Song construction

Salvatore

Member
Oct 4, 2005
314
2
18
wisconsin
Hey Steve or others
I was just wondering whats approach for songs others have written. Do you know instantly what your going to do when you hear parts of a song and just lay it down or do you sit down with recordings and develop bass lines. And how do you know when enough is enough? I mean when do know when to just follow the guitar lines? You can't do that all the time. I know these are general questions and you should just do what feels right, there so many avenues to go down. but these are issues I'm dealing with and I'm a little frustrated. And I was wondering how the pros do it.
Thanks :headbang:
 
I think when it comes to playing on other people's material the first thing you have to remember is that you are playing on work that isn't your own. You might be hired for certain aspects of your playing, but at the end of the day you should really be striving to give the 'client' what they want. Particularly where a producer is involved. Generally what you want to do is see any charts that might be relevant to what you are going to be playing and ask if there are any specific ideas or briefs that the client wants to make you aware of. Usually if you are in a stiuation with someone that has worked on composing a piece of material they are going to have some specific ideas in mind and really it is your job to fulfil their expectations as best you can. If you can excede their expectations all the better. Usually though, if there is no specific idea prepared, I will be prepared to come up with several different approaches until I have one that fits what is wanted. Often it's not really just a matter of hearng the material and thinking "ok I know exactly what I will do here." I have had exactly that thought about a piece of music but when I run my idea past the client it's not at all what they are thinking and what they want is sometimes completely different. Also bear in mind that there is no point being precious about an idea you have as often what you will feel is right is different to what the the producer or client will want. But the best method is to be prepared to come up with as many different approaches as you need to in order to fulfil the brief.

On the other hand if you are working in a group environment where you have more say in what you do, things might be a little different. All the same though, in any situation, you need to be prepared to try different things until you and the people you are working with are relatively satisfied with the ideas. A lot of the time the best approach is a matter of trial and error or of developing an idea.
 
I think you've got to listen to "Empiricism" by Borknagar.
I usually listen to what the other guys from the band want then I sit down and play what I have inside and what I think it's better for the song trying to not follow the guitars. It's an hard job but it's great!
 
hey man jsut do what feels right at the time. start off simple and stay in key then throw in fills or licks where neccessary. try not to think too hard about it and go with what feels best - and you cant do with what you dont have so if youre playing or recordind just make sure you keep time and stay in key. remember the bass's role is support, rythym and to keep the groove. and you could always go back to what you did and change it later. if you want ideas or examples of fills lsten to some of these bassists - steve harris, cliff burton , steve digiorgio, geezer butler. but do what feels right to you, remember it's your bass lines and nobody elses - and being simple is not a bad thing sometimes its downright good.
 
Those are nice sentiments, Frank, but not really necessarily productive ones. I think if you are in a situation where you are specifically playing on someone else's material you really have an obligation to do the best thing for the piece and also for the client, whoever that may be, and especially if you are being paid for your time. As I said before, that person might have, and often does, have a different opinion about what the best thing to do is, and that isn't always a matter of complexity. If you go in there with the attitude that you are going to do what you feel is right and that it's your bass line, then you are only going to create a situation where, especially in the case of working on a session, you probably won't get hired again. Secondly the producer can always cut and paste the parts you play or get someone else to play the parts. Basically the professional thing to do is to work with the producer and get the best thing for the music, and let's face it, the person that knows what is best for the music is ultimately the person that writes or produces the piece, not the person that plays bass, or any other instument, on it. If you want to call all the shots on what you play then go and write your own material.

Having said that, though, you should always be able to give your opinion on certain aspects of what you are doing when it is needed, and in a lot of cases I think you will find that if someone is hiring you for a specific reason, then they will probably want to hear your opinion as well. The thing to remember though is to keep your opinion productive and not to be precious about your ideas when you are playing on someone elses material. If they like your idea and want to go with it, all the better, but there is really no point arguing about how you think that your appraoch is the best because it's your bassline. Once again they can always cut and paste or get someone else in.

Also I don't really think it's just a matter of listening to bassplayer x or y for fills and so on. I think it's more a matter of having as much knowledge of different kinds of music and musical approaches as possible and being able to apply them to a certain situation. I also don't think anyone should get too hung up on what they think the role of the bassplayer is either. That role can change, depending on the situation and a professional, or at least professionally minded, musician will always be prepared to expand on that role or to explore new approaches.

I agree it's important to stay in time, but most producers will quickly point out when you aren't, and also a sense of timing is relative to a large extent. Staying in 'key' on the other hand really depends on what you are playing on. I doubt anyone is going to tell Stanley Clarke or Jamaladeen Tacuma that they went out of key on certain projects, for example.
 
um ,it's a little hard to pinpoint exaclty whats right or wrong. every musician is different and slavatore is no exception. but is he asking what approach others have taken to writing their songs and what to do when recording a song that someone else has written?


salvatore how long have you been playing for?
 
sorry i meant is he asking what approach other musicans have taken when writing their songs/basslines OR what he should play if he's covering their tunes?
 
Hey Frank
I have played bass for about 15 years or so. I took a break from playing for a couple of years and now back into in more then I ever have been. I reciently bought a 6 string and still adjusting to having more strings (but thats a different subject all together). I started playing in a band with some guys that I knew from back in the day whom I had always looked up to. All of them are very good at what they do and its great because its a challange to take things to the next level and making me a better player. I'm also trying to learn more general music theory and I was just wondering how some of you approach songs that are new to you, in perticular Steve D. and any professional musicians . Its also good just to talk about things and hear what others have to say in this bass player community. :headbang:
 
damn dude a 6 string? fuck man thats nuts. but more power to you. i think i know what you're asking but i dont think theres a definitve blueprint for what you can and cant do and thats the beauty of the freedom of music. i say go with what feels most comfortable cause thats when youll do your best and no argument with nothinggod - if that comfort lies in his approachand what he suggests then more power to you on that. everyones different. i think overtime youll develop your knowledge of knowing hwat youre doing the more you prctice what it is youre trying to achieve - so if youre learning or recording someone elses songs then try to figure it out by ear or get the tab , but ear is better to figure things out if you want to be a better musician. im not sure how the pros do it but im sure they all have their own style or structure when it comes to recording and writing that theyre probably used to. the way ive done it ( thats if im recording my own stuff) is listen to the guitar tracks my friends have made a couple of times and then play what feels or sounds best. if we have a definitve time frame and im not sure then i always do 3 takes and i choose the best of the three. sometimes later on i go back and add or remove things if i come up with an idea an fix it- anyway you like to do it , itll turn up fine. and playin a six stirng if pretty fuckin admirable so im sure youll be allright.


till next time....
 
I think in the situation I was talking about, which was where you are working on a session for someone that has a written piece of material, pretty much most musicians that have done that kind of thing would agree that while you can say there is no right or wrong way and every musician is an individual, there are ways to be more or less professional. I would say that it's the more professional musicians that will continue to be hired. I mean, you could be the most innovative, technically developed player in the world and if you are in a situation where you can't give the person that is hiring you what they want it's probably not going to get you too many gigs with them in the future, or do your reputation any good. I read an interview with Tony Levin years ago where he said that as good a technical player he is and as good a writer and so on, when he is hired for a session he pretty much goes in there and gives the client what they want, not necessarily what he thinks he should do initially. Which might be why he is the highest paid session musician around.

Probably though, in the situation that Salvatore seems to be talking about I really would stand by saying try as many approaches as possible until you find the right thing for the song. Talk about different approaches with the song writer, or writers and find out if they have any ideas in mind. That can always be a good place to start and you can develop your ideas from there. Find out what scales are being used what the chord progressions are, think about the rhythm and how your playing might tie in with drums or percussion. Beyond that though it's difficult to say there is a set formula for how to approach a given piece. Different musicians will do different things at different times and that will be based on a lot of different factors from which kind of theory they apply, to their habbits or simply what they like the sound of more. Also I think that the more you know about different types of music the better off you are when making those kinds of choices. I think when you are working on someone else's song in any case, you still want to do the best thing for the piece and for the song writer(s). Also I stand by saying not to be too precious about a certain bassline or thing you are playing if it's not working out. You will probably come up with something that works a lot quicker if you let it go.
The thing don't really agree with that Frank said in his last post was that playing "by ear" is necessarily better if you want to be a better musician. I think when you are playing music that is based on more than the predicatble diatonic I IV V progression there are going to be times where you need to analyse what is going on in order to play the best thing for the music. Listen to Spiral Architect, for example, and tell me that anyone is "playing by ear" there. I think the better musician is the one that is prepared to take as many different approaches as they need to to get their parts right. Ultimately, what you really need to have is a good line of communication going with the people you are working with and being prepared to do the best thing for the music.
 
well the ear thing is like - the more and better you can hear the better a musician you are , since music is a hearing art. im not too keen on the roman numerals or scales or anything so i wont argue with you on that. i see what you mean now.

i guess if you walk into the studio and you have a piece to play that the producer wants then by all means play it - more money in your pocket. the way i thought sal was asking was like what he should do in just in general when he heard the piece. see usually in my case when im recording people just say - allright do your thing. so yeah if he's got something to record, something specific, then do it- but my advice applies more to as if they put you in the driver's seat, which is usually my case. ive never recorded anything professional. i guess it depends on the circumstances. wemust have just saw that question differently or somethin.
 
I think that what I am really saying is that you need to be able to take more than one approach when you are trying to figure out what the right thing is to do depending on the situation. I look at everything I do in two ways, firstly I think about how I respond to it emotionally and then I try to analyse what elements are making me respond that way. Is it the kind of tension and release, is it consonant or is it dissonant? What kind of relationship do the notes form in a melodic sense? What are the harmonic relationships?

The thing I think a lot of people misinterpret when I post my opinion about these things is that I think that theory is the rulebook you need to follow when you are playing or even writing. My opinion is more that theory is the thing that helps you really know what it is you are doing.

The human ear and mind are easily fooled when it comes to certain things in music. A lot of things that create a psychological response in the listener, or are intended to do so are based on things that are subtle modulations. For example if you take the circle of 5ths you can start in one "key" and move through several movements and end up playing in a “key” that is very different without the listener being obviously aware of where those changes take place. That is because generally we won't notice how a single note changing at a time will change the structure of the "key". Just to clarify, the circle of 5ths is where you go from, for example, CMajor to GMajor to DMajor and so on. If you play these scales back to back you will notice that you are only changing one note at a time. This is just one example of what I am talking about, though. There are many techniques you can use that are along the same lines. Jazz is built on these kinds of concepts, for example. These things are hard to pick up when you are just playing along "by ear". That doesn't necessarily mean that what you are doing is the wrong thing even if you are "playing by ear", though.

The bottom line is that if you do need to analyse a piece of music, then being able to have some kind of theoretical analysis is definitely going to be the tool that helps you. It's much easier than having to remember shapes and sequences all the time. Also it helps you to draw a clearer picture of any shape-based patterns you are playing when you are thinking that way. The other thing that I will point out is that theory is present in anything you do anyway, and a lot of the time it's the way that we are conditioned to understand that theory that dictates what we do, or are at least more likely to do. For example, when you hear a dominant chord your instinct is to resolve it back to the tonic, whether you theoretically know what that means or not, and generally we will base the shapes we play instinctively on things that we are conditioned to respond to.
The last thing I want to say is that I agree that music is a 'hearing art' but I think it is a lot more as well. It's also an analytical, scientific, psychological and physical ‘art’ in my opinion. Excluding the other aspects of music is really taking a pretty limited approach.

Sorry if I made this into another ‘to theory or not to theory’ rant, but I spent half the time I have played not really knowing what I was doing in any theoretical sense and these days I would find it hard to see how I could ‘just feel it’ and have all the options I have when I consult my theoretical knowledge.
 
Nothinggod
I'm in that situation now where I feel like I'm really limited by my lack of musical knowlege. Its never to late to learn but It's quite a complicated subject. My biggest problem is all the termonology. I look up the definition of something and they use all the lingo to define it and then I end up more confused. Its like trying to teach yourself algebra from scratch. There has to be an easier way to learn this. How did you learn Music theory?
 
I know how you feel actually. As I said in my previous post I spent half of the time I have been playing, almost 20 years now, not really knowing any theory other than the shapes and so on that I had familiarised myself with. I couldn't have even told you what the major scale is until I had already been playing for ten years or more and by then I had even done a fair amount of gigging and recording. I basically wrote anything I wrote based on the way certain shapes 'sounded' or I would hum something and try to play it. Usually I found that I had a certain idea in my head and I could never really figure out how to realise it musically.

I am actually pretty much self-taught in my knowledge of music theory. I have done a lot of reading and I have worked in situations with more formally trained musicians and spent a lot of time discussing different ideas with them. I also developed my theoretical knowledge by writing and analysing what I was doing and also by analysing what other people do. This is also an ongoing process. The language of music theory can get pretty confusing, though and one problem I found that limited me early on was that a lot of the ideas that are involved in music theory are rarely ever explained in an empirical sense. Usually people will teach a scale or a mode and just say "play this in A", for example and not really explain how scales, triads, intervals, chords etc are linked.

I would recommend getting a good tutor, and not someone who is just going to teach you licks and so on. You really want to be specific too when you ask a tutor about tuition, and tell them that you want to learn what certain things mean, not just how to play them. In my opinion if you go to a tutor and the first thing they tell you isn't that the major scale is formed by playing all the natural notes from C-C on a piano and then explaining how you derive the intervals and consequently the basic units of comparison and 'measurement' for all scales, intevals, chords etc, then don't waste your time and money with them. Sometimes I think getting someone to teach you at least those basic concepts can make a lot of difference in your overal development of theory.

The internet is full of good resources for learning about theory too. http://www.dolmetsch.comis one that I would recommend as it starts right from the very basics and goes into very advanced concepts.

I think you are right in saying it is never too late to learn though. I think also that the toughest thing is to break old habits and attitudes. I remember very clearly my attitude to theory before I really got involved in learning about it and understanding it, and the difference between what I was able to do then and what I am able to do now. I know now that all my claims of being able to play it by ear were less than accurate for the most part, and the way I see it now, it doesn't matter how well I can hear something, what is the point if my mind can't interpret it in a relative sense for me to play?

Anyway good luck. If you have any specific questions you want to ask me feel free to send me a message. I don't mind reading stuff and replying in the forum as long as Mr Hippy is cool about it too.
 
Hey thanks for the link. I have a few books on chords and scales and things but they all assume you know about the theory of music. That site really begins with the bare basics and thats where I need to start from. Its starting to make some sence. I have always felt intimidated by music Theory, maybe its because it's called Theory and not just music learnin. -