endorka

[quote name='chrkelly' post='758419' date='Feb 26 2010, 05:18 PM']It's weird isn't it, it's the same with bows, I doubt you'd ever see anyone playing French in Germany and vice versa but here in the UK it's split pretty much evenly. In France they play a lot on those Quenoil style basses and go for a very soloistic sound with loads of overtones. Here it's all about deep fundamental.[/quote] I've definitely noticed the propensity for the deep fundamental in orchestral double basses here as well. I find it interesting as the sound I've gravitated towards is like the French style you mentioned; quite light, with a lot of overtones, a bit like a cello. This is at least in part because I do quite a lot of amplified arco playing, where the lighter sound seems to project more. Having a darker tone seems to add to much "woofiness" when amplified, even on the G-string, where I definitely don't want it to do this. It still blends in fine with a double bass section in the orchestra, and I think the brighter tone allows me to hear myself better in that situation. I guess it wouldn't if everyone had that kind of sound though :-) [quote]I prefer the C extension but I'm probably biased that way as that's what I play on the vast majority of the time. That and there's just something satisfying about hanging off the scroll of your bass for the low stuff. Makes you feel you're playing like you really mean it.[/quote] The C extension makes more sense to me also - essentially because it is not in the way when you don't need it. Jennifer

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='758574' date='Feb 26 2010, 07:59 PM']Having a right-hand issue though: I've found I'm anchoring my ring finger on the E string whenever I play any of the higher strings. I've tried to stop doing it but I end up with a bad sound when plucking the A because my finger comes to a stop quite hard against the E and makes a loud thump that interferes with the attack of the note.[/quote] Just to check: are you still using bass guitar technique to pluck the strings, i.e. the fingertips? On double bass it is more typical to use the side of the fingers to get more "meat" onto the strings and give a stronger/fatter sound. I'm sure there are plenty examples, but the following is one approach, courtesy of Ray Brown; [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9frgJdwYNC8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9frgJdwYNC8[/url] Jennifer

[quote name='chrkelly' post='758344' date='Feb 26 2010, 04:05 PM']5s are common in orchestras, especially in Germany where people play 5s almost exclusively.[/quote] There is definitely a bias towards either the C extension of 5 strings depending on country/culture - do you know why? Certainly I don't think there are any 5 string double basses in any of the major Glasgow orchestras, but I'd say at least half of them half C extensons. Which do you prefer yourself? Jennifer

[quote name='tauzero' post='758239' date='Feb 26 2010, 02:22 PM']The WAV-4 does need some sort of buffering pre-amp though, otherwise it sounds really thin.[/quote] That's interesting re: the WAV-4 , and I certainly don't doubt your experience, but mine has been different - perhaps it depends on the amplifier one uses? I used mine mostly with an Eden Wt330, and it sounded fat as beejeesus, but it has a 1 megohm input impedance, designed for acoustic instruments, so that would explain that. Perhaps amps with a lower input impedance are those requiring the preamp? It also sounded great on Trace Elliot and Ashdown amps, but I've no idea about the technical specs of those. Jennifer

Just to present a different point of view: I am not entirely convinced that starting on a 5 string bass is such a good idea, one reason being that the vast majority of method books and teaching material is for the 4 string instrument, and learning that is complicated enough without adding other factors in. Adding another string adds significantly to the complexity and size of the instrument - as Kyle says, bowing becomes trickier (and it is tricky enough already!), and it can often be difficult to figure out how to integrate the B string into exercises based around a 4 string instrument. I would be wary of assuming you require a low B from your experience of bass guitar playing, as the fundamental frequencies and tone produced from notes on a DB are far more resonant, especially when amplified. An amplified low B on a DB is outrageous, indeed most bass speakers cannot reproduce it well at all, and players often end up using them sparingly, or for special effect. I've certainly rarely come across situations requiring a low B; you get the occassional notes in classical music, often when reading parts written for cello, but it is considered acceptable to play these an octave higher if you have a four string. In jazz the low B is just not a requirement at all. Of course, your needs may be different! My main concern is that with a low B, you end up with something that is occassionaly useful, but a pain in the backside most of the time. Jennifer

[quote name='Doddy' post='757277' date='Feb 25 2010, 04:47 PM']If you only have three songs that involve the bass being tuned down a tone on all strings,surely you would only have to relearn those three songs and not the whole set?[/quote] Yup - and if you get a Hipshot D-tuner, you don't have to worry about re-tuning between songs etc. A flip of the switch will move you from EADG to DADG, even during a song if you're quick enough. Jennifer

[quote name='howieee' post='752943' date='Feb 21 2010, 04:33 PM']... i want to customise it,, make it [b]sound realy nice.[/b] i want to put new pickups in it[/quote] Good pickups will almost certainly make it sound really nice in my experience - you get a lot of bang for the buck in sound terms when you replace duff pickups with good ones. I replaced the stock ones on my P-bass clones with Seymour Duncan Quarter Pounders, and the instrument is now one of the best sounding I have every heard. Replacing the pots is easy and cheap and often part of replacing pickups; the knobs themselves should not need replacing. [quote]and maybe buy a fender maple neck from somewhere. eventually add a badass to it. some new knobs and machine heads etc .[/quote] None of these changes will make it sound really nice; some will have a negligable effect, certainly compared to installing new pickups and/or strings, and some of them will have no effect at all - the machine heads certainly fall into this category. Virtually no bang for the buck at all with those upgrades. You will receive conflicting opinions about the benefits of the Badass bridge ranging from zero improvement to huge improvement. In my opinion, it is possible to get a great instrument by upgrading a mediocre one with things that are relatively cheap but give big improvements in sound (e.g. pickups) or playability (e.g. fret dress), especially as these are the things that are skimped on with budget basses. But if you get carried away with all the expensive bling such as machine heads you're wasting your money and time. Jennifer

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='750819' date='Feb 19 2010, 12:58 PM']I present the first in my series of studies designed for the Pre-Novice. This is called "Étude in E": [/quote] Ha - you may speak in jest, but when starting to play bowed double bass, that is one of the exercises, and you can spend weeks, months or even years trying to make it sound good. Then you have to move on to the open A string. Jennifer

All looking good, especially the Seymour Duncan 1/4 pounders & Rotosound strings - my favourite combination. I must confess I've never understood the debate around the tuner replacement thing - if you can tune the bass, and all things being equal, it stays in tune, then the tuners are doing their job, and do not need replaced. If the bass can't be tuned, or it won't stay reliably in tune once tuned, with all other things being equal, then the tuners *may* be the problem, and *may* need replaced. I've never owned a bass that wouldn't stay in tune, and I've owned some cheap basses. Both my Squire P-bass and Westfield P-bass clone are just fine in this regard. Jennifer

Simandl: [indent]Franz Simandl (August 1, 1840 - December 15, 1912) was a double-bassist and pedagogue who is remembered most for his New Method for the Double Bass, 30 Studies, and more advanced collection of studies, Gradus ad Parnassum. All three of these works are still in use today and are available in a number of competing critical editions. His approach uses the first, second, and fourth fingers of the left hand (actually, the third and fourth operating together as one digit) for stopping the strings on the lower register of the instrument and divides the fingerboard into various positions.[/indent] From [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?act=Post&CODE=02&f=31&t=77300&qpid=744609"]Wikipedia[/url] :-) Jennifer

[quote name='essexbasscat' post='744569' date='Feb 14 2010, 09:42 AM']Q. do you think one finger per fret is valid advice ? I havn't researched it personally, but relied instead on the advice of the 'experts'. What do you think ?[/quote] It depends! I have found that advice to play with 1fpf is usually given by those that can use this system with no difficulties, and this makes sense - it is a good system if it can be used easily. However, in my teaching experience, I have found that most people do not belong to this camp. People seem to fall into roughly 3 categories; 1) They can use 1fpf no difficulties, without thinking. This ability, while related to hand size or finger length, can also be related to hand shape. 2) They are using 1fpf with some problems - occasional misfrets, fingers way too far behind the fret, inconsistent fingering, awkward hand shape, getting tired quickly, etc. This is usally due to the hand being slightly too small, or similar, and can be addressed by using a slight pivot on the thumb to make up for this. 3) Those who are attempting to use 1fpf with serious problems - essentially, the hand is far too small, and the pivot required to make it work is going to be as large as an entire fret shift, in which case they are probably as well using the Simandl or 1-2-4 fingering approach, adapted to the bass guitar with full thumb pivot. As I previously mentioned, most people belong to groups (2) and (3). Stretching exercises will only take you so far, and overuse of this when innapropriate for the hand shape can lead to injury. I initially tried to use 1fpf when starting to play bass guitar, but it caused pain, so trained myself to use 1-2-4. Last year I was playing some basslines (from the musical "Rent" :-) that definitely benefitted from the 1fpf approach ("La vie Boheme" was one), and found that by using the pivot on thumb approach I was able to do so, for short periods of time. I asked for advice on this from a wiser bass sage, my question: should I try to use 1fpf all the time? His reply: use it only when the bassline indicates. There are many basslines where it does not - "box" type lines being an example that readily lead themselves to 1-2-4. Of course, when one is playing in the higher registers of the instrument, 1fpf is fine, and indeed often necessary. Jennifer

[quote name='bass5' post='742959' date='Feb 12 2010, 12:03 PM']I admit I swapped the original crappy pickup in the Squier for a Seymour Duncan Quarter Pound.[/quote] I too have a very similar bass, and I also replaced the stock pickup wth the Seymour Duncan Quarter Pound. These are outrageously good pickups - I swear they'll work for anything. Jennifer

No worries :-) Someone let me try a Westfield P-bass once, because of its colour (yellow) they got it half price, i.e. £60. I thought it was brilliant to play, and they eventually ended up giving it to me. It needed a fret dress, new pickups, the bridge repositioned, and the nut height reduced, but I was able to do this myself, so very little actual cost. The result is amazing - seriously, everywhere I go, people assume it is an expensive bass because it plays and sounds so well. Guess they must be on to something? Jennifer

Oh aye, And I forgot to mention that it's great to hear that you're playing the double bass again Bilbo! Jennifer

Ok, to re-iterate: Playing behind or ahead of the beat, as you say, are subtle, consistent rhythmic devices that affect the feel of a tune sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse, depending on how appropriately they are applied. If done well - and it is a *lot* harder to do this than many people think - they can improve a piece. Rushing or dragging is a problem with a musician's timing, and I have yet to find any situation where it has a positive effect. Jennifer

Can't say I've ever heard of the phrase "drawing" used in this context, but as others have pointed out, the opposite to rushing is usually dragging. As Tim says, this is not the same as "feel" or playing behind/in front of the beat - it refers to a problem with keeping good time. In my experience, many drummers have a problem with dragging. It is absolutely ruinous for a song when they do this; the feel goes, and the most lively song can end up as a dirge. It needn't just be on ballads, for example, if a drummer attempts to overegg the behind the beat pudding in a disco song, the result will be music that is boring and lacks the thing that makes people want to dance. The song will appear to go on forever, and as a bass player it'll be all you can do just to keep the tempo correct. If left unchecked, they will tend to slow down over time. I'd rather have a rushing drummer than a dragging drummer, within reason - at least things retain some sense of going somewhere, and it is not always unnatural for songs to speed up a little as they progress. Slowing down is definitely a no-no though. To get a different perspective, I've asked other musicians what they think of bass players, and what the common problems with them are. One that has come up is the "passenger bass player", who essentially contributes nothing to the feel or presence of the music. This is apparently caused by a similar (although usually not quite as bad) problem with time as the dragging drummer. Essentially, the bass player is "playing along" rather than creating a pulse. In other words, mostly harmless, but not really what you'd want. Jennifer

I'm still getting on great with my Yita CF bow after several months of use. To answer your questions: 1) It would appear to do so. 2) The weight/balance is an improvement on my old bow, which was described by most as "reasonable". I find the CF bow excellent in this way, and can execute the arco/pizz/arco switch you mention with surprising grace. 3) No idea about the long term effects of col legno, sorry. 4) I've seen no evidence of this, but it's early days yet, although I can't see it being a problem. Jennifer

I've tried several different approaches to playing the double bass, and the one that I settled on that I personally found provided the easiest and least tense playing was sitting on a pretty low stool, playing the bass in an (almost) cello style. I learned this from my tutor, although ultimately I modified the position a bit to suit myself; he plays the double bass almost exactly like a cello, i.e. the bass is barely at an angle to his torso at all, whereas I found I had to rotate the instrument a little, in the manner of a traditional tall stool orchestral player, to be able to play the G string at the tip of the bow without having to over reach. My avatar shows this pretty well. The great advantage of this approach is that the bass is totally supported by the left knee, right leg, and torso - neither hand is involved in holding it in position at all, the instrument is rock sold, and your hands can be as relaxed as possible. I use a boot lace from a leg of my stool to go round the endpin, so the instrument is in exactly the same position every time I play it. The disadvantage, as far as I can ascertain, is that it only seems to work for relatively tall people. The most critical factor is probably arm length. ...and the fact that you'll be carrying about a stool for the rest of your life :-) Jennifer

[quote name='CraigPlaysBass' post='726506' date='Jan 27 2010, 04:22 PM']Are these a good idea? Are they as loud as acoustic guitars? I have heard some theories that you require a guitar body bigger than a jumbo guitar to get to the same volume...[/quote] To put it mildly! People will tell you all sorts of things about their acoustic bass guitars being fine in the volume stakes, but it really isn't true - someone battering chords out on an acoustic guitar will easily overpower an acoustic bass. You just can't change the laws of physics - double bass strings are tuned to the same frequencies as bass guitar strings, and there is a reason the body of a double bass is so huge. Even then, it is not as efficient as a violin at producing sound. However, if you alter your perception of the role of the bass in this setting, some things are possible. Realise that you will not be producing any fundamental frequencies from notes on the E and A strings at all, and that the presence/click of the notes you play will come from the overtones and percussive click of the notes. Keep things simple and to the point, lower your expectations of being overtly heard, find what notes punch through the best (I suggest starting on the D and G strings, occassionally the A) and you may be able to make a contribution to the sound. Some people have had good results with using a pick in this situation, presumably because it helps emphasise the aforementioned overtones and percussive click. Jennifer

My first instinct would be to lock in with the rhythm of the hi-hat, which seems very consistent. Jennifer

[quote name='Doddy' post='702974' date='Jan 6 2010, 03:46 PM']I've never found it to work, to be honest. Take your example of 'Santana' for crotchet triplets-I automatically say it as a quaver and 2 semi quavers ( 'San-tana'). That's where confusion sets in. I have never taught using words for rhythms,and have never had had a student who hasn't been able to grasp rhythms by counting.[/quote] I agree that there are no universal teaching methods, and I agree about the flexibility of interpretation of the rhythm of these words. It's just that in the context of this thread, where some are having difficulty understanding theory, or find it intimidating, the ability to say "hippopotamus" within a certain period of time is probably easier to comprehened than Jakes (admittedly jokey) other explanation of the same rhythm; "it's simple five over four, thats five evenly spaced crotchets in the space of four" It's just a friendlier way of looking at the same thing for those who can't read music :-) I also agree (in a broader sense) that if you explain things to students well they can be helped to understand something within the space of a half hour lesson that has puzzled them for decades. A lot of the things mentioned in this thread are good candidates for this - simple harmony, modes, etc. Jennifer

[quote name='Doddy' post='702852' date='Jan 6 2010, 02:14 PM']I've got a real dislike for using words to describe rhythms. It always seems really 'childish' to me. I don't know any good drummers that use them either.[/quote] Childish is irrelevant - it is a mnemonic, and if it works it works. As a learning tool I and others find it useful for "auralising" (?) unfamiliar rhythms. "Santana" is a good one for crotchet triplets, which many people can't seem to hear/play properly. For the record, the drummer who told me of this stuff is excellent - and I do not use the word lightly! Jennifer

[quote name='Duarte' post='702626' date='Jan 6 2010, 11:27 AM']Okay next week I'm off to Southampton to record an EP with my brother who is at University there. This project means I must use my double bass, but apparently it is 'too big' and they will not allow it on the train.[/quote] I'm in Glasgow so can't help there, but for future reference I've travelled on trains a lot with the double bass, and have never asked permission in advance - I suspect that your problem comes from doing this, and ending up with some jobsworth automatically saying "no". Some long distance trains have a guard's van you can put the instrument in, otherwise I try to locate the bike area ahead of the crowd and prop the double bass up in the corner there. Another good one, assuming it is not in use, is the area reserved for a wheelchair user. Of course, in this case be prepared to move the bass should a wheelchair user require it. There are sometimes other nooks and crannies that the bass can go in, and you can sometimes get it in a seat itself, but be prepared to end up standing next to it in a vestibule. On a long journey this can be a hassle, but hey ho. Jennifer

[quote name='Doddy' post='699678' date='Jan 3 2010, 04:55 PM']No you don't-it will fit in easily with the front seat in place.[/quote] Yup - as you said earlier in the thread, it will fit with the back seats folded down no problem. You can also get it into the Ka by reclining the passenger seat, then putting the double bass in neck first through the front door. Still takes up two seats but offers different loading possibilities. This method works well for most saloon cars as well. Recently I went to a gig with my double bass, a keyboard, a couple of rucksacks with stools etc., and the keyboard player himself, all in a Mini Cooper. No problem :-) [quote name='andyjingram' post='698805' date='Jan 2 2010, 04:30 PM']I did used to get a Trace 4x10, 1x15 and head in the back of mine with two electric basses on the front seat in a double bag. I think that is why the suspension needs replacing... [/quote] A lot of people worry about the weight of music gear in cars, unnecessarily I suggest. If you think about it, a Ford Ka is designed to carry four adult humans (five at a push) with their luggage. If average humans weight about 80kg, with a (small) luggage allowance of 10kg, that allows for a total load of 360kg for four humans. Of course you will be one of these, so that must be taken into account, leaving us with 280kg of payload - over quarter of a ton. That's a [b]lot[/b] of music gear - you will almost certainly max out in volume before weight in your average car. For example, a heavy bass guitar will weigh about 5kg, so having two of them in a double gig bag is trivial. Even with the leads :-) According to the specs on the web, a Trace Elliot 4x10 weighs about 26kg. A 1x15 combo is 38kg, which we can include the weight of the head in. Total for all basses and amplification is 74kg, a little less than your average human adult male. So carrying that gear is no problem at all, roughly equivalent to yourself and a single passenger. For some perspective, an Ampeg 8x10 cabinet weighs about 65 kg - problematic to lift for a single person, but from a weight point of view, you could carry 3 of them in a small car and still be well within the design limits of the vehicle. Of course from a volume (as in dimensions :-) point of view it would never work. A double bass, while huge, is actually very light, I'd say at a guess less than an average suitcase. Rant ends! Jennifer

[quote name='jakesbass' post='702577' date='Jan 6 2010, 10:49 AM']Nah it's simple five over four, thats five evenly spaced crotchets in the space of four... used all the time in contemporary music.[/quote] Oh yeah. Drummers are good with words for these rhythms, one I work with uses "hippopotamus" (hip-o-pot-a-mus) for 5 in the space of four. Do you have any others? Jennifer