Members Givati Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 My argument (and it is obviously only my opinion) is that there is no such thing as an instrument's intended purpose. That's much too closed minded for me. I used to play duets with a violinist. I played the melody and she played the rhythm/harmony. It was gorgeous to us. There was never a single moment that my bass objected that it wasn't being used for it's intended purpose. I conceed your point and very well put!And actually let me add to that.I was thinking in the traditional realm. Traditional metal, jazz, etc. The "traditional" use of a given instrument in a given genre. But, you are right! Thinking the way you are takes you outside the box. Allows for experimentation, and freedom and a whold host of possibilities.Very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fretless Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 As long as it has something down there to shake up your nether regions . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 I conceed your point and very well put! Thanks. 99% of my music is absolutely standard run of the mill 3-5 piece rock band type music. However, if I lose sight of the creative possibilities, I am doing myself, my bands and my listeners a disservice. I also believe that the further from the norm you stray, the more cognizant of the norms you should be. That way you are breaking "rules" with intended purpose and not simply haphazardly. Much like understanding music theory in order to know when and why you want to violate the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ivanthetrble Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 Some of my favorite bands don't have bassists. Thinking that any element of the stereotypical band is essential ignores the fact that the very concept of creative expression is to not do exactly what has been done before.+1 I have a couple of fav bands without bassists. Hate them for it but still love the bands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 One of the main reasons they are underwhelming is because they are trying to play like a band that has a bassist. If you are going to break convention, the music will need to adapt accordingly. emphasis added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 +1 I have a couple of fav bands without bassists. Hate them for it but still love the bands. Me too. Bastards! Or in the case of Sleater-Kinney - bitches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mooktank Posted December 7, 2007 Author Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 Haha I knew this would stir up the pot quite a bit. I do agree with the sentiment that it's important to just do something new. I just feel like I'm missing a dimension. We have a keys guy but he's also the other guitarist. It limits things a little. Not really a big deal I guess as long as it's a good time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rhat Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 For sure you can run without a bass player. I knew some guys who were a duo. The guitar player used a 12 string and the sideman played a conga rig, played harp and steel drum. The used no over dubs on their CDs. All live mixer burns at shows. If you wanna hear what two guys can do without a bass player ,, send me a PM with your email. rat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 Haha I knew this would stir up the pot quite a bit. I do agree with the sentiment that it's important to just do something new. I just feel like I'm missing a dimension. We have a keys guy but he's also the other guitarist. It limits things a little. Not really a big deal I guess as long as it's a good time. Your sound changes without a bassist, whether you want it to or not. It sounds like you want one and just can't find one. Keep looking. It took five years to find a lead guitarist in one of my bands. We played without the entire time. I couldn't be happier that we waited for the right situation to present itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted December 7, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Kindness, I want to make one comment....you talked about particular songs not needing bass. But his issue is the bend not having bass for *any* songs, and I think that's the deal-breaker. Doing one or two bassless songs can add a different and perhaps welcome feel to an album or a concert. Doing all of it would probably come up lacking. Genre-specific, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 Genre-specific, of course. That's the key. If you are going to play without a bass, you simply have to break convention and not play to the conventional ideal. An entire band's catalog can be extremely musical without any bass playing, but it will never be a conventional sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Givati Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 If you are going to break convention, the music will need to adapt accordingly. Another very good point Kindness. Breaking with convention is not an easy task and stay relevent at the same time. You break too much and you end up an Ornett Colman. Not that there is anything wrong with Ornett, but 99% of the public doesn't get his music. ON the other hand breaking with convention gives you stuff like Soulive (no bass) or Charlie Hunter (no bass). It takes balance. You think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted December 7, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 That's the key. If you are going to play without a bass, you simply have to break convention and not play to the conventional ideal. An entire band's catalog can be extremely musical without any bass playing, but it will never be a conventional sound. If I have to live in a world where girls don't shake their booty, I don't want to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members countrybass Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 Not if you're in an ...And Justice For All cover band. :lol::lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 If I have to live in a world where girls don't shake their booty, I don't want to live.If you can't make the booty shake without your bass, you aren't using your other "instrument" to its full potential. I know what you mean. Like I said, I play bass, I find bass to be my most expressive instrument, I can't live without it. "Music" in the abstract is not as limited as I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 I do agree with the sentiment that it's important to just do something new. I just feel like I'm missing a dimension. We have a keys guy but he's also the other guitarist. It limits things a little. Not really a big deal I guess as long as it's a good time. Bass registers are perceived differently by the human ear than others. Even harmonically speaking - the bass "drives" our perception of what we hear musically: e.g an A,C,E triad with no bass sounds like a minor - play an F in the bass and you get an FMajor 7.... It's possible apparently to trick the ear into hearing bass if certain harmonics are present in the correct amounts. It's okay to break with tradition but we are constrained by psychoacoustic principles to hear things the way we do, regardless of how we may or not intellectualize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crescent Seven Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 You could always buy a bass and hire a guitar player. This is very common for bands that struggle to find a bass player. I mean, bass is just a guitar with 4 strings on it. C7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 It's okay to break with tradition but we are constrained by psychoacoustic principles to hear things the way we do, regardless of how we may or not intellectualize. Which is exactly why it is important to understand the rules and why they exist before breaking them so you know the ramifications. If you don't understand "why" things aren't working they way they would with a bassist, it is harder to make the music sound the way you intend. The more you know, the easier it is to create what you intend to create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members willsellout Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 I'm in a band right now. There's no guitarist, no drummer, bassplayer. I think it's killer and super creative:D The best band you've never heard. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 In all honesty, I am not trying to be a smart ass in any way shape or form. The only thing a bassist adds to a bands is the ability to play bass. Not true.I can sing, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 Not true. I can sing, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted December 7, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Bass is the meat behind the beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 My two cents. Obviously, bass is not essential. White Stripes seem to get by just fine without one. Bob Dylan became a star with just a guitar and a harmonica. Traditional asian music doesn't seem to have any bass instruments at all, and everything plays the same melodic line, anyway. I went to a dance as a teenager, and the band didn't show. I borrowed a guitar and an amp, and played the show by myself. So of course it can be done. However, Kindness is dead on in his assessment: taking out one of the usual elements changes things, and it's important to understand how things change to make it work for you. I studied musical composition in college, and one of the first things I noticed was that many of the classical pieces we analyzed didn't always follow the rules. As Kindness said, you have to understand the rules before you break them. Oh, sure, some people get lucky, but you greatly increase your chances of having it work if you understand what you're doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 7, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 7, 2007 snipYou've changed my facetious to a real . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 7, 2007 Members Share Posted December 7, 2007 Which is exactly why it is important to understand the rules and why they exist before breaking them so you know the ramifications. If you don't understand "why" things aren't working they way they would with a bassist, it is harder to make the music sound the way you intend. The more you know, the easier it is to create what you intend to create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.