paul_c2

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1480879664' post='3187791'] It's not complicated, honestly. If you work in circles where reading is the the norm, I can completely understand why you might think any other approach is a terrible restriction. But it's important to be aware that there are circles where it's not the norm, usually where exactly replicating an existing part isn't the primary goal. That's not to mention folk and roots music, which has survived for years on a mouth-to-ear basis. [/quote] Surely its only "not complicated", if the basslines are not complicated? I freely admit I'm pro-standard notation, for two reasons basically: 1) The burden of remembering basslines/music in my head is lifted - I don't need to be so familiar with the line to have remembered it; but familiar enough to play it well, given the part (as standard notation). For me, the "gap" in standard between sight reading and playing is relatively small. Most musicians can play better than they can read, obviously, but for some the gap is larger than others. Since the typical stuff I play is a couple of steps easier than my ultimate ability, it means I can fairly quickly get "up to speed" and pass off a convincing rendition with minimal practice. More complex stuff, it starts becoming less about the reading and more about the practice/repetition. 2) Its a standard language of communication across (almost) all musicians, so ideas, music, etc can be easily shared amongst musicians who play different instruments. Obviously, reading music is only one part of music theory, but in itself it would help learning about other aspects of music theory.

Its a thing like anything else, which needs a logical approach and learning how to do it. Its like a piano player who would learn the left hand part and the right hand part, then put them together (and some pianists can sing too, so they're coping with 3 parts!) One way to approach it is to simplify the bassline then sing + play; and continue to also practice the real bass line until its more solid, then put the real bass line and vocals together.

I've always wondered how people who can't read/write music communicate ideas amongst each other? It must be a horribly restricting and inefficient process to have to play something, then listen to it and basically memorise it (and fraught with inaccuracy). Or somehow describe using numbers, or tabs, or something?

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1480866983' post='3187654'] Brian May guitar solos! [/quote] .....or John Williams basslines: [sharedmedia=core:attachments:229816]

[quote name='Coilte' timestamp='1480860149' post='3187593'] "Knowing" your scales involves a lot more than being able to play them from root to root all over the neck at a gazillion BPM's. While this is no bad thing, it is only half the picture. Learning scales ...i.e. [u]really [/u]learning them...involves knowing how chords are made from scales, and knowing how to harmonise a scale..i.e. playing all the diatonic chords of that scale. Knowing which chords are major, minor, etc and just as important...WHY they are major or minor etc. [/quote] I would label what you have described not so much as "knowing your scales", but "understanding diatonic harmony". Its still just as valid an area, though.

[quote name='thebigyin' timestamp='1480859035' post='3187579'] A lot of times Paul i would sit and try learn the lines along with the songs. But on a few occasions i have gone down to a Band rehearsal not knowing there set and blagged it by writing down the chords and just root noting and the occasional fill or if it's been Rock and roll or Blues just a basic walking line I have been out of the scene for quite some time through work but I have reduced my hours now and picked up the Bass again but unfortunately no Band at the moment so i have started trying to educate myself better by learning some theory ect [/quote] Aaaah right. I guess there's different categories of theory. For example, what you're doing is effectively composition, which is one area of theory. And things like knowing how to play scales or arpeggios on the bass, is really a "technique" thing, rather than "theory" (you could say its putting the theory into practice). Knowing [i]when[/i], not just [i]how[/i] to play them would again be a composition thing. For example most of my playing is from reading music, so I don't ever get to choose the notes I play, but I'd come across things like scale runs and arpeggios again and again. Obviously practising/knowing scales and arpeggios in a more general sense, means that applying them when it appears in the written music bassline is much easier (and it makes sight reading easier). There's definitely an area of theory, "how to come up with a good bassline" which is an essential skill for most bass players, but there's other theory too, which either indirectly applies or is basically irrelevant (but still interesting).

[quote name='bazztard' timestamp='1480763764' post='3186942'] yeah I should have said MY MIM Jazz's bridge pup is anaemic. that's why I just bought a set of SD 1/4 pounders to try out to the OP, the better jazz pup is the neck, so a better combination would be the J neck and a P pup, not P and J bridge imho ymmv [/quote] My Jazz bass's bridge pickup definitely helps shape/alter the tone. I suspect its a simple case of pickup height not optimised, since the optimising of pickup height is to balance the tones from each of the pickups (and across the strings) so they're even and allow their use to shape the sounds. My experience of cheaper new basses is they don't come that well set up and there's always a need to tweak something or other. I dare say, more expensive basses come better set up, but I don't go into music shops and try these, because I can't afford them.

[quote name='thebigyin' timestamp='1480843305' post='3187401'] Morning Folks What's your feelings on Theory??? Are you a big believer in learning your scales and modes, chord tones, arpeggios ect. I must admit my lack of knowledge after many years of playing is beginning to get to me now, in the past i have played in quite a few Bands and blagged my way through ect. I used to find the whole thought of learning Theory a chore but just recently i have started to learn a bit more about chord tones, inversions, scales and modes all simple at present even grasping simple intervals mainly 3rd's and 6th's, 5th and octaves as they seem to make the most sense at present....wish I had started learning theory awhile back now....any help or advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks and Cheers Bob [/quote] What kind of bands have you played in and how did you approach playing the bass (lines)? For example, did you simply seek out the tab of a song then learn it, or did you come up with your own bass lines, if so what was the starting point - simply trial/error from hearing the song (ie by ear), or were you given the chord progression, etc.

I see theory like this: The 'history' of music theory is that lots of composers did stuff/wrote stuff, and some of these composers works were pleasant while others didn't sound that good. Later, people 'analysed' what the successful ones did, and created the 'science' of music theory. Then, composers and others started getting taught music theory, as a shortcut to produce more "nice" sounding music and less "other" stuff. So its not so much a set of rules by which you must adhere to, rather an empirical analysis of what previously is thought to be nice music. These days, there's more to theory than simply this set of guidelines, since its possible to analyse further and explain WHY things work well while others don't, too. And depending on the context and style of music, you can learn/apply theory but also ignore or deliberately go against it, to create different/interesting things. A case of "know the rules before breaking them". I dare say what you've picked up by ear, is a rough understanding of theory for the particular style of music and playing you've done so far - so extending this knowledge will not be a difficult thing to do. Also, its no use learning something then not applying it, you'll just forget it again (or be inexperienced at applying it).

Have you considered a Jazz?

ETA: Yeah you're right, the Squier VM Precision has 2 pickups in PJ configuration. The range is weird! All the Precisions have 2 pickups, except the fretless, 5 string, Affinity ones with the starter pack, or the most expensive (Custom Vibe) one.

I disagree with the above comments re: the PJ twin pickups, it obviously does give a wider variation in tone control. I have a Jazz bass and use it all the time, including during recording. Tuning stability: basses are generally much better than guitars at remaining in tune, although of course travelling (in and out of a cold environment etc), putting in and out of the case and knocking the tuners, taking a cold instrument and playing it (so it gradually warms up) etc will mean it will go slightly out of tune as it warms up, which is what you'd expect from the science/physics. Once you've been playing them for 15-20 mins they'll generally stay in tune for a long while. Regarding the different basses listed, I didn't know they did a Squier VM Precision with 2x pickups, I know they do the Affinity version though. But with the range you've listed, it would be best to try them all out and see which one you find most comfortable playing. I am well used to the Jazz bass style, I recently tried an Ibanez and was unimpressed - there was nothing much wrong with it, just didn't feel that comfortable playing, or sound that great - not sure why though. I did try a Precision (and a Jazz) and it felt absolutely fine though. Never played a Yamaha. But this is a personal view, you're best trying them all out. None of the ones you've listed are "duff" so in theory any of them would suit okay.

New or secondhand? New, you'll find almost all guitar shops will be selling at pretty much the same price. Secondhand, you'd think there's bargains out there but almost all sellers will overvalue the guitar, so finding a good saving over new will be difficult. There's plenty of choice out there though, there's tons of Squier Affinity guitars bought by people who then hardly play them, then give up. So its possible to find "nearly new" guitars with almost no wear or imperfections, although be prepared to restring it since I bet they've not changed the strings since purchased. If your budget is tending towards the price new of higher end Squiers (ie, £300-400) then seriously consider a Mexican Standard Strat secondhand, for about the same price. I predict it would keep its value much better and be easier to sell later if needs be. Also it is a bit better in quality.

Technically nothing wrong/unsafe to do this. Yes, you'll have effectively one "sound" from the amp. If you're just starting with 6 string guitar, this is a non-issue though. In fact, it would be better to have that one clean sound to hear, since using effects (especially distortion and compression) will just cover over the true sound of the guitar, leading to sloppy technique.

If you have 1 minute, listen to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruTfC5v9Z2Y If you have an hour or more, then Scott Devine has a bunch of stuff on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=scott+devine+walking+bass

You could buy a secondhand one to avoid the lead time of 6 months. Or choose something without such a long lead time.

Firstly, its not a "Fender" but there is a link to the Fender name. Squier is a different brand owned by the Fender parent company, which is basically the cheaper/more accessible end of the range. In days gone by, it was fairly simple but now its fairly complicated, in that there's several ranges within the Squier brand: Bullet Affinity Standard Vintage Modified Classic Vibe I've probably missed a few out too. I've listed them in price order, the Bullet being the cheapest. Your guitar looks like a Bullet. Many more reputable guitar shops no longer sell these, but start off at the Affinity range, basically because they won't sell something they consider too low quality/too many issues and returns, etc. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but your guitar is worth something like £70-90. The one anomoly is its in a nice case - the case is possibly worth £30-40. It may be worth splitting the case and guitar if/when you sell it, although it would be easier to sell them as one; and offer postage on it (which massively broadens the available marketplace).

[quote name='TrevorR' timestamp='1480419038' post='3184172'] Me too. Once at pitch just give them a few little pulls up. If I'm in a cheeky mood I might let them "splang" back down onto the fretboard. It seems to seat them in nicely and help them settle down quicker. Surely the "detaching the windings from the core and killing the strings thing must be pure bunkum, otherwise every slapper and plucker would have to change their strings after every... well, every song, let alone after every gig. Any set of Mark King's strings get a darned sight more abuse through a single rendition of Lessons in Love than I give my strings during a string change and tuning up session. How does he ever manage to get to the end of a whole gig with strings that have completely died by the end of the intro of the first song? [/quote] Indeed. I think some people don't have a sense of the strength of strings, or are being overly cautious about their fragility. Yes, its possible to have a "dud" string and it break internally very early on in its life, also the older the strings get the more likely they are to break, either internally or if its the external winding, clearly visibly! But bass strings, due to the pitches produced, simply don't come close to being vulnerable in normal day-to-day use and can be abused - severely abused - without snapping, if you so wished. Also it means they can go on and on for 10+ years if you really didn't care about the sound too much. Its possible to pick up and carry a bass by a string, if you wanted to demonstrate its strength, in fact the bridge screws or nut may fail before the string does.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1480282139' post='3183098'] You can't have the strings opposite on a cello and bass to how they are on a violin and viola. It would be impossible to move from one instrument to the other. Sometime around 1600, everything was standardised. Cellos and basses are just bigger versions of violas and violins. If you can play one you can play the other. They could equally have standardised the other way round. But they didn't. When I turn my head to look at the headstock and fretboard on my bass; the E string is on the left and the G is on the right. . [/quote] They're not opposite, I think you're just getting confused as to what "left" and "right" is, because they are not well defined because when you look at an instrument from different angles, it could be interpreted differently. If you are turning your head to look at the bass during playing it, its an odd position/posture you've found youself in if you can see the E string on the left!!!

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1480276340' post='3183044'] Stick a violin or viola under your chin. Which way are the strings? Turn the violin round so it's a guitar or double bass, the strings have to be in the same position or your fingering all goes to pot. [/quote] I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Its clumsy to try to define the strings as going left-right on violin/viola/guitar/bass guitar, and if you take the position of the cello/double bass strings as the player sees them, then its rightmost string=lowest string.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1480268296' post='3182951'] Convention. Every stringed instrument, even the piano, goes from low to high, left to right. [/quote] Except its not true. 1) the horizontal position of the guitar, bass guitar, violin and viola means that there is no "left" and "right" strings. 2) the string instruments played upright (cello and double bass) have their lowest string on the right, as the player sees it, which is the opposite direction to a piano as the player sees it.

There is unlikely to be any difference in tone, to make it worth seeking a "bass" cable. Its true that cables, the length of cables, and whether they're curly or not, does affect tone, but its easy to re-adjust if the cable makes the tone too dull or bright using the tone controls on the amp. So don't worry about it (especially with a 15W Marshall amp) and choose cables according to length, L- or straight connections and durability. Also you can get ones which tend not to kink up, which is handy.

I can almost - but not quite - justify having a 2nd bass as a backup!!!

I think its simply based on convention from the instruments the bass guitar evolved from - double bass and guitar. Why is it like this on those instruments? I think possibly, its logically chosen like that because on eg voilin/viola/cello its easier to have the thicker/lower in pitch strings above the fingers when they're pressing on thinner/higher pitch strings during chords and double stops, rather than having to effectively bridge over an open string when stopping higher strings. Also, indirectly related, I believe that the ancestors/predecessors of both guitar and double bass evolved from a common instrument, hence why the tuning of a bass guitar EADG is the same as the tuning of the bottom 4 strings of a guitar in conventional tuning, its not just coincidence there is a historical reason. But I'm not 100% sure on that, since loads of different tunings were used over the years/centuries.

I have gigged plenty of times before but it was a while ago, I have a few coming up soon (in a couple of weeks). I've ordered a spare set of strings, just in case I snap a string before/during the gig. And I'll take a number of extra leads just in case of an electrical issue; and a spare mains lead for the amp. My bass is a Jazz bass so it has 2 pickups, meaning that if something strange electrical happens to it, it might only affect the one pickup and I can survive on the other one (or it might be a more general electrical issue). What other preparations or bits and piece are worth taking to the concert, just in case something bizarre or unusual happens?