floating thumb technique?!?

[wotnwhy]

some good points there Graham

will have to have a play about with you style and see what it's like, sounds intruiging

Edited December 24, 2007 by wotnwhy

[6stringbassist]

If anyone's interested, Todd is in the UK in March, he's going to be doing a couple of masterclasses which should be well worth attending, he'll be posting details on his website when he has everything confirmed.

For 5 and 6 string playing floating thumb is really the only way to play accurately, once you get the hang of it you'll never go back to balancing your thumb on the pickup.

It also gives you the opportunity to move around and pluck different areas of the string, without having to have ramps fitted to your bass, which I think look ugly.

I also find that it lets me use more dynamics in my playing, just because I have really good control of my playing.

Edited December 26, 2007 by 6stringbassist

[OldGit]

Still looking at this and I just noticed it's not a new technique

Here's Jack Bruce with Cream in the 60's ..
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l16jlallBMs&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l16jlallBMs...feature=related[/url]

[bnt]

This thread has been confusing me a little, because this "new technique" look a lot like the way I've been playing for 20 years now. My first good bass, the Hohner B2V, is a 5-string with pickups that are nearly flush with the body, and I could never rest my thumb on them. So I rested my thumb on the B string, and moved my hand to reach the higher strings. Now I have that bass tuned EADGC, and the Tune 4-string with the very long J-style pickups. When I bought that last year, there was a comment from someone here that those pickups would be a problem because they wouldn't make good thumbrests, but I didn't get it, because I haven't been resting my thumb on the pickups all along.

I've just had a closer look at what I'm doing, and seem to be mixing it up: I'll stretch my fingers up 1, 2 or occasionally 3 strings for the odd note, without the thumb moving. However, if I'm staying on the higher strings, it moves up, not necessarily straight away, but sometimes at the same time as a position change on the fretting hand.

The idea that some folks are keeping their fingers on the pickup/rest/ramp at all times, and stretching their fingers to reach every string, is just weird! Here's Gary Willis explaining what he does: he thinks it's a bad idea, because it leads to playing with a bent wrist, and could lead to tendon problems. In the examples, he seems to be using a floating thumb too.


Edit: am I mis-interpreting what "floating thumb" means? My thumb hooks to a specific string as I move it, but I wouldn't have thought of calling it "anchored", since I don't put force on it when playing. It's a reference point for my hand position, which assists with muting too. If Todd meant that his thumb just rests on the strings, not using them as a reference, then that's something I fail to see the point of. In Todd's video that's how it looks, thumb flat: IMHO that's going a bit too far, and I prefer what Gary was doing: the ergonomic benefits from the straight wrist are there too.

Edited May 13, 2008 by bnt

[mcgraham]

Whilst you may not be 'anchoring' in the traditional sense, the purpose of the floating thumb is to allow you be able to slide from string to string without having to lift your thumb off a string, or remove it from between two strings.

Those who place their thumb against a single point all the time are 'anchoring', those who are placing their thumb at a single relative point (i.e. always 'hooked' one string below the one you're playing) can be considered to be using a 'movable anchor'. The floating thumb, however, is not this.

Relax your hand, place it on your desk such that the outer side of your thumb (relative to the inside of your hand/index finger) is flush with the table top. Slide your entire forearm and wrist (as one structure) across the table top. [i]That[/i] is the action the floating thumb advocates. Imagine the table top was the upper surface of your strings, you wouldn't once get 'caught' on or restricted by the strings. It provides for a relaxed hand, and a complete muting device for your strings that doesn't get you tangled in your strings.

Making sense?

Mark

[bnt]

[quote name='mcgraham' post='197964' date='May 13 2008, 01:57 PM']Making sense?[/quote]
I get that from the video, but if it means using the thumb only for muting, then no thanks. For accurate fingering, I need a constant reference of my hand position relative to the strings - up/down and high/low - and that's what my thumb provides when it's touching a string by the tip. It's a tiny, quick movement to get it over the string and I have flexibility in how I time that (I observe), hence my reluctance to call it "anchored". So I do see what he's saying, and I don't need an explanation, I just think it's wrong for me.

Edited May 13, 2008 by bnt

[mcgraham]

That's fair enough! I never really found myself anchoring much, so the progression from even a slight movable anchor to the floating thumb made a lot of sense. Whilst I understand what you mean about the reference point / muscle memory, you soon pick it up with the floating thumb. You do get a constant reference point, it just isn't as definite as a string, it's just a position on the course of strings.

Having said that though, if your technique uses minimal anchoring with a movable anchor then you're a darn sight better than a large number of bassists!

Mark

[XB26354]

I also adapted to using floating thumb technique. It becomes more useful on 5- and 6-strings. Whilst Gary Willis has phenomenal technique I could never get that third finger to relax enough and the whole thing felt uncomfortable (and I had several goes at it over about 6 months). His technique is also extremely difficult to master if you have wide string spacing as your third finger must stretch to reach the upper string. As it goes through the string at a different angle you get a different attack, so it doesn't sound right. It also becomes very hard to keep your hand relaxed.
I found that as soon as I lifted my thumb off a string my whole hand relaxed, and I could play far more fluidly and rapidly. I use it to damp the bottom strings where there is still a sense of placement, so I guess it's just what feels best to you. It doesn't work so well for big string skips so I have added using the thumb for bottom strings and i/m for the upper strings. I prefer to adapt my technique slightly to suit the line rather than being stuck with a one-size-fits-all technique that falls apart when you try to play quick octaves or chords.
I haven't played 4-string for a while but none of these problems seemed to come up so maybe it is just 5 strings + that create these kind of issues with the plucking hand...

[6stringbassist]

I spent a weekend studying with Todd Johnson earlier in the year, floating thumb means that your thumb actually floats, it's not anchored, it's used as a mute.

It's actually quite hard to accomplish, but very useful.

As with most techniques, it may suit some but not others, and is only really useful with a 5 or a 6 string.

I personally don't use it very often, I prefer to rest my thumb on something, I move up and down the strings as I play.

[wotnwhy]

"Still looking at this and I just noticed it's not a new technique"


"This thread has been confusing me a little, because this "new technique" look a lot like the way I've been playing for 20 years now."

must have missed something, who says it's a new technique?

[XB26354]

This is not a new technique. I have been using it for years too.
Classical guitarists have been at it for about 250 years too

[SkinnyMike]

This thread has been a great read guys! And the same goes for the 3 finger exercise in another thread.
I definatly need to adopt this technique as i get a very sore wrist quickly when playing bass. Although having dislocated and broken my right wrist a few years ago wouldnt have helped in any way, shape or form...

Wow my right hands technique is going to change a LOT over summer because of this forum!!

[mcgraham]

[quote]Classical guitarists have been at it for about 250 years too[/quote]

Really? That's really quite interesting, all the classical guitarists I've watched tend anchor in some form, be it movable or absolute.

[Kev]

didnt know it was callled that, but ye i always use it kinda, specially with my 6 string

Edited May 14, 2008 by BassManKev

[XB26354]

[quote name='mcgraham' post='198473' date='May 14 2008, 08:31 AM']Really? That's really quite interesting, all the classical guitarists I've watched tend anchor in some form, be it movable or absolute.[/quote]
There's always some form of anchor, even with a "floating" thumb - got to dampen those lower strings.
As the thumb is needed to play bass notes and bottom notes of chords (and occasionally for strums a la flamenco) there is no particularly strong anchor on classical guitar. The hand positions look similar, with a comfortable, straight wrist and relaxed plucking hand. I stumbled upon the floating thumb technique as it removed all tension in my fretting hand.
I'm happy to play a variety of techniques, depending on the line. The only style I would say is a big no-no is to anchor your thumb on the pickup and leave it there whilst you play all 4/5/6 strings. This puts a severe bend on the right wrist (which gets worse the higher you wear the bass), puts tension in the hand when you play the upper strings and leads to a loss in fine control when playing quickly.

[SkinnyMike]

[quote name='XB26354' post='198628' date='May 14 2008, 11:51 AM']The only style I would say is a big no-no is to anchor your thumb on the pickup and leave it there whilst you play all 4/5/6 strings. This puts a severe bend on the right wrist (which gets worse the higher you wear the bass), puts tension in the hand when you play the upper strings and leads to a loss in fine control when playing quickly.[/quote]

Too true buddy. I adopted this style when i started 6 years ago and only YESTERDAY realised that it was the worst playing technique a bass player could have compared to all the others out there. Im trying my hardest to adopt the floating technique and to be fair, after 6 years with 1 technique then switching to this (completly new to me) technique, its not actually as hard as i thought it would be. It feels very natural. It does hurt at 1st but i can tell that its gong to be doing me a whole lot of good in the end.

[wotnwhy]

i still don't see where anyones claimed its a new technique??

[nottswarwick]

cool

I do floating thumb, non anchored, and find it fine, except for octave licks, where I seem to be better anchoring fully. Working on keeping floating, but feels a bit awkward.

[mcgraham]

I don't think that octaves with floating thumb are any more difficult than using an anchor, movable or otherwise. It's just the difficulty inherent in playing two non-adjacent strings with digits that are right next to each other (i.e. standard IM alternation, with or without raking), unlike using hybrid picking to pluck octaves on guitar.

Erring slightly off-topic here, whilst I would agree that there's no reason that you [i]have[/i] to use index-middle to pluck octaves, and that thumb and another digit make it easy, by all means use it, but I would encourage people to develop their technique to a level such that you don't get impeded by things like this. To switch from two finger to thumb and index (say) and back again, no matter [i]how[/i] fluid, will never be as quick as not switching at all and being able to do said octave licks (string skipping et al).

Mark

Edited May 15, 2008 by mcgraham

[nottswarwick]

[quote name='mcgraham' post='199059' date='May 14 2008, 09:16 PM']I don't think that octaves with floating thumb are any more difficult than using an anchor, movable or otherwise. It's just the difficulty inherent in playing two non-adjacent strings with digits that are right next to each other (i.e. standard IM alternation, with or without raking), unlike using hybrid picking to pluck octaves on guitar.

Erring slightly off-topic here, whilst I would agree that there's no reason that you [i]have[/i] to use index-middle to pluck octaves, and that thumb and another digit make it easy, by all means use it, but I would encourage people to develop their technique to a level such that you don't get impeded by things like this. To switch from two finger to thumb and index (say) and back again, no matter fluid, will never be as quick as not switching at all and being able to do said octave licks (string skipping et al).

Mark[/quote]

exactly. I am working to not have to switch technique. It is coming quickly, as I am a grade 8 classical guitarist, so am using all 3 fingers, which makes it fine. A bass is a lot bigger and more physical to play, hence the practice needed.

I am using floating thumb in this video clip [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd7ijoPye0k"]live clip - floating thumb[/url] if anyone is interested. Feedback welcome

[mcgraham]

[quote]as I am a grade 8 classical guitarist[/quote]

That must help!

[quote]am using all 3 fingers, which makes it fine[/quote]

Now, I identified several key issues with using more than two fingers. The main issue I identified (after a year of using 4 digits) was that the permutations of which fingers you change strings on are numerous i.e. on an 'x' note phrase, there are 4 different fingers you can start with or change to a different string with, as opposed to just two. So for every practice exercise you have, you (ideally) need to practice it 4 times over starting on a different finger. That's a [i]lot[/i] more work than just two fingers.

That ultimately means you spend twice as long getting your technique together compared to doing the same with two fingers, possibly longer due to the higher level of co-ordination required. And the work that people throw at multi-finger techniques is amazing, imagine what could be accomplished if they threw that much dedication at two finger playing.

I'm not saying abandon it, (as I use 3/4 as and when I need to) but certainly consider that the permutations alone may impede your progress.

Mark

[nottswarwick]

good point mark, i have found exactly this and mainly use two,as in the clip. the third comes out for the odd reach over to a higher string. ultimately i am aiming for a consistent technique applicable to all situations. guven the time, this would get a couple of hours work a day, but i am lucky to get a couple of hours a week to practice, such is life

[XB26354]

[quote name='mcgraham' post='200461' date='May 16 2008, 02:36 PM']That must help!



Now, I identified several key issues with using more than two fingers. The main issue I identified (after a year of using 4 digits) was that the permutations of which fingers you change strings on are numerous i.e. on an 'x' note phrase, there are 4 different fingers you can start with or change to a different string with, as opposed to just two. So for every practice exercise you have, you (ideally) need to practice it 4 times over starting on a different finger. That's a [i]lot[/i] more work than just two fingers.

That ultimately means you spend twice as long getting your technique together compared to doing the same with two fingers, possibly longer due to the higher level of co-ordination required. And the work that people throw at multi-finger techniques is amazing, imagine what could be accomplished if they threw that much dedication at two finger playing.

I'm not saying abandon it, (as I use 3/4 as and when I need to) but certainly consider that the permutations alone may impede your progress.

Mark[/quote]
Some valid points there. I think Gary Willis is different from the 4-finger guys in that he has a very strict system worked out based on a smallish number of set moves. He also plays all rest strokes, which imho have a much better tone. I couldn't get my hand to relax with that third finger really, so I have regressed to using index and middle with the occasional thumb for now...
The only example that is very difficult to play using just index middle is doubled octaves (i.e. low A-A high A-A). Try as I might I cannot get that to be efficient at a fast tempo. It is physics - you have no choice but to move your whole hand. "River People" by Weather Report is commonly the hard workout for that kind of line. Play it with Gary's technique and it becomes very easy. As the third finger is there on the string ready to play you can do single or doubled octaves very rapidly (like on his video - I know I can't play them anywhere near that fast, that cleanly!). He has two basic positions - open and closed - and I don't see any problem with his ability to play very fast
I think tbh he is one of the few guys that actually worked out a system, and he must have spent a long time training both hands to work as light as possible and be totally relaxed. I've seen him play right up close (lessons!) and he looks like he's using zero effort, even when playing hard lines. Plus he gets [i]such[/i] a fat tone.
Back to the woodshed...

[mcgraham]

Gary Willis is great. As you say he is one of the few bass players that has a true system. Although I'd (objectively) say that the reasoning behind his technique has some inherent flaws. Specifically that he advocates using the third finger to always ascend. What about when you only want to do one note per string? He switches to a completely different posture (Boo! Hiss! Inefficient!) What about when you are doing TWO notes per string (ala double picking exercises on guitar)...uhhh, effectively learning to play 2 finger with just your middle and ring fingers... hmmm, that doesn't sound efficient? Particularly with time invested.

Also, if you check out Youtube there's a vid when he explains most of his technique excellently, then just adds 'oh and I just rake, like most bassplayers'. Objectively speaking that's a pretty weak argument for using rest strokes. There are some excellent advantages to free strokes.

XB, I'm not sure if you've ever used free strokes as a main playing style but I find that I automatically utilize them (drawing from the free stroke method of the 4 finger/Garrison technique) for string skipping, particularly double octaves. I'm of the opinion that rest strokes are not particularly advantageous at all skipping more than one string at a time, be it up or down. You're in contact with a string with at least one finger at any given time (unlike free strokes) which (for lack of a better explanation) gets you somewhat 'tangled up' in the strings. Ramps helps with this and a light touch helps too, but perhaps try using free strokes or work on getting your rest strokes 'more' free of contact with the resting strings? I recognise that you are a teacher and Institute grad so I won't attempt to lecture you tis simply a sharing of what has worked for me.

Mark

[XB26354]

No, I'd don't think it is a lecture at all - fascinating to hear someone else's viewpoint

I'd say that you're right about the raking aspect - whilst superficially quicker it is clumsy and at high tempos there is a loss of note definition and control, unless it is a Jamerson-style rake using open strings.

I would say that for me the most important thing is the quality of each note, how it sounds. I don't think a technique should ever com before the sound. Every bass player I have heard and seen using a free stroke 4 finger technique can play very fast, but I don't like the tone - it sounds thin and scratchy and lacks oomph, and tbh only seems to work well when playing on one string/one note - again what finger are you going to use on the next string up? I actually think Gary's idea about ascending using the third finger is very logical. It is a little weaker but I had more problems with the open position ascending. Closed position was really comfortable. Doesn't seem to be a problem for piano players - and they use both hands

If you look on Youtube and watch Matt Garrison, he switches between 4 fingers and 2 fingers. Imho he sounds so much better with 2 - the notes are rounder, more horn-like in their tone. The other reason I wouldn't really consider 4 finger technique is that there is no easy way to damp lower strings when playing on the G (or C on a 6). At least the standard technique or Gary's style leaves the thumb covering the bottom strings. I think the proof of the pudding is that Gary looks more relaxed and effortless playing than pretty much every player I have seen. I think he put years of effort into it, so that may be what's necessary to get to that level. Another point is that the bass is still very young - just under 60 years old - and no "standard" technique has really come out. Sure index-middle is the most used but there are so many other techniques (and a lot of players don't even strictly alternate i-m anyway) it'll be interesting to see if anything does become more popular in the future...