I use both, as things speed up movement wise, its more shape based, slower note + shape
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
Welcome to TalkBass! Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Do you think note names, or fingerings/patterns?
- Thread starter Dusky Bass
- Start date
Playing around on piano also helps you understand what's going on. I sometimes get songs on keyboard first, then bass.
Fully agree here. I side with your approach, for sure. Thanks for taking the time to share the story.
Depends on what I am doing.
Am I composing, improvising or playing an already known piece.
But generally I perceive music in intervals, rather than either, how does this note fit in relation to the previous and next note.
It's not really something I can put into words, it just happens, intuitively, and has more to do with how it actually sounds, rather than trying to name those sounds, something more immediate.
This of course does relate to both notes and patterns, it's just that those are kind of secondary to me.
When I play a known piece on bass I do definitely think in visual patterns though, but here naming those patterns is still secondary to me.
In other words thinking is predominantly a post production process to me, as always, neuro-scientifically speaking as well, thinking is an after-thought.
If you have to think about your next move you are already behind, and if you are thinking ahead you can't really be there and act in/on the moment.
Am I composing, improvising or playing an already known piece.
But generally I perceive music in intervals, rather than either, how does this note fit in relation to the previous and next note.
It's not really something I can put into words, it just happens, intuitively, and has more to do with how it actually sounds, rather than trying to name those sounds, something more immediate.
This of course does relate to both notes and patterns, it's just that those are kind of secondary to me.
When I play a known piece on bass I do definitely think in visual patterns though, but here naming those patterns is still secondary to me.
In other words thinking is predominantly a post production process to me, as always, neuro-scientifically speaking as well, thinking is an after-thought.
If you have to think about your next move you are already behind, and if you are thinking ahead you can't really be there and act in/on the moment.
Last edited:
Depends on the music for me. If I recognize patterns I just move them around in the places they need to go. If I'm figuring out a new piece and I know what the chord actually is then I pay attention more to the notes until I work out the fingering that I'm most comfortable using. Once I've decided on where I'm going to play those notes, then I'll just be playing the pattern and not really thinking about the notes themselves. If I decide to add some embellishments from time to time, I will figure those out ahead of time too or just add patterns that I know will sound good and work during that chord.
Bit of both. I can read music and like to know the notes, in relation to chords being played.
But then the familiar common patterns - TRIADS, inversions, scales etc exist as shapes in muscle memory. As do certain groove patterns.
But then the familiar common patterns - TRIADS, inversions, scales etc exist as shapes in muscle memory. As do certain groove patterns.
Well if you have read enough sheet music, you also read patterns, but it also tells you time - pattern of slices of time. How you execute that is up to you. It's been a minute like 50 years ago when the piano teacher wrote what fingers to use but she took those away by the second month.
Here' s an idea, do scales and arpeggios on 1 string. Then do them in half notes, quarter etc. Then create patterns of time mixing those values and superimpose the scales arpeggios on top of that. The work on reducing that shift by adding another string until you use all strings. You will intuitively create fingering patterns as your hand would seek the path of less resistance and efficiency.
Here' s an idea, do scales and arpeggios on 1 string. Then do them in half notes, quarter etc. Then create patterns of time mixing those values and superimpose the scales arpeggios on top of that. The work on reducing that shift by adding another string until you use all strings. You will intuitively create fingering patterns as your hand would seek the path of less resistance and efficiency.
You need to know the neck. It's easily said but not easily done.
I started on cello. It occurs to me that in classical etudes and repertoire, they throw a whole blizzard of notes at you, so you can't be thinking about letters or numbers while you're playing, or you'd go nuts. You have to reach a point where the music just flows from the page, or your ears, or your imagination, to your fingers. Due to my background, it's also how I approached the bass, and never learned any other way.
Today, I can sight-read or play by ear, but if you ask me to name the note I just played, or remember how I fingered it, I have to stop and think about it, and it will probably make me look stupid. In fact it's a bit embarrassing.
Whether this is a good place to be is anybody's guess, but it's probably what I'm stuck with at age 60. However, I think that trying to remember note names and fingers, or fret numbers, is going to be hobbling in the long run.
What I suggest to people is to get the sound into their heads instead of the numbers, by putting down the bass and singing the parts before trying to play them. Also, try to "think" the sound. Imagine singing the music to yourself, in your head, while you're walking down the street, riding the bus, whatever.
In my opinion it's better to think of them as geometric shapes, but it's important to think about the degrees of what you're playing, in this way you'll realize the whole difference between scales, arpeggios, modes, in my opinion is the best way. Notes automatically comes with a bit of work on the fingerboard.
Just to give an example here's a short video about major scale and modes with open fingering.
Just to give an example here's a short video about major scale and modes with open fingering.
definitely not the fingerings, as fingerings might differ.
I'd say I'm moreover thinking of chords in this context (when asked what I'm playing), as I'm describing the harmony and no need to describe every note I'm playing, so the progressions would be more concise. sometimes instead of chords I use function names (example below).
so I'm basically saying: now I'm playing GMaj, and now C. or: GMaj twice, then a sub-dominant, then back to tonic.
I'd say I'm moreover thinking of chords in this context (when asked what I'm playing), as I'm describing the harmony and no need to describe every note I'm playing, so the progressions would be more concise. sometimes instead of chords I use function names (example below).
so I'm basically saying: now I'm playing GMaj, and now C. or: GMaj twice, then a sub-dominant, then back to tonic.
I’m all about patterns. My P&W band plays four or five or six new songs a week. Currently we are also rehearsing for Christmas, another six that total nearly fifty pages of music alone. Once I have a pattern down “as written “when the BL decides to change keys I just shift the pattern, all is well
When I'm playing bass, I think of chord progressions. When I'm thinking of chord progressions, I start with the I chord and then understand where the changes go. So, for example, one song is a 12 bar blues in Bb with a quick four. The next one is a stereotypical I-IV-V song. The next one is I and IV and then goes to the III and around the circle of fifths. Some songs that are ALWAYS done in a particular key, I'll keep the actual chord names, especially if the changes are a bit unusual.
There are some tunes with very characteristic bass lines (Night in Tunisia, Red Clay, etc.) where the pattern is difficult enough that I have to work out a specific fingering. So I suppose I "think of the pattern", but it's more like remembering the fingering necessary for that particular pattern. I mean, you have to practice everything; but that's not quite the same thing as just remembering which frets to put your fingers and having no idea what the actual notes are.
Someone up top said "learn the music, not the finger patterns" and I'd strongly agree with that.
Old-time fiddlers, for example, have to retune to go from the key of G to the key of C. Don't be like that.
There are some tunes with very characteristic bass lines (Night in Tunisia, Red Clay, etc.) where the pattern is difficult enough that I have to work out a specific fingering. So I suppose I "think of the pattern", but it's more like remembering the fingering necessary for that particular pattern. I mean, you have to practice everything; but that's not quite the same thing as just remembering which frets to put your fingers and having no idea what the actual notes are.
Someone up top said "learn the music, not the finger patterns" and I'd strongly agree with that.
Old-time fiddlers, for example, have to retune to go from the key of G to the key of C. Don't be like that.
Well, that's an undefined statement. "Knowing the neck" to mean, when you see something written in notation, you can immediately know how to finger it? Absolutely yes. "Knowing the neck" to mean, you memorize a specific finger pattern and then you can move it up and down? Seems like a much lower-level knowledge.
I assumed "knowing the neck" meant knowing every note on the neck so you could find it in real time if needed (ie, play all the G notes on the bass - you have 5 seconds). I could be wrong, but I think it's valuable knowledge.
My goal is to be able to say "yes" to this question. I am currently transitioning from playing "relatively" to playing both "relatively" and "absolutely".
Loose definitions: (Still working on these for myself, so bear with me on ineloquence)
Relative: This has two main components.
1. Mental (theoretical): Thinking of every chord and note in terms of relation to the key center and intervals. This includes knowing Nashville Number and Roman Numeral systems, understanding the chord tones and scales per mode (at least the ionian based modes, but harmonic and melodic minor are vera useful).
2. Physical (but also crazily mental): Having deeply ingrained fingerings and patterns for transitioning between these notes and chords during chord progressions, pentatonic usage across all chords, modes, scales, inversions, and the like. You want to play "Save Tonight" in any key, I will just think vi, IV, I, V in the relative major key and have a good time, though I really should also think i, VI, III, VII in the relative minor key at some point. I can handle most pop, funk, blues, R&B songs like this, and can perform reasonably well on wakling bass lines for jazz standards, though my jazz lines have been super basic and repetitive in my opinion.
Advantages: This is the system that takes advantage of the amazing patternality of our chosen instrument. Learn something once, shift it all over the fretboard, profit.
Absolute: This has two main components.
1. Mental (theoretical): Theory, theory, theory, theory and also some theory. Understanding notes and their relationships with or without an instrument in my hands. Understanding the circles of fourths & fifths, knowing the name of every note and chord in relation to every chord center. (e.g., just knowing without thinking that the major 3rd scale degree of F is A, and that the chord associated with that 3rd degreee is Am7.) More advanced goal: knowing the note names of all the triads within any given chord, including up to the extended triads, without having a bass in my hands or keyboard in front of me as reference. (e.g., If the chord is F7 then: 1, 3, 5 is F, A, C [maj]. 3, 5, b7 is A, C, Eb [dim]. 5, b7, 9 is C, Eb, G [min]. b7, 9, 11 [maj] is Eb, G, Bb. 9, 11, 13 is G, Bb, D [min])
2. Physical (but also crazily mental): Memorizing every note on the fretboard and understanding the theoretical note and chordal relationships at a celluar level. This means knowing every note on every position such that I am no longer surprised to find that some note 3/4 of the way to the 12th fret turns out to be an F# when I randomly remember to think about it, and playing through all of those notes, chords, triads such that I can find the next best note to play at any time from any position within any frame of mind.
Advantages: For me, this is the knowledge that is providing me with true freedom to play whatever I hear. It helps me get through sight reading lead sheets and standard written notation. This is also extremely difficult for me and has been kicking my backside for several months.
Sorry for the long response, but this is the journey that I am on right now. Apologies also for any mistakes in the above - responses and criticism are welcome from those who have also undertaken this journey, or are thinking about it, or are just on the forum and want to talk.
No apologies needed; exactly what this thread and topic are for. Thanks for taking the time to share and elaborate.Sorry for the long response, but this is the journey that I am on right now. Apologies also for any mistakes in the above - responses and criticism are welcome from those who have also undertaken this journey, or are thinking about it, or are just on the forum and want to talk.
My goal is to learn a song cold, however that may be. It depends on the song. For some tunes, I start off learning the notes/chords, and then I may discover an interesting pattern with the line that sticks with me. Once I get the song down, though, I try not to think about any of it and rely on muscle memory. That's the goal. I try to practice in as many ways as I can think of so that when it comes to a live-playing situation, it is more about expression than remembering notes/chords/patterns. That's my method, anyway, for what it's worth.