think that,in a way,Claypool is over rated because
he gets lauded as a bass playing genius when there are big aspects of his playing that are very
sloppy. Marcus Miller is probably my favourite bass player,but I don't think that his last couple of
studio solo albums have been particularly great.
I think Flea gets lauded waaay to much,but it doesn't stop me digging a bunch of the Chili's albums.
There is a big difference between liking/disliking a song/band/album and saying that the players are over/under
rated. Just because I like a band doesn't mean I rate the players highly and vice versa.
[/quote]

It's obviously something we won't agree on I'm afraid Doddy! I find the concept of critiquing your favourite bands or songs based on technique utterly strange. Can't you enjoy music for what it is as opposed to what any one person is doing wrong? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

'Overrated' - what does it even mean? That more people like talking about Flea than Anthony Jackson or Richard Bona and that this is for some reason wrong? Umm... why? Do Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're the real technicians or the instrument? It's all very silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No its not silly at all. The discussion is about the process not about the truth. In truth, not one of the 10,000+ basschatters out there gives a rat's arse what anyone else thinks about their favourite players but there is fun in the discussion and banter. We all get angry and hot under the collar about everyone else's preferences and criticisms but, at the end of the day, none of it matters. It's like a jigsaw puzzle, really; entertaining but, ultimately, completely pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331563294' post='1574837']
Do Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're the real technicians or the instrument? It's all very silly.
[/quote]

I don't really care about much else of this thread but this stuck out. Yes Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're technically very good.

They're very good because they've practised a lot more than most individuals. I think that deserves recognition when it pays off, which it clearly does with both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1331562520' post='1574813']
Just because I like a band doesn't mean I rate the players highly and vice versa.
[/quote]

This is the problem with a question like this thread, I cant disagree with the fact that Mark King is a great bass player, and by comparison someone like say unknown Justin Crawford of New Fads, played extremely simple lines but I enjoy that sort of playing so much more than listening to 16 slapped and poped notes each bar, however amazing well its done in the context of skill, same goes for most things I like, like America and CSN etc, bassists dont do anything special, but just enough to make the song move you

Edited by lojo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1331568598' post='1574970']
I don't really care about much else of this thread but this stuck out. Yes Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're technically very good.

They're very good because they've practised a lot more than most individuals. I think that deserves recognition when it pays off, which it clearly does with both of them.
[/quote]

I practice a lot more than the rest of my band, should I ask for more money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331563294' post='1574837']
It's obviously something we won't agree on I'm afraid Doddy! I find the concept of critiquing your favourite bands or songs based on technique utterly strange. Can't you enjoy music for what it is as opposed to what any one person is doing wrong? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
[/quote]

I'm not critiquing my favourite bands based on technique. I'm saying that people will often elevate the
players in their favourite bands to genius like status and claim that they are under/over rated based on
that.What I said was that just because I like a band/song doesn't mean that I like the individual musicians
and vice versa.
I mentioned John Entwistle as being over rated based on the fact that he was voted 'Bassist of the Millenium'.
It doesnt mean that I don't like some of The Who's music....it means that I think that Entwistle gets a lot more
praise and admiration than I personally think he deserves. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1331568598' post='1574970']
I don't really care about much else of this thread but this stuck out. Yes Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're technically very good.

They're very good because they've practised a lot more than most individuals. I think that deserves recognition when it pays off, which it clearly does with both of them.
[/quote]

But you misunderstand my point entirely. You'll find that both aforementioned bass players already get enough credit. As far as I'm concerned, Anthony Jackson is probably the best technician of the bass guitar that has ever lived and I'm get to hear anyone that lives up to his level of 'technical prowess' for lack of a better term. Every bass player that knows the circles in which Anthony Jackson has performed will be aware of this, as is the same of Richard Bona. But using Flea as an example again, has he not worked hard to get where he wants to be today? He's been part of a band that has widely influenced other bands and has sold millions of albums worldwide, and if we're quite honest has influenced a million other bass players too.

Which one deserves more credit? Who cares. They both have their place in music as it exists today. Comparing them is a totally fruitless endevour.

Edited by risingson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331571930' post='1575067']
But you misunderstand my point entirely. You'll find that both aforementioned bass players already get enough credit. As far as I'm concerned, Anthony Jackson is probably the best technician of the bass guitar that has ever lived and I'm get to hear anyone that lives up to his level of 'technical prowess' for lack of a better term. But using Flea as an example again, has he not worked hard to get where he wants to be today? He's been part of a band that has widely influenced other bands and has sold millions of albums worldwide, and if we're quite honest has influenced a million other bass players too.

Which one deserves more credit? Who cares. They both have their place in music as it exists today. Comparing them is a totally fruitless endevour.
[/quote]

ah think i get you now. Your basically saying they deserve credit for influencing others? If thats right then i agree. However, it's when you get people who aren't as educated who claim the likes of flea or McCartney are in the top 50 or w/e bass players of all time. When clearly they are not. That is when they become over-rated. For me anyway.

Again i'm not arguing their impact or influence on music, but great bass players they are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1331572318' post='1575078']
ah think i get you now. Your basically saying they deserve credit for influencing others? If thats right then i agree. [b]However, it's when you get people who aren't as educated who claim the likes of flea or McCartney[/b] are in the top 50 or w/e bass players of all time. When clearly they are not. That is when they become over-rated. For me anyway.

Again i'm not arguing their impact or influence on music, but great bass players they are not.
[/quote]

I give up :blink: the bold part speaks volumes unfortunately about the snobbery that musicians can sometimes display. Utter madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331572722' post='1575093']
I give up :blink: the bold part speaks volumes unfortunately about the snobbery that musicians can sometimes display. Utter madness.
[/quote]

you've taken out of context what i'm saying, as i did you. I'm saying that those who don't know what those such as anthony jackson are doing in a theoretical format, are less likely to realise how clever he is. How can they if they haven't been taught it first? You can't recognise a major scale unless you've been shown what a major scale looks or sounds like....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1331568598' post='1574970']
I don't really care about much else of this thread but this stuck out. Yes Anthony Jackson and Richard Bona deserve more credit because they're technically very good.

They're very good because they've practised a lot more than most individuals. I think that deserves recognition when it pays off, which it clearly does with both of them.
[/quote]

Nonsense. Being technically very good is only any use if it enables you to say make an interesting artistic statement. Music is about art, about creativity. Technique is just an aid to that. The two bassists in question both have something interesting to say, but it's quite possible to be technically very good and have little or nothing to say (Jeff B springs to mind...).

Ultimately I think the problem with negative threads is people do start to take offence, everyone knows someone is going to and so it's not really a productive exercise. These sort of things seldom end well, rightly or wrongly.

FWIW I'll take Entwistle over MM a thousand times over. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1331572722' post='1575093']
I give up :blink: the bold part speaks volumes unfortunately about the snobbery that musicians can sometimes display. Utter madness.
[/quote]

Indeed. Should we bail now or can we still land her safely??? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe if the thread was something like "Bass players i was told were great and when i listened to them i thought WTF!"

I'd go for Entwistle who i always thought lived off his solo in My Generation for far too long. I'd add Flea to my list too. I am not saying they are rubbish - all i am saying is that when i heard them i couldn't work out why they were rated so highly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1331573320' post='1575106']
you've taken out of context what i'm saying, as i did you. I'm saying that those who don't know what those such as anthony jackson are doing in a theoretical format, are less likely to realise how clever he is. How can they if they haven't been taught it first? You can't recognise a major scale unless you've been shown what a major scale looks or sounds like....
[/quote]

As Jaco said, "cleverness is no substitute for true awareness". ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...