Cover band bass tone

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='grumpyguts' timestamp='1500993340' post='3341567']
Given the variabilities inherent in differing venues is it unrealistic to try and replicate the bass tone as per the original recording?
[/quote]

Possible but largely pointless.

[quote]
As a relatively inexperienced live performer should I just set a decent tone for each venue and apply the same to everything.
[/quote]

Yes (IMO)

Its much more important to get the groove / feel / articulation than to clone the actual bass sound.

[chris_b]

+1

[stingrayPete1977]

+2

[lojo]

There is no right answer to this thread , but i believe firstly you must know your songs well and have own default tone.

After this what is wrong with either having fun replicating sounds or reinventing depending on your personal and bands desires, or just sticking to your own sound all through , That's just 3 possible routes and id enjoy a band doing any of them well.

I love playing effects, I can do picked overdrive Stranglers type sound then do 80s fretless to bright compressed 80s pop lines.

[TimR]

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1501144410' post='3342755']


I think tone is all part of being a musician, be it a good, average or poor one. I think most of us strive to be above average at least, if not much better than that.

Not worrying about tone and how the bass contributes (in the case of a cover song, contributed) to the tone and feel of the song to me is accepting approximation which may spoil some listener's experience. Each to their own view but I don't subscribe to the view that the bass sound is not important to a piece - it's actually quite fundamental in my view.

Level 42 without a Prophet 5 or something which can emulate it pretty accurately, for me as a fan of their music, would be a washout. As would Mark King playing a Precision, in terms of the affect on the sound of the band.

I think it all depends, as a musician, how much you accept approximations. I've played in bands where arrangements of songs have been performed which [b] miss out fundamental hooks (note hooks can be bass hooks), use inaccurate and less effective chord voicings etc etc. [/b] No doubt the band sounded competent but is this good musicianship - depends on your viewpoint but my view is it's not.

My view is you need to have a bass which has a range of potential sounds as well as being a reasonably flexible and skilled musician to do cover work well.
[/quote]

You must get those things right. Copying the sound is completely irrelevant and pointless.

I would much rather listen to a band that are playing using different sounds than a band who are trying too hard to copy the sound exactly, missing and sounding plastic. So much so that when I played in a cover band I asked the keyboards player to pick one of the 3 authentic keyboard sounds he had on his keyboard for all the songs; strings, piano, or Hammond, rather than use some poor approximation to copy the original.

Our singer was not an impressionist, why should the bass player be?

What happens when you cover a song with two guitarists with multiple overlays, or backing brass and strings, multiple vocal overdubs and a backing choir, when you only have one guitarist and one singer?

[lojo]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1501488321' post='3344888']
Our singer was not an impressionist, why should the bass player be?
[/quote]

Because he might like it , but your right he doesn't have to

[Lozz196]

I think a good across the board tone should be able to cover it, but if I went to see a band who did a Stranglers song and the bassist didn`t even attempt to get a JJ like tone I`d be pretty disappointed. But then, out of the whole venue I`d probably be in a group of 1. I don`t see anything wrong with trying to get near without incurring a lot of cost. Sorting a Zoom B3 or similar would be easy enough, and could really make a difference. Sure, most punters won`t notice the difference in bass tone, but I`d bet that they`d think that the band were sounding like the originals, and that has to be the point, making the songs sound better. And having similar tones/sounds to the originals breeds that familiarity, so people will then latch on to the "this band is good" mind-set, which in an ideal, increases gigs/fees/fans.

[stingrayPete1977]

Does it have to "sound like the original"?

[lojo]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1501533540' post='3345376']
Does it have to "sound like the original"?
[/quote]

No it doesn't , but you can if you wanna

I love emulating JJ burnell sound (even on walk on by) but there's nothing wrong with playing a stranglers song with a fretless and chorus if you want too

The whole thread is silly , nothing is right or wrong , but the debate is fun

[Rich]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1501488321' post='3344888']
Copying the sound is completely irrelevant and pointless.
[/quote]
Unless, heaven forbid, you actually [i]enjoy[/i] the process of trying to replicate the original tones?

[lojo]

I copy Ashes to Ashes as the original and live trying to get that down

I also really love the Ashes to Ashes cover by War paint which is completely different

Does this end thread ?

[TimR]

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1501536864' post='3345414']

Unless, heaven forbid, you actually [i]enjoy[/i] the process of trying to replicate the original tones?
[/quote]

I had one of the early zoom multiFX units the 9000s. Sounded great in headphones or solo at home. As soon as I played it in a band situation it was impossible to for it to sound right. I guess things have moved on technology wise but I don't think my band would appreciate me fiddling around and trying different settings during each song.

Life is too short.

It depends what your band is about. For a covers band I just don't see the need. If you're a tribute act then it's easy, every song will have the same sound. So if original bands keep the same tone, why don't cover bands? We are a band who cover songs using our own sounds. We sound like us. The Guitarist does change sounds for each song, but he's limited by the guitar he has, the amp and cab he has, and even the make of effects he purchased.

Edited August 1, 2017 by TimR

[chris_b]

[quote name='lojo' timestamp='1501537642' post='3345427']
Does this end thread ?[/quote]

No. . . . too soon. . . . keep it going. Go around again!

[lojo]

We've played sets where we have seriously emulated some songs and done others in different genres and sounds , does it all have to be one way or the other ?

[Dad3353]

[quote name='lojo' timestamp='1501542913' post='3345467']...does it all have to be one way or the other ?
[/quote]

Steady on, there, old chap..! This is Basschat, remember..?

...

[drTStingray]

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1501539147' post='3345442']


No. . . . Go around again!
[/quote]

Aha - Let's Go Round Again - sounds far better on a Stingray...... 😂

[drTStingray]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1501538914' post='3345440']
We are a band who cover songs using our own sounds. We sound like us. The Guitarist does change sounds for each song, but he's limited by the guitar he has, the amp and cab he has, and even the make of effects he purchased.
[/quote]

That's all fine but why shouldn't the bass guitarist do something similar. In fact I think we all possibly do - by varying how we play song to song - I too used to take effects with me but rarely do these days - largely because I can't be bothered and because there's often not enough space to set them up - however I do play Chameleon- which does sound better with envelope than without. I suppose if you wanted to be really accurate you'd play it on a keyboard - I think it sounds good on bass guitar.

Is the debate here really along the lines should you use a bass with flexibility in sound or one which doesn't - I guess there's no right answer - each to their own I guess - I know what I prefer!

[fftc]

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1501144410' post='3342755']

Not worrying about tone and how the bass contributes (in the case of a cover song, contributed) to the tone and feel of the song to me is accepting approximation which may spoil some listener's experience.

[/quote]

Even for the original band though there is approximation. Which is the definitive?
The studio version or the live version?

There is nothing wrong with trying to replicate the sound from a record exactly if you think that is a fun thing to do. If you can incorporate that effectively into a live set that's great. But I think being happy with your core tone is more important, and I think most listeners would enjoy the experience more.
If a marching band were to play Superstition it wouldn't sound the same as Stevies original recording, but I'd still be dancing!

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='lojo' timestamp='1501535305' post='3345399']


No it doesn't , but you can if you wanna


[/quote]

Certainly and I think the vast majority of people that don't use fx in covers bands are in agreement that it's fine to do whatever you like, if I was playing in a tribute band I'd try and nail the tone the best I could and encourage the rest of the band to do the same but we're not a tribute band, we are covering 40+ different acts with different kit that don't always use the same kit themselves!

[lojo]

With our 80s stuff I would always look at live versions of the songs over the recordings , some of those bands couldn't put the studio sounds on stage anyway even with their budget , but it did give some nice alternate things the aim for over the records

Not a favourite song of mine , but an electric version of sweet dreams is a good example of what they did live themselves

[bassjim]

[quote name='Sibob' timestamp='1501235964' post='3343463']
I play in a covers band that ranges from 60's to modern-day stuff and just use a '71 Precision with flats (or my P/J Lakland with the P solo'd, rounds on that, tone backed off a bit). We don't particularly try to sound like the original band/recording, very much do our own thing arrangement and general 'vibe' wise, so I guess that makes it easy to carve a space for myself. If you're trying to accurately approximate Mark King in the 80's, a Precision won't do it......but we're not interested in being a tribute act, much more interesting doing our own thing with the songs.
The Precision sits in the mix beautifully and doesn't thin out when playing up high. A sprinkling of some effects, octave, envelope, overdrive and it's all there. No EQ tweaks at all, only take a second bass in case a string breaks (hasn't happened in 10 years, but you never know).
If you're interested in having a listen, bunch of live stuff here, these are my Precision with Chromes, Little Mark II with my Barefaced Super Compact mic'd with an SM57:

[url="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEEfKwixZBpOacl2xdsZJcA"]https://www.youtube....ZBpOacl2xdsZJcA[/url]

Si
[/quote] Awesome band ! Great playing all round. Love the bass tone.

[tauzero]

I used to play fretless for everything. I think the only song we did that was originally on fretless was Kayleigh. I really don't care.

[oldbass]

I can think of only a handful of different bass tones that the public might notice.

a, Jaco type burp
b, Pino type wah
c, P with fresh rounds thu an SVT with a pick. (ala The Damned etc)

For everything else a P played with a light touch with the low end rolled off a bit will make all but the most evil audience smile with delight...in other words it dont really matter as out there in audience land as long as they sense some sort of low down drone they'll be happy.

[Chris2112]

Getting a good sound for the room is more important than slavishly replicating the sound of the original record IMO, because the average punter won't really notice if you use a Jazz bass when the original was recorded on a Precision but they'll surely notice if your sound doesn't suit the room.

Imagine covering a motown gig in a room where a P bass is just giving a floppy, droning 'boom' instead of the tight, middy punch of the original record. The professional musician must think on their feet and adapt to the room. Play closer the bridge, cut back some low frequencies, whatever it takes.

I'd focus less on the tone you're seeking to replicate and spend that same energy making sure the performance is nailed-on brilliant.

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1501536864' post='3345414']
Unless, heaven forbid, you actually [i]enjoy[/i] the process of trying to replicate the original tones?
[/quote]

Yeah fair enough if that floats your boat but I think its important for the OP to realise that its not really a significant factor in how well the band is going to come across.