Major-Minor

[quote name='Pete1967' post='681794' date='Dec 11 2009, 10:53 PM']The 'quiver' you refer to is popular with jazz players but a bone fide classical player wouldn't be seen dead with one.....[/quote] Not true! Nearly all the bass players I work with (in one of the BBC orchestras) use a leather bow quiver, and I've seen them often when I have worked with other orchs. Having said that, we usually only play pizz with "bows down" on long pizz sections like that bass bit in the New World symph (Dvorak), slow movement. If there is any arco coming up that requires a swift change, we play the pizz notes with bow in hand, plucking with the middle finger, bow held upwards with thumb, pinky and index fingers. There are many pieces where you are constantly changing from arco to pizz and its vital to get this technique sorted. Lets be clear: There is a distinct difference in sound when you play pizz with bow in hand, plucking just with the tip of the middle finger, as opposed to jazz style where more of the flesh works the string, producing a long sustained meaty and characterful note. Some Principal bass players will ask for a specific approach depending on context. For a lot of the more classical rep, the former approach is more in keeping with the style ie a shorter, less sustaining thuddy sound. Another bow-in-hand approach is to pluck with middle AND ring finger - giving a thicker, louder sound - ideal for ff or louder. I have quivers on both my basses and they are ideal for storing duster, rosin and tuner when the bass is not in use. I also have a little place on the quiver where I keep my trusty pencil, hooked through the retaining strap. Very handy ! Also the quiver is most useful when you need to put the bow down to write something in the part. I highly recommend getting one. Have a look at: [url="http://www.contrabass.co.uk/bowquivers.htm"]http://www.contrabass.co.uk/bowquivers.htm[/url] Not the cheapest place to buy bass stuff, but it will give you an idea as to cost. The Major

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='681028' date='Dec 11 2009, 10:00 AM']Thanks. I'm happy to stand corrected. The thing is, ten years ago (back when I were a lad with only classical and rock backgrounds) I would never have said Dsus = C/D. I've long thought of Dsus as DGA. However, with a bit of exposure to jazz theory (and I'm pretty sure Mark Levine lays it out like this in [i]The Jazz Theory Book[/i]), I've come across the idea of Dsus = C/D too many times to ignore. In fact, looking at Wikipedia (that bastion of accuracy ) again, they've got it there as well on [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_chord"]the page for suspended chords[/url]. I mean, it's Gsus = F/G there, but it's the same thing. I'm coming to grips with the fact that jazz chord terminologies seem to imply different things from standard "rock"-style symbols, but yes, this one's always struck me as a bridge too far. I guess it's an easy shorthand for a much more complex chord. If every jazzer knows that ([b]in jazz[/b]) Dsus actually means D9sus without a 5, that would make charts simpler to read. Of course, I'm happy to stand corrected again. Yours, Confused of Corbridge[/quote] I looked at the wiki sus chord page, and it is mostly accurate except for this paragraph where it mentions what it calls "jazz sus chord". Setting aside for a moment the fact that there is no such thing as "jazz theory" (or rock theory or classical theory - its all just "theory"), the whole point of having chord symbols is to communicate from composer/arranger to player (or from one muso to another ) what harmony is intended for the passage of music being played. If academics (and others) try to stamp their own identity on the accepted norm, then we will end with confusion like the above example. Granted, the chord symbol method is not foolproof, indeed it is hugely limited in scope, there being many occasions where the only solution is for the writer to specify exactly what notes and voicing are required. It has always been entirely clear to me that "sus" in a chord symbol means the fourth REPLACES the 3rd. If you require the 3rd as well as the 4th (as in CEFG) then this is clearly a major triad with an added 4th and therefore will be written C add F (or Cadd4). The word "add" is very useful on these occasions. It leaves no uncertainty. A note is simply added to the named chord. What has to be remembered is that the 3rd of the chord (either major or minor) is what gives the harmony its distinctive flavour. If you replace the 3rd with a 4th (sus), you completely change the character of that chord - it becomes a more open, floating sort of harmony. I'm particularly fond of this sound and use it a lot in my own writing. Consecutive sus chords are always a great tool for inspiration. Think of the intro to Street Life by the Crusaders as an example. As the Wiki article says, a MAJOR triad with an added 4th is fairly dissonant (a lovely crunchy sound). However a MINOR triad with an added 4th is quite a relaxed harmony, not quite stable, but still fairly smooth in character. I forgot to mention in my previous post that D9sus (for instance) can also be written as Am7/D (DGACE), and is somehow easier to read for improv purposes. The very nature of jazz means that the chord sequence is only ever a rough guide, and so some loose abbreviations are quite acceptable in a heavily improvised situation. Its all about using yours ears anyway on most jazz gigs. However, if you are playing in a reading situation - say in a heavily arranged big band setting or TV / Film session - then accuracy in the rhythm section chord charts is vital. All too often, I've seen chord symbols written by less experienced arrangers that leave the poor old guitarist scratching his head. I've banged on about this before on the forum: Music theory has developed over many hundreds of years, its not science, its entirely man-made, based on our emotions and preferences and to a certain extent on our musical conditioning - ie the sounds we have been exposed to. I work in many different music genres, so I see at first hand the differing ways of articulating musical thought, but in the final analysis, we NEED a consensus of opinion and methods when it comes to music creation / re-creation. Otherwise we just end up with confusion and wasted time in the rehearsal room. The Major

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='680350' date='Dec 10 2009, 03:24 PM']When you work up the scale, you go from 1 (root) up to 7, and then the next note's the root again, just an octave higher. You can think of that octave as note 8, so note 9 is the one after the octave and so on. So a C9 chord (for example) adds a D to the top of the chord. Yes, D is also note 2 in the scale, but using a 9 suggests that the D should be voiced into the second octave. (Incidentally, when you see C9, it's implied that there's a flat 7 in there too, so the chord would be C,E,G,Bb,D.) Suspended simply means that there's no 3rd in the chord, and it's replaced with a 2 (sus2) or 4 (sus4). In jazz, a sus chord is a dominant seventh chord with an added fourth, which can be written as a slash chord: Dsus is equivalent to C/D. HTH. Someone with much deeper knowledge than me will surely be along soon to add, correct and fill in the gaps. [/quote] Can I just correct one small point here: You say "Dsus is equivalent to C/D". This is not quite right. Dsus is DGA C/D is DGCE If you wrote D7sus you would get DGAC If you wrote D9sus you would get DGACE The Major

[quote name='leftybassman392' post='680355' date='Dec 10 2009, 03:27 PM']Actually I'd be interested to hear what the Major has to say about it.[/quote] This is a most interesting question - and I have to say i have no idea of the answer ! I shall ask some of my more erudite orchestral colleagues, but i don't hold out much hope of getting to the bottom of this one. The Major

One 4 note chord that does work on BG is the "dominant 7#9" played right at the top end of the fretboard. Its a great jazzy bluesy sound. In this example, I've used C7#9 to start this short sequence followed by B7#9 one fret lower and Bb7#9 one fret lower again. In the interests of theoretical precision, I've used the correct enharmonics, resulting in a C## (double sharp) ie the 9th note of B major is C# so in sharpening this note we get C## - it looks like an X before the note. In my early days in Mecca bands and various other dance bands, British arrangers always referred to this chord as C7b10 (flat 10), and I still prefer this method. But the American music education system seems to have won the day, and now everybody refers to it as a sharpened 9. [attachment=37952:Dom7_9sequence.pdf] [attachment=37953:Dom7_9sequence.mp3]

Another latest update ! I decided to take the plunge and order some Evah P orchestral (medium) strings to try on my main orchestra bass which up to now has always had Pirastro Flexocore strings. Well, I put them on yesterday, and I have to say WOW - what a difference ! A clean, clear, immediate response under the bow even when playing spiccato, lovely big fat round sound, great dynamic width, and a healthy sustain when playing pizz (although not as good as the "weich" version of the EP's). They are substantially thicker in feel than the Flexocore, and I am comfortable with this. However, time will tell whether I find them more tiring to play on for long periods. I'm playing a couple of short solos at a chamber concert next weekend, plus a busy week of orchestral CD recordings, so I'll let you know after that how I get on with these new strings. The Major ☛ 𝄢♬♬♬♬

[quote name='SteveO' post='675543' date='Dec 6 2009, 11:34 AM']Heres some more if you want. These can be found in the character pallette / special characters menu item on your mac (once open, change the view "all characters" then you can find musical symbols in the menu) Dunno if you can find em in the PC character map though although anyone can use them by typing in the &# numbers followed by a semicolon: 𝄪 Double sharp &#119082 ♯ Sharp &#9839 ♮ Natural &#9838 ♭ Flat &#9837 𝄫 Doubleflat &#119083 𝄞 Trebble clef &#119070 𝄢 Bass clef &#119074 𝄡 Tennor clef &#119073 𝄆 𝄇 Repeats &#119046 &#119047 e.g. to get ♭ type [code]& # 9 8 3 7;[/code] without the spaces[/quote] That's brilliant ! Thanks so much for that SteveO. ♮𝄞♭𝄐𝄫𝄡𝄇♯ɰɣβ I had no idea these things were so readily available on my Mac. The Major☟☛➲➤⬆⇪⇲↷↷♬♪௹

[quote name='chardbass' post='675208' date='Dec 5 2009, 07:30 PM']When I mentioned that there would be someone better informed it was you I was thinking of you Major Damned if I can remember how to use symbols in text too![/quote] I assume you are referring to ###s ? On my Mac, it's the alt key and the 3 key ######. took me some experimenting to find it but there it is ######. The Major

[quote name='chardbass' post='673868' date='Dec 4 2009, 03:25 AM']Before we get involved in modes it is worth considering the basic minor scales and its variations. There will be someone better informed than me here but when I have taught I use the natural minor scale as a start point Root, 2nd, min 3rd, 4th, 5th, min 6th, min 7th octave A natural minor would play A B C D E F G A. When I played a classical instrument I was taught the harmonic minor and melodic minor A harmonic minor has a raised 7th- A B C D E F Gsharp A but the gap between the F and Gsharp is considered large and un-melodic (whilst not a complete cardinal sin) As a result when ascending from 6th to 7th the 6th is raised by a semitone and when descending from 7th to 6th the 7th is lowered by a semitone with the 6th unaltered. The resulting scale means a different series of notes going up to the one coming down. A melodic minor ascending and descending is A B C D E Fsharp G sharp A G F E D C B A [url="http://www.tonalcentre.org/Harmonicmi.html"]http://www.tonalcentre.org/Harmonicmi.html[/url][/quote] I posted recently on this subject on another thread (the one about being confused about modes, i think). So let me just clarify a couple of points: The usual "classical" teaching gives just 2 minor scales: Harmonic and Melodic, but in fact the latter is an amalgam of 2 scales: Melodic and Natural. If you are asked in an Associated Board exam to play a melodic scale, they will expect the ascending to different to the descending, as has already been pointed out. What they don't teach in this domain, however, is that the descending scale is a in fact called a Natural Minor. The reason for the Melodic minor scale's introduction actually goes back to (I believe) Medieval times, when all serious music development happened in the Church. It was believed that the harmonic minor's jump of a minor 3rd between the flattened 6th and major 7th was too ungainly for the singers (it was predominantly vocal music at this time) and so the major 6th was introduced to smooth out the scale. The Harmonic minor scale, however, fits nicely into the style of harmony that became common as music developed through the Early Music and Baroque periods, ie the idea of the key system that we are all so familiar with these days. So, staying in A minor, we would have the chord built on the 4th note of the scale ie D with an F natural in it (rather than the F# of the melodic minor scale) and a G# to fit into the dominant chord of E7. The Major

[quote name='leftybassman392' post='674458' date='Dec 4 2009, 07:51 PM']Explanation is not part of the creative process.[/quote] While I agree wholeheartedly with this statement, it doesn't half make it easier to BE creative of you at least have some detailed knowledge of what others have done before you. That's how you can avoid cliches and accusations of plagiarism. It can also give you a starting point from which you will probably stray wildly, but will at least get you going, avoiding the writer's block syndrome. Having said that, "explanation" is what we get in bucket-loads from young composers whose works we perform at our annual SPNM (Society For The Promotion Of New Music) concerts. Drives me mad ! Bullshit, bullshit and yet more bullshit ..... every time. The Major

[quote name='Sibob' post='674210' date='Dec 4 2009, 02:48 PM']It would be interesting to know if anything musical has been written theoretically before it has been performed creatively[/quote] Most of the orchestral repertoire !

[quote name='jakesbass' post='674167' date='Dec 4 2009, 01:52 PM']To my mind it's largely to do with the historical context, Miles sought to cool everything down, the 10 years prior to Kind of Blue was faster higher faster and yet faster with more changes and more improvisational gymnastics than at any time since Bach. So the idea was... how can we move away from all that freneticism and still retain an improvisational integrity? the answer apparently was not more but less changes... So how few can we have? well why don't we try just one chord for a while... can we blow on it? yeah of course the chord is just the template... what happens when we run out of steam? we'll just move the chord up a semitone and see what happens.... and so on (a fictional conversation obviously) As XB pointed out chromaticism is a hallmark of jazz so it follows that it would be retained in this much cooler version of what had gone before. As I said in my original post it is true that (as you pointed out) there is a minimum of adherence to strict modal expression but to my mind that is irrelevant when trying to grasp the idiom, and the guys who do grasp it well will have a facility of all of the history of the music. And love it or hate it (the term that is) it's deemed to be playing modally.[/quote] I think you've hit the nail on the head here Jake. The meaning of words changes over time, and changes differently within different musical disciplines, so clearly a jazz musician's use of the word "modal" is now very different from its universally accepted meaning from 60 years ago. I've just listened again to Freddy The Freeloader, and bass man Paul Chambers (who you cited as achieving modal playing) gets about as far away from modality as its possible to get (using the traditional meaning of the word). So if his playing is, for you, an example of modality, we need a new definition of the word, one that clears up some of the confusion as stated in the original post on this thread. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. While i can accept the changing of word meanings, I still fail to see how we can help those new to the modal concept to meaningfully incorporate this in their musical development and bass playing without an understanding of the historical development of modes over thousands of years. Another word that is changing its meaning in some music sectors is "arrangement". I think some of us that actively do arranging / composition etc know exactly what that word means traditionally in the music biz. However, I recently read in a high tech music magazine that "arranging" was: (and I paraphrase): Deciding the order of verses and choruses in a song (!!) Now that REALLY bugs me ! The Major

[quote name='jakesbass' post='672957' date='Dec 3 2009, 10:50 AM']Whist I agree with most of the content of your analysis I would offer you this point for your consideration, it's philosophical more than technical... The [i]concept[/i] is modal. And taken in historical context that is all that's required for this to be the seminal album we all (seem to) agree it is. I think Paul Chambers achives a good deal of modal playing as does John Coltrane and Bill Evans, whereas Cannonball is relying on changes that aren't there to get from point A to point B in the charts. You might argue that I'm pointing out the obvious, but when faced with an analysis such as yours I think it's easy for the reader to overlook this core concept and so it's pertinence needs to be added in to the mix. Whatever the players do (and I agree much of it strays from the stated harmony) the structure is a modal one.[/quote] Sorry Jake - I'm yet to be convinced (please convince me!). Yes you can analyze various bits of chord sequences and maybe say they are modal, but its a very tenuous connection. The first 16 bars of So What is in the key of C (the melody has no sharps or flats) the chords are clearly in C major. The only reason we say its in the Dorian mode is because the first note D feels like it is the tonic or root note. Is this a ground-breaking modal concept ? Please please convince me that Kind of Blue is based on a modal concept. (I do love a heated debate !). The Major

[quote name='XB26354' post='673170' date='Dec 3 2009, 01:39 PM']What kind of musical education are you talking about here? Classical? If so then it doesn't really apply in the same way to musicians who play "current" musical instruments. There are no defined methods for playing guitar, bass or drums that are universally accepted. As these instruments are highly unlikely to be used for classical music performance the most complex music they're likely to play is jazz, and jazz is a notoriously difficult music to write down, as it is very much down to individual interpretation. That is why dynamics and tempo variance are virutally never indicated in jazz, other than accents or short/long notes. Most jazz musicians go to music college (if they go at all) which is already at tertiary level. As Mark Levine says in the Jazz Theory Book, classical music is ear and eye music but jazz is almost entirely ear music. To the jazz improviser the Dorian mode is just an available pool of notes to draw open over a certain sound. Kind of Blue fits that interpretation - there is chromaticism within each tune but then that is a basic hallmark of jazz.[/quote] I think we all broadly agree here. My main concern, from the start of of this thread, has been the fact that the less experienced players are clearly confused by the term "mode", and how the stuff they are learning about modes can be put to practical use. I think some more posts along these lines would be most helpful. As some of you know, my musical "footprint" is very wide, with many years experience in classical,jazz,pop,world music etc etc and therefore I can empathize with every viewpoint stated above. And I've had many a long argument with my old Dad, a died-in-the-wool classical muso (long-retired) about the best ways to teach music. I've always believed that music education should encompass all the different ways of thinking, whether it is the the old way (church harmony / counterpoint / score analysis etc etc) or the modern methods - chord symbols, pentatonic blues scales, improvisation, modes etc etc. But these days (not like when I was a student), the differences between the old and new methods are becoming narrower, and indeed most Music Colleges encompass (and sometimes heartily encourage) the study of all types of music thinking / performance. You know, its actually a very old fashioned viewpoint to think that somehow "classical" music is different from the rest of the music world. The BBC orch I play with has covered just about every genre you can think of over the years including various ethnic musics (Indian / chinese / African), hip hop / r'n'b, rock, jazz (we did a concert with Wynton Marsalis for instance), all sorts of weird contemporary stuff, along with all the repertoire from the last 300 years. The only real difference between your typical classical muso and others, is that some of my colleagues would find improvisation a little daunting. Only some, mind you. There are plenty who can do it extremely well. And students at Colleges these days are encouraged to include improv in their courses. Oh and course orch musos can read fly sh*t !! The Major

[quote name='derrenleepoole' post='672440' date='Dec 2 2009, 08:19 PM']The whole of 'Kind Of Blue' by Miles Davis is an exercise in modal improvisation and writing.[/quote] I know Kind of Blue very well. And I'd be hard pressed to find many examples of true modal improvisation in this seminal album. Yes there is the odd bar or two, but if the soloist introduces notes from outside the mode, it is simply no longer modal. In fact, how can the listener really know whether the player is thinking modally ? As I've said before, one can improvise using multiple modes over one chord, but then the music is no longer truly modal. Same with the melody writing. Apart from the first 16 bars of So What, there is very little evidence of true modal melody. Take the melody of "All Blues" for instance: The first phrase (over G7) hints at mixolydian mode but as it has no 7th (F) it is unconvincing. The second phrase (over C7) is more mixolydian in character with its flattened 7th but again, as there is no 6th, it is also unclear. The final phrase (over D7 and Eb7) is too sparse to pass comment. The point of this thread was, surely, to clarify modal concepts to those new to this way of thinking. You can analyze most pieces of music and point to various nuggets of modal thinking, after all every scale is a mode of some sort, but for a newcomer, we need to be clear and precise, and that's why I suggested thinking about certain well known melodies (not their accompaniments or styling) that demonstrate their modal character. There has always been a lot of bullshit surrounding the Modal Concept, and its only when you study the history as well as the modern usage that it starts to make sense. As has been said already on this thread, one needs to have a firm and comprehensive grasp of traditional theory and harmony (as taught in the last 200 years) before looking at Modes, and I personally believe it is a mistake to teach bass players (or any young musos) about practical modal application until they are in their tertiary education (ie Degree level). But, as there appears to be many references to Modes in the early grades of BG tutor books, I feel we need to help clarify what all this means for the young player. If you teach somebody about modes, there has got to be some practical usage for this info to make any sense - and that is what seems to be sadly missing in these methods. To give a young player the idea that, say, the Phrygian mode is somehow a scale fingering pattern in one octave, is a gross misuse of the word "mode" and will give that player confusion for many years. If you are teaching the scale of (say) C major starting on E for one octave, then that is what it is : a scale of C major starting on E for one octave ! NOT the Phrygian Mode !!! which is something far more complex. The Major

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='669897' date='Nov 30 2009, 12:21 PM']I should send these to you for proof reading. I sometimes find that some of these details are a result of a slip of the mouse when fiddling with Sibelius things. I will have a look at it when I can (not at home right now).[/quote] Bilbo - I'd be very happy (honored in fact) to check stuff through before publication. The Major

Another thought occurred to me today: If you are trying to understand what all this modal stuff is about: It's quite useful to think of certain well known tunes to get the flavour and character of modal melodies ( and I'm referring here to the notes, not the genre/style/mood/groove etc ). Scarborough Fair - the traditional folk melody - is in the Dorian mode. Although the distinctive Major 6th (from the root) is only heard once in this melody, it sets the mode quite clearly. God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen - the Christmas Carol - is in the Aeolian Mode ( actually a Natural Minor Scale - with its Minor 6th). Miles Davis's tune So What is in the Dorian Mode - D Dorian for 32 bars, Eb Dorian for 16 and D Dorian again for the last 16. But please be clear - we are only talking about the MELODY here - not the track itself, which includes all sorts of other chromatic notes. The first 4 bars of the quintessential Rock n Roll bass line ( in key G would be GBDEFEDB GBDEFEDB ) could be said to be in the Mixolydian mode (although it doesn't quite tell all the story as there is no 2nd or 4th degree of the scale). Jingle Bells (the whole melody) - is in the Ionian Mode. Vaughn-Williams - Fantasia On A Theme Of Thomas Tallis - the main viola solo is in the Phrygian Mode. If you don't know this piece, i would heartily recommend you listen to it. Can anybody think of other examples ? I'm struggling to come up with Lydian (Locrian ? Forget it !) The Major

[quote name='lowfer' post='670350' date='Nov 30 2009, 08:00 PM']it feels to me that there are almost 2 schools of thought here. When i learnt modes i was taught that the different modes were the same scale i.e same notes played from a different starting point. It certainly seems that other people have the same thought. However, when the major talks about using modes he is introducing different notes from the original scale. This certainly sounds that it has the potential to add more flavour to your improvisation. However i am now really confused. For me i am currently in the process of learning all the notes on the fingerboard so i have a much better understanding of all the notes in a scale as opposed to knowing the shape and leading from the root. Any suggestion for getting to grips with learning fingerboard would be great.[/quote] If you look again at my Modal Example, you will see that not a single note is from outside the scale of C Harmonic Minor. I was trying to demonstrate how you can create a modal melody from out of all the available notes. What you need to realize is that a modal scale (indeed, ANY scale) is not simply one octave (although that is often how we first learn to play scales) but in fact covers the entire frequency spectrum from the lowest audible sound to the highest. This is often misunderstood by the less experienced players. So all the notes in my example are in the C Harmonic minor scale. Also, I suspect you believe that a "scale" means playing adjacent notes either going up or going down. Again, this is how we first learn the fingering patterns, but in a broader sense, and for the purposes of composition or improv, a scale is simply a set of notes from which we can draw our melody. And it should not be thought of as a restriction (ie no deviation allowed) but as a starting point, a reference from which one can deviate in whichever creative direction one desires. Actually you are right about there being 2 schools of thought re modes. If we talk about modes from a historical perspective, there was never any sense in their early history that modes were directly linked to harmony ( although this is arguable - for another time perhaps ?), whereas nowadays we ally each modal scale to a chord (or chords) for improv or composition purposes. A good way to get to know the fingerboard is to play scales and arpeggios in 2 octaves or beyond, both up and down, in the traditional manner, saying the note names out aloud as you go. The Major

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='669763' date='Nov 30 2009, 09:04 AM']It is on there listed as My Romance (take 1) - The Best Of Bill Evans[/quote] Got it now - thanks Bilbo. One small point: Bar 26 last 4 quavers and Bar 27 first crotchet triplet should be 8va. The Major

Kongo - I admire your obvious enthusiasm for music and love of bass playing. I sincerely hope you can make a long term career in this wonderful music world. BUT - with respect, Grade A in GCSE music is just at the very start of the long process of music study. And believe me, it never ends. That's why I still love being a professional bass player after 40 years. I still learn (or re-learn) something everyday. Its not just about your fingers, your instrument, and the guys you happen to be playing with that day. Music is universal. Its everywhere, in many different guises, different forms. Music is human. Its about people, their emotions, their pleasures, their sadness, their joy. Michael Manring could not have written the solo piece you posted if he had little or no theoretical understanding. He could not create music like this if he had no feel for time, space, communication, emotion. He displays lots of technique, but that's only half the story. The bass is a social instrument, by which I mean that we mostly need to play with other musicians for it to make sense. Solo players like Michael Manring are the exception to the rule. Very few bass guitar players can make a living as a solo player. This also applies to the double bass, and I get very annoyed with the Classical Music Colleges who encourage student bass players to do solo recitals rather than studying orchestral repertoire. We get young DB players auditioning for the BBC orch i play with, and their solo concertos are always impressive - then you give them a bit of a Beethoven symphony to play and its AWFUL ! You've only got to look at the musical market place in its widest view, and you can see, firstly, how difficult it is to break into the profession and secondly, the huge variety of skills needed to sustain a long term musical career. I always want to encourage young bass players to excel in their chosen career, to have as much fun and enjoyment as I've been lucky enough to have over many years BUT you've got to be realistic. Without all the necessary skills - technique/theory/creativity/aural skills/reading/improvising/composition/arranging etc - you will flounder and end up disenchanted with the whole business. Next time a world class orchestra or a top jazz group or folk group comes to your town, go see them, even if its right out of your comfort zone, take it all in, put aside your prejudices, try to work out what's going, be critical, listen intently, immerse yourself . There is so much good stuff out there, and it doesn't cost a fortune to go to these concerts. You may be surprised by how it makes you feel. The Major

Bilbo - thanks for this. I don't know this album (I'm ashamed to say) and I can't seem to find it on Spotify or iTunes. Can you tell me the tempo its played at ? The Major

[quote name='derrenleepoole' post='666733' date='Nov 26 2009, 09:00 PM']Where's the Bflat if it's mean't to be C harmonic minor? Or have I missed something? Not that I'm picky or anything [/quote] There are 3 types of minor scale in conventional theory: Let's think in A minor - it's easier to visualize the keyboard white notes: A NATURAL minor: ABCDEFGA no sharps or flats (the Aeolian or Hyperdorian Mode) A HARMONIC minor ABCDEFG#A the seventh note G is raised a semitone to G# to accommodate the dominant chord, in this case E7. A MELODIC minor ABCDEF#G#A this scale was introduced to remove the minor 3rd interval between F natural and G# which was considered an awkward interval to sing. Of course, all this theory was developed during a time when vocal church music was the predominant musical activity. So in my example, the C HARMONIC minor scale has a raised 7th (ie not in the key signature which of course has 3 flats including Bb) so that when the Dominant Chord of G7 is played, the B natural is already in place and can resolve to the tonic ©. This is why this note (the raised 7th) is referred to as "the leading note". The Major

Here's another little chord exercise, this time with a Latin feel: The first 2 bars are straight chords, plucked with thumb plus index and middle fingers. In the next 2 bars, its the same chords but given a nice Latin groove. Enjoy ! [attachment=37152:Latin_Ch...Sequence.pdf][attachment=37151:Latin_Ch..._Example.mp3] The Major

[quote name='Kongo' post='665811' date='Nov 26 2009, 12:56 AM']Jus no...Jazz theory please! I don't enjoy that AT ALL! lol![/quote] This is going to sound like "lecturing" (which it is !) but: I'm assuming from your post that you are either currently at college doing music or you once were. Apologies if I have this wrong, but: If you are thinking of a long term career as a bass player, you would be wise to get to know all the genres of music that use bass, including jazz. Jazz in any case is a very broad church, and there will be a branch that you will feel more at home with. Just dig a bit deeper and you will find it. From there, you can then explore other areas of this genre and maybe start to appreciate stuff which at present you find difficult to comprehend. A career bass player needs to be open to all styles of music and have at the very least a smattering of knowledge and technique in each. You simply can't afford to ignore areas of music that may not be immediately to your taste. We all have areas we specialize in, but if one day you are asked to do a gig or session in unfamiliar musical territory, it helps if you have at least some basic knowledge of that genre. And in any case, there is no such thing as "jazz theory" - only "music theory". Its all about notes and rhythms - how they interact, what sounds harmonious, what sounds dissonant, how to create tension. release, emotions, excitement, relaxation, groove, pulse, etc etc All types of music are subject to the same physics of sound. I thank my lucky stars every day for the long term career I have had as a bass player (40 years so far). But I have NEVER turned my nose up at any style of music. From heavy metal to irish country music, Elgar to Ligeti, freeform jazz to Dixieland - I've played it all, and although I have areas I prefer, I feel enriched by the diversity of my experience. Lecture over !! To answer your question: The best way to approach any tutor book is to start at page 1 and work your way methodically through to the end. Obvious really !! The Major

When I was first getting into jazz playing on DB in the 70's (I was already a pro classical player), I used to listen to British bass man Roy Babbington on record and on the radio. I thought his feel and sound were just what I wanted to emulate. I met him briefly in the 80's (at the "99" pub near the Royal Albert Hall) but it wasn't till about 5 years ago that I actually saw him playing. He played my bass on a couple of numbers at a jazz gig. I could not believe my eyes ! He broke every conventional left hand rule in the book. Everything I had ever learned about bass playing technique he did the opposite. But the point is: he is an exceptional player. He could get round the DB with seemingly effortless ease. Now, I would never try to copy his technique, it's too different from mine, and I would never encourage a student of mine to play in that way, because I wouldn't know how to justify his method like I do my own. But you can't take away from him his exceptional agility on the DB and his wonderful musicality. There isn't a "right" way to play any instrument. We all have our own preferences, and any good teacher will always insist on a student adhering to that tutor's methods, otherwise why have lessons ? But we shouldn't decry another players style just because it isn't the same as our own. If we all played in the same way, how boring music would be ! The Major