|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.203.44.73
In Reply to: How many love deep extended bass and have the equipment to do it? posted by tubesforever on September 11, 2006 at 20:13:33:
Sorry, maybe this is bashing, but as talented as these gentlemen are they don't hold a candle to any random section player in a collegiate orchestra when it comes to bowing.I feel a rant coming on...
Many, perhaps most, working jazz bassists do not possess the bowing technique that would earn them a chair in a professional orchestra. Their tone is nasally and scratchy. It is not an easy thing to reach into a bass string a produce a big, fat tone with a bow.
As long as I'm on the box, I might as well add that I've never been a fan of Mr. Clarke, bow or no bow, acoustic or electric. Although I respect and admire his fretboard gymnastics, the man seems to have a hard time just holding down a groove. I've seen him three times and walked away shaking my head after each performance.
OK, I feel better now. A jazz player with a bow is one of my pet peeves.
Bowed basses? Check out the introduction of the "Ode to Joy" theme in the final movement of Beethoven's ninth or the all too brief passage in the third movement of Sibelius' op. 47 violin concerto. Too many others to mention.
Follow Ups:
In addition to Slam Stewert, There's Jimmy Blanton, Richard Davis, Henry Grimes, and Charles Mingus.I agree that many others, including the great Paul Chambers, didn't have the technique to make bowed bass ring with a good tone.
the great classical virtuoso and heir to Koussevitsky, when asked once named Slam Stewart as one of the most significant bass players of the 20th century. The reason? He was probably first to make the bow "swing", through unusual and innovative combinations of hooking and slurring patterns, never before seen in Classical arco playing. FWIW...
As far as my personal taste goes, Clarke and Waserman make rather bland music on the whole, so they bore me considerably. That is beside the point - there are more than a few phenomenal jazz bassists who posess considerable arco technique (especially the younger guys that are conservatory trained, but lets not forget the likes of Mingus or Ray Brown or . . . ).In any event, sounds like this argument is that one has to be "technically correct" to be listenable or worthy. Hogwash. If that were the case, fusion would rule the world. Personally, give me Peter Kowald, Scott LaFaro, Mark Dresser, Wilbur Ware or Richard Davis over any collegiate player or orchestra. .
That was not a rant, you made a lot of sense. Without agreeing 100 percent with everything you said, may I suggest that George Mraz, Miroslav Vitous, Slam Stewart and, especially, John Clayton (who was 1st chair in the Amsterdam Symphony before he joined Count Basie and then Monty Alexander) when well recorded are capable of creating sonorous arco tones, with intonation that matches and in many cases betters the best of the good classical players. There are others.
Oh, and maany years ago, Ron Carter got called arrogant, jealous, and all sorts of other things for saying in print pretty much EXACTLY what you said about Stanley Clarke.
Regards,
P
Cheers!
Man I do agree with you
Its amazing I do love bowed or plucked deep string bass
A recent adjustment to both speakers and Cart, and I am getting masses of it
I have no ability to comment on reletive technical merit of Jazz and classical bass players, I like both for different reasons, and think they would probably agree.
Deccas often have sensational bass attack
Also A Mary Black album has stunning bass No Frontiers, though its plucked bass
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: