Can you objectively measure technicality?

[Akio Dāku]

Well that's it really, just been mulling it over in my mind... I mean obviously there are graded pieces; so we know certain academic boards have figured out a system of measurement, but I honestly don't know what parameters are assessed and it's easy to make the assertion; "the nuances that set the threshold for technicality are subjective." but I'm not so sure...

   What do you reckon? Is there an objective threshold for technicality or what can be called a technical piece of music? 

[TheGreek]

Wow....that's a heavy question for just after Teatime...

Sorry..can't help with an answer.

[Skol303]

I think you can objectively measure some aspects of technicality. Fretting accuracy, intonation, rhythm and timing, for instance, could all be objectively (ie. scientifically) measured and compared.

Problem is, ‘technicality’ blends with ‘artistry’ when it comes to musicianship; and you can’t put an objective score on art.

So I think the answer is “yes and no”  

[TheGreek]

20 minutes ago, Skol303 said:

So I think the answer is “yes and no”  

Take a seat...I'll find a fence for you to sit on...😄😄

[fleabag]

I think the answer is definately maybe.

[Norris]

In the same way you can ask someone to paint a portrait. You can check there's eyes, a nose and a mouth, but where they appear is very much in the style and interpretation. Is a Picasso still a portrait?

Musical scores are still open to interpretation, and would usually have slightly less freedom than various artistic schools. However a synthetic, robotic performance might be accurate, but would it be enjoyable?

Edited September 25, 2018 by Norris

[casapete]

51 minutes ago, TheGreek said:

Wow....that's a heavy question for just after Teatime...

Sorry..can't help with an answer.

Just after teatime? You southerners have late snap....

[Norris]

I've not long had my tea either and it's nearly bedtime for an early start.

[ahpook]

I'd say no, only a consensus.

Much like reality.

[Happy Jack]

Not entirely sure why anyone would want to do this anyway.

[mikel]

Who cares?  Its music. If it moves you on any emotional level then it good, for you.

[musicbassman]

Bass players exam

Able to play a well known but technically demanding bass line correctly

Displays accuracy of playing, timing and good technique

Understands techniques required to achieve a range of sounds and tones from their instrument

Able to read music, and/or able to quickly learn a piece of music by ear and hear intervals correctly

Able to work with fairly hopeless drummers and still make it sound good

Turns up on time, always

Pulls good bass faces

Makes a decent cup of tea

[Marc S]

17 minutes ago, musicbassman said:

Bass players exam

 

Able to play a well known but technically demanding bass line correctly

 

Displays accuracy of playing, timing and good technique

 

Understands techniques required to achieve a range of sounds and tones from their instrument

 

Able to read music, and/or able to quickly learn a piece of music by ear and hear intervals correctly

 

Able to work with fairly hopeless drummers and still make it sound good

 

Turns up on time, always

 

Pulls good bass faces

 

Makes a decent cup of tea

 

And part of the advanced Bass Players Exam is;

Ability to turn down overly loud lead guitarists amp, without him / her noticing

Ability to convince lead singer to arrive at venue, and help drummer unload their car, along with everyone else

Ability to convince keyboard player to get a round of drinks in.....

;) 

[NancyJohnson]

Last night (after we'd finished recording), our guitarist said I needed to watch some live footage of a bass solo by Rancid's Matt Freeman.

It was frenetic; fast, not a bad note and (to my ears, at least), a bit formulaic and frankly, a bit dull.  I decided to pull out my trump card, the delicious isolated John Myung live footage that's been kicking around on YT for a few years.  

My guitarist was agog, almost like he couldn't quite compute how someone could play bass like that.

Thing is, these players are both great at what they do, but just different at what they do.  You need to add proficiency and adeptness to the equation to make technicality work.  Both these guys have these qualities, but one of them just has a bit more of each.  

[sprocketflup]

14 minutes ago, NancyJohnson said:

Last night (after we'd finished recording), our guitarist said I needed to watch some live footage of a bass solo by Rancid's Matt Freeman.

It was frenetic; fast, not a bad note and (to my ears, at least), a bit formulaic and frankly, a bit dull.  I decided to pull out my trump card, the delicious isolated John Myung live footage that's been kicking around on YT for a few years.  

My guitarist was agog, almost like he couldn't quite compute how someone could play bass like that.

Thing is, these players are both great at what they do, but just different at what they do.  You need to add proficiency and adeptness to the equation to make technicality work.  Both these guys have these qualities, but one of them just has a bit more of each.  

At the risk of sounding like I don't know what I'm doing ( ha!) …..links please?

[chris_b]

13 hours ago, Skol303 said:

Problem is, ‘technicality’ blends with ‘artistry’ when it comes to musicianship; and you can’t put an objective score on art.

The two parts, execution and interpretation, will be considered and judged separately by music colleges etc.

[SubsonicSimpleton]

Technicality is pretty easy to measure IMHO, but ultimately who cares?

Whether we are talking about photography, cinema, sculpture, painting, pottery, glassblowing, music or any other art form that you care to consider, technique is always necessary to create the art, but it isn't the deciding factor of whether it resonates with us and evokes a reponse.

 

[musicbassman]

8 minutes ago, SubsonicSimpleton said:

Technicality is pretty easy to measure IMHO, but ultimately who cares?

Whether we are talking about photography, cinema, sculpture, painting, pottery, glassblowing, music or any other art form that you care to consider, technique is always necessary to create the art, but it isn't the deciding factor of whether it resonates with us and evokes a reponse.

 

What is it with schoolboys and their right hand technique, eh?

[Guest]

Having done the old Rockschool exams up to grade 8 (well... only grade 8, but having seen the books for the other grades) you can broadly assess the complexity of a piece, and skills such as sight-reading (so quarter notes in C at 80bpm are demonstrably easier than sixteenth notes in Db major at 140bpm). As has been said, what then comes out can be judged in terms of execution (cleanliness of fretting, note length, accuracy of rhythms) and interpretation, which includes the entirely subjective “feel” - but even then a bass player that locks in with the rhythm section or playback and is dead-on appropriate for the genre will stand out to most musician ears compared to someone who just plays the notes as written. It may also be the case that more complex rhythmical structures (so some Indian, Latin, South American and/or African music where there is a pulse but it’s not the conventional 4/4) might be considered more “advanced” here in the U.K. - if not in the origin country!

In the end grades don’t really mean a lot for music. 

 

[Monkey Steve]

Short answer: no, move one...

slightly longer answer: no, but I know it when I see/hear it

Better, longer answer: define what you mean by "technicality" and then we'll talk

[Leonard Smalls]

59 minutes ago, Monkey Steve said:

Short answer: no,

Different short answer; yes.

The Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music have been assessing technicality for many, many years:

https://us.abrsm.org/en/our-exams/

The above is the syllabus for piano exams up to grade 8 (I got as far as grade 7 about 40 years ago!). Unfortunately, they don't seem to do a bass exam so we'll never know what respective grades "The Chain" and "Schooldays" are!

[NancyJohnson]

11 hours ago, sprocketflup said:

At the risk of sounding like I don't know what I'm doing ( ha!) …..links please?

Matt Freeman

John Myung (the real fun starts around 3'35")

They're both great players but very different.  I just love how John Myung does so much without looking like he's doing that much.

[Wolverinebass]

12 hours ago, NancyJohnson said:

Matt Freeman

John Myung (the real fun starts around 3'35")

They're both great players but very different.  I just love how John Myung does so much without looking like he's doing that much.

Well, Matt Freeman is just playing very fast 16ths, however they are amazingly accurate. As for John Myung, he's technically amazing as he tends to use 4 fingers. I tried that about 10 years ago, but realised I'd never have to play fast enough that I couldn't manage with 3. However, Dream Theatre are just sooooo awful. They should just wear capes and form a yes tribute band.

[NancyJohnson]

11 minutes ago, Wolverinebass said:

Well, Matt Freeman is just playing very fast 16ths, however they are amazingly accurate. As for John Myung, he's technically amazing as he tends to use 4 fingers. I tried that about 10 years ago, but realised I'd never have to play fast enough that I couldn't manage with 3.

However, Dream Theatre are just sooooo awful. They should just wear capes and form a yes tribute band.

Images & Words was a great album, still is, but primarily, it contains songs of a manageable length, whereas the more current stuff (viz. everything thereafter) is just nonsensical fretwank.  I have no idea how you would even write that kind of material.

[Akio Dāku]

On 25/09/2018 at 20:17, Skol303 said:

I think you can objectively measure some aspects of technicality. Fretting accuracy, intonation, rhythm and timing, for instance, could all be objectively (ie. scientifically) measured and compared.

Problem is, ‘technicality’ blends with ‘artistry’ when it comes to musicianship; and you can’t put an objective score on art.

So I think the answer is “yes and no”  

This all makes sense, so I guess what I'm asking is; at what point does "competence" your ability to execute said tasks (Fretting accuracy, intonation, rhythm and timing, etc.),  ascend into something we'd call "technicality"? Is it simply a question of averages? If a piece takes a higher level of competence than a bassist with an equivalent facility to the mode average could achieve, then does that piece meet the requirements to be deemed technical?   

18 hours ago, Monkey Steve said:

Better, longer answer: define what you mean by "technicality" and then we'll talk

"Technicality" defined as an above average "competence"... I think... haha, 🤣 like... Imagine a spectrum of ability that (for sake of discussion) goes; crap, decent, competent, technical,  virtuosic.