mcgraham

That Hevos gear looks good. Why is it that irrespective of what you have, eventually you start thinking about changing for no particularly good reason? There is nothing I can think of that is wrong with my Berg, and it's size and convenience is more or less unrivalled. Yet I still find myself looking at large cabs with separate power section, despite my dislike of carrying more than is necessary. Ugh... I hate gear, such a pain! Mark

I tell people what I think. I like to be blunt, I hate subtext, but I recognise few are like that so I always try to say things with grace, and usually tact. In fact, I even went out of my way to tell Victor Wooten what I thought of his music. I bought his Bass Day DVD. Watched it. And sent him an email. I think he's a phenomenal musician, and I love what he does with the bass. And I told him as such. I'd like to see more of his fingerstyle work as that always catches my ear, but I like a lot of his slap stuff too. There are a few things I'm not such a big fan of: the recent bizarre attraction of solo bassists to detuning random strings to random pitches and randomly playing. Good as an exercise? Maybe. Just cannot understand it as a performance. But hey! You take what you like, and leave what you don't! No-one said you had to like everything that one person does. Anyway, I like Victor's playing, particularly his improv. His creativity and innovation inspires me, even if sometimes it leads him down paths that make me raise an eyebrow. Mark

I tend to use vibrato with a lot of grace microtonal bends. For example, just bending a note slightly above it's ideal pitch briefly and returning to it really makes a note stand out. It's requires a bit of work to make it not too extreme or long to sound bad, but not so subtle or short that it's not noticeable. This is also useful for bending up to another note, lots of fun in walking lines. Uses a lot more finger strength and control than perhaps an ideal style of vibrato. Bending up to notes is another favourite trick of mine. If you can do it well on guitar it really helps. Noticeable bends up to a note at key points in a song can really help the bass stand out and add some variation. Mark

That guitar looks amazing. Headless WITH whammy WITH sustainer... does it have piezo/midi? Please say it doesn't, otherwise extreme jealousy will kick in... Mark

Thanks Rich! You're also a classical upright bassist yes? How do you utilise vibrato there? Do you have a preference? Mark

From my understanding, there are multiple ways of doing vibrato. On electric instruments you have a number of different options: 1) Sideways motion - ala minute bends upwards and downwards at a particular rate. This seems to be the preferred method of vibrato amongst guitarists. It can be used to achieve very extreme vibrato in both rate and depth of the vibrato. However, a LOT of guitarists who use this technique do not control it well, they just randomly waggle their fingers and get massively inconsistent vibrato. There are many variations within this. Some guitarists like Joe Satriani keep a concrete hand position and pivot from the wrist (thumb over the neck/near top of the neck). In contrast, some guitarists like Michael Angelo Batio have their thumbs well behind the neck and bend using a pushing motion from their fingers. Guthrie Govan uses both. 2) Lengthways motion - ala pushing and pulling the string towards and away from the headstock. This is more traditional vibrato like on fretless bowed instruments. It can be less pronounced on fretted instruments but it's easier to control rate and depth, and you can get multiple strings moving at once. You also have the option of using your finger, your hand or your elbow to control this vibrato. Classical guitarists often use this, violinists, cellists etc. This is my favourite type of vibrato. With practice it can become quite extreme for such a subtle movement. 3) 'Compression' motion - ala gripping and releasing the string into the fretboard to increase tension. I can see this working on scalloped guitar fretboards, or high up on a violin fretboard, but unless you have massive frets on bass, this may not be the best option. Certainly not my favourite option. There's probably others but those are the ones I'm acquainted with. Different people will find different vibrato types easier than others, and you will have your own preference regarding how to use vibrato (i.e. depth, rate, variation in the two, etc) and the tones each type gets. Experiment, find what works mechanically, identify what you like sonically, and work on achieving your favourite sound using these techniques. RE: vibrato being noticeable in a band situation - it is totally noticeable provided you use the right type of vibrato for the right situation. Vibrato and bends can be noticeable in even very noisy conditions, you just need to experiment and find what works mechanically for you together with what works in the context. Mark

I absolutely love Prosteels. I practice a LOT, and these strings are the only ones that sound great, even, crisp and full, even for months of intense playing. I've tried Rotosound and found them to be too abrasive and shortlived. I've tried Warwick Black Label, thin and weedy sounding, also very very abrasive. Fender are alright, nothing remarkable. Elixirs feel like dead strings, and sound half-dead. I've not played a better string than D'addario yet, but I'm open to change. Mark

This is such a great advance in MIDI technology. I've been planning on (eventually) shelling out for the Axon midi system, which would set me back at least 500 quid in hardware alone, let alone installing things. But now people are making ones that simply plug into normal pickups. Genius! Whilst it may not track as well as more expensive ones (I don't know, does it?) it's a step in the right direction technology wise, and brings the price right down so that it's affordable to the masses. Mark

[quote]But if the slightly elitist attitude and image of Jazz puts people off the genre[/quote] I have to admit, there's an element of truth in this. The number of musicians I've met who are so up themselves as an 'artiste' in their genre of choice that makes you want to dislike anything they produce just to spite them... well... there's enough of them to annoy me! And there's loads of these types in all genres, not just jazz. It's just a question of whether you've come across them in your own 'travels' or not. With regard to jazz, I adopt the 'rules' of jazz as a mindset. I approach playing music in general with the same attitude. It's just about having fun! You can do so much with average bits of music with just a little imagination and the will to be creative and break convention. It's meant to be fun! The academic side is, to me, like learning the rules of football. I don't view it as burdensome, just a means to an end. Once you know the rules, and what areas have no rules, you know how to play the game and have fun within it. Mark

I have to be honest, I love jazz. But it took me a while to find the right stuff. There's a lot of crap jazz out there, and the way the term 'jazz' is so liberally used by so many, to describe both good jazz, bad jazz, and non-jazz music alike makes it frustratingly difficult to find jazz that does it for me. Then there's the performers themselves. This is not meant as an elitist comment (hear me out), but there's a lot of musicians that just don't seem to understand jazz, but simply 'pretend' to do so. In my mind, jazz affords you (and encourages you to use) the freedom to play whatever you wish to, but it should not be at the expense of making cohesive, interesting and ultimately listenable music. I know that people's tastes vary and I accept that, but I'm talking about those that are arguably just w***ing away on their instruments and calling it jazz. [i]"I'm free to play whatever I want, so that's what I'm doing!" [/i] These musicians who feel a need to exercise their freedom in this way end up destroying the very thing granting their so-called 'musical freedom'. However, those who choose to exercise their freedom in a more constructive, focused manner can bring fruition to this 'musical freedom'. That's what I look for in good music, not just jazz. Anyway, in answer to the question, I think any good music is valuable, and as good music in a certain genre becomes scarcer for one reason or another, the more valuable I consider that music becomes. Mark

It's very easy to get defensive about what other skills a given musician may have outside of reading/listening skills. Of course, one may develop skills outside of their normal skillbase when needs must, but until such a situation arises, why use would you work on something you don't yet need or will develop a need for with your free time if you're already using your free time to work on something you do need, i.e. working on other areas that are more pressing? I wish to draw a distinction here between those who are practicing what is useful to them with the free time they have, and those who rarely practice with diligence and simply assert that they don't need to learn to read or <insert skill here>, i.e. they are happy with where they are at. I would hardly call the former 'lazy', they are merely prioritizing. I'd say that is what Max has (wisely) done. And I wouldn't attack the latter party's position either, but I certainly wouldn't credit them with a strong reason for not learning a new skill. Mark

[quote]I think you'll find I already just said ear training was important[/quote] I do apologise. That statement came across a lot more 'teacher-ish' than it was intended. It was more a generally directed comment rather than a specific 'warning' to you. I've not got a coloured view of readers. I know plenty of good readers who are excellent improvisers. The thing is, they use their improvisational ability far more than their reading ability. So those readers who have a balance of both skills even seem to implicitly acknowledge a good ear is used more often than good reading skills. Note: I did not say they imply it's less valuable, just used less often in their musical pursuits. Again, horses for courses. Mark

[quote]Whether you read or not, in music there are always reasons to develop skills such as ear training and improvisation. I think the nature of some performers who read does reading a disservice and presents it in the wrong light.[/quote] It can be presented in the wrong light when those skills are presented in the wrong context. Orchestras are an amazing example of what is possible with written music - hundreds of people playing complex interweaving parts with relatively little amounts of preparation, with flowing dynamics controlled simply by the movement of one man's hands, all culminating in one complete beautiful piece. On the other hand, good jazz groups are a great example of what is possible with highly developed ears and a musically attuned mind - a small group of people playing completely unwritten and undecided parts, with no absolute rights or wrongs or directions/preconceptions that must be followed, but parts being composed on the fly that serve the song, and dynamics decided and directed purely by the sum of the parts provided by the individuals. However, very little is more painful or bland than a person with a highly attuned ear trying to bluff their way through a piece that would normally require strong reading skills, or a reader attempting to muddle along with improvisers. Different skill sets entirely. Mark

[quote]Except all things being equal - someone who can read has access to all of the opportunities reading brings, and all of the opportunities reading isn't required for.[/quote] Both camps have access to both types of opportunities; it just requires one camp to learn the skills of the other. I appreciate that 'listening' skills and 'playing by ear' is less obviously an academic skill when compared to reading, but I think it is just as valid a skill, and requires just as much dedication to get it up to scratch (if not more depending on the nature/personality of the player). Don't make the mistake of thinking that developing a strong ear is automatic just because one can read. I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that it isn't a given. Mark

[quote]Outside of orchestral (and arguably some session playing) - can you honestly say this is true? Are you suggesting readers have no reason to develop skills in improvisation (which is basically playing by ear) etc? I don't think many modern musicians *rely* on their reading at the expense of anything else - its a technique that is extremely useful but is not the only thing we can do.[/quote] Fair question - I have played with such people. I'm not saying that ALL readers do NOT develop skills, I'm saying that often there is no driving force or necessary imperative to develop such skills as they are not needed outside of their usual sphere of playing. IME, such people are usually classically trained musicians who 'get into jazz' or branch out into some other styles, and because they have the technique, and perhaps a memory that allows them to throw out licks they learned from reading, they do a passable imitation of such styles. I played with a jazz group that was like this (see a previous post by me in this thread) and they were shocking. No dynamics, no understanding of variations, colouring the music with different ideas, and just random fast streams of notes in their solos. They could play difficult stuff, had solid rhythm, presented solos with confidence, but really had no depth to it. It was the academic version of what I would do if I had to bluff my way through a reading set by ear. Mark

I have to be honest, not being able to sight read fluently (I can get by) has not been a hindrance to me in 99% of all musical situations I've been in. And a great deal of these have been dealt with difficult material, such as gospel, jazz (standards and originals). Using my ear and my sense of musical direction has served me well. And I could have made a living out of a number of these groups. So, Max, I totally see and agree with your viewpoint that it isn't necessary to be able to read to be a great and/or successful musician. However, not being able to sight read does leave me annoyed when I hear pieces that I simply want to be able to play note for note instantly upon viewing or with little preparation. For my own personal satisfaction, I want to develop that skill. And once I have that skill up to scratch, I'm sure that further opportunities will present themselves. In short, it's my opinion that there are opportunities for those who can read, and opportunities for those who can't. Neither being more or less valid than the other. I would suggest that a number of those who can read and have come from a reading background may not have experienced a 'playing' life in bands that have no reading requirement, or perhaps they struggle in/do not enjoy/dislike such environments, and as such they may lack a strong realisation there is clear musical fruit to be borne out of such scenarios. The same can be said (vice versa) for those who do not read. Those who read well have little reason in organised (i.e. non-improvised) music to develop such skills as they rely on their reading skills to get by. The same can be said (vice versa) of those who do not read. Unless you have some kind of reason or driving purpose to develop one set of skills or the other, I can totally see why one would end up advocating one over the other depending on their life/playing experience. I for one don't need it and have never needed it, but I want it, because I know I'll use it more and more, until I eventually need it. Mark

[quote]I vaguely remember it being something to do with playing violin as a kid... although I can't see how that would make it more comfortable.[/quote] I remember reading that as well on the Spector website. Makes sense if violin technique was all you'd known. In the same way that a lot of long term guitar players who take up bass continue with a pick rather than learn a whole new set of muscle movements. Not saying it doesn't look odd though! Mark

IMO Hiromi is excellent. From my own perspective, I really like her compositions, the technicality inspires and impresses me whilst the pieces stay musical, and regardless of the song, you know that if it's a Hiromi piece it's going to be well out of the ordinary. Her originality in composition also gives me great inspiration to try different things, and gives me a lot of good ideas. +1 about the overproduction on the albums. In comparison to the live vids (particularly Time Out) they are seriously lacking in groove, feel and tone. Fuze was a great addition and added a lot to atmosphere of the band, but his recorded tones are often poor. I greatly prefer Tony over Anthony on the Brain album. Martin Valihora is on my list of favourite drummers; the guy has immense feel and his fills and groove are uber-tasty. My main criticism of Hiromi is that she only has two modes: Intense or Off. No such thing as a truly downbeat, chilled Hiromi piece. Although Green Tea Farm has garnered a lot of praise from my non-muso friends. Mark

You're totally right, best to keep the info pallatable and pitch it at the right level. Interesting discussion though! Mark

I was going to say something along the same lines, but had to disagree with my initial position. I agree the OP was asking about hearing these intervals, and ultimately an interval is an interval. End of. As such one can recognise intervals regardless of context, but they go hand in hand, and sometimes one is recognisable before the other. If he just wants to work out melody, then I would agree, an understanding of context could be a little too much info to bother with. However, if he's wanting to work out why something sounds the way it does, or why 'that' note works there, then context is very important. And IMO that should be the ultimate goal. Even if he's just playing in a major key, that's still a backdrop upon which the notes are placed. If he only wants to play in a major key then context ain't such a big deal. Mark

+1 XB. Whilst you can 'get away' with just knowing intervals for transcribing or hearing things, knowing their context and how they sound over their context is vital. The melody works with the musical backdrop to create the overall feel. A good exercise I use is to play something exceedingly random/atonal and record it. Then, without analysing what I just played too much, try to play something else over it to create a context and make it 'work'. A simple example is to play two notes a semitone apart (say F# and G - say on guitar). In and of itself without context it sounds verrrry dissonant. What if I throw in the D below that? It becomes a Dadd4 (or a very select D11 chord), very modern sounding. What if I throw in a B instead? it becomes a Bm(b6), very sinister and unresolved. What about an E an octave below... Context gives the melody meaning. Mark

Depends what you mean by 'ensemble'. Knowing the above helps massively in understanding shape and feel of a bassline beyond the absolute basics. Not that sticking on the root is a bad thing at all. Just saying that the above helped jumpstart my creativity. Mark

Do you mean the pitch axis theory that Satriani advocates? If so I've used it to great effect. Really helped me to unlock ear training. The basic idea is that if you play in (for example) E major, you can use the root of the scale to 'pivot' into other scales, thereby using different intervals and consequently unlocking different sounds. Satch does this in various ways, e.g. constantly flicking between different scales centred on one note (like a generic key), a chord 'progression' where only the chord tones change whilst the root stays constant, etc. You can also do this using any note within the first/preceding scale, but typically works best on the root, and then chord tones. This device/concept allows you to move between scales easily, and thereby give you different 'pools' of notes to work with. In essence, it teaches you to look/listen for differences between intervals and groups of intervals, internalise the sounds of scales, as well as what it feels like to move between different scales. It also helps free you up to not be afraid to play something other than the known 'safe notes' in a key. At least that's my view. Here's a good video of him demonstrating it: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SckVz3XpLs"]Satch YouTube Vid[/url] Mark