Double Bass Let's Talk BPM....

[neddyrow]

I play in a fiddle band (if I had to choose one category) where we play a lot of fiddle tunes, old bluegrass, old country and have over an album's worth or original songs. We try very hard to play mostly fast upbeat tunes to get people dancing and moving as we play a lot of festivals and private parties. I am curious as to what speed you guys play your tunes at. We play most of our songs above 140 bpm as when we dip below that speed, songs seem slow. we still play peppy songs in the 130-135 range as they need to be a little slower to get the words out. Last night we played a few songs with the bpm meter and clocked in at 150!

So... I am curious, what speed do you play your faster bluegrass/fiddle tunes at?

 

[BobKay]

For the most part, we play them as written. I've never checked on BPM. Walking In My Sleep is off the charts, or at least the way our banjo player does it. Slower stuff is, well, slower. Allows the harmonies to develop and instrumental breaks to be more precise.

If all of your bandmates have the chops to play over 150 BPM, then I guess you can go for it. For us, it's not a race to the next song.

 

[neddyrow]

150 is a bit fast for us. we were surprised when we checked it. our banjo player plays clawhammer and struggles at that tempo. slow train, despite its name, is also off the charts!

 

[turf3]

Are you counting in two, or four?

 

[Ed S]

Are you counting in two, or four?

Ah - I KNEW someone would offer that! I've been confused by such discussions in the past. I'm pretty certain what it means to play a tune in 4/4 at 130 bpm. These forums are the only place I've encountered confusion as to what that means.

It is fun to "put a little air under" a tune, and I acknowledge that a BG band absolutely hitting it at top speed is great fun to listen to. But IMO&E, once you get N of 130 bpm, it is extremely common for groups to lose the musicality. And when you get N of 150, I get the feeling it is more for the enjoyment of the pickers, rather than the audience. Kinda like, it is impressive that they can do it, just not terribly enjoyable to listen to. Add in that, unless you get into an oldtime vibe, how quickly do you want to get through each tune?

With my 3-piece string band, sometimes we enjoy playing fiddle tunes much slower than the usual jam speed. In the neighborhood of 90-120. Gives them a totally different feel, and allows for a lot more subtlety IMO.

 

[turf3]

Ah - I KNEW someone would offer that! I've been confused by such discussions in the past. I'm pretty certain what it means to play a tune in 4/4 at 130 bpm. These forums are the only place I've encountered confusion as to what that means.
.

Well, you know, it kinda makes a difference. 150 BPM in two, one bass note every beat, mandolin chops in between, is a sprightly tempo. 150 BPM in four, bass note every other beat, mando chops in between, is quite slow.

 

[Micha84]

How fast is Muse's Hysteria? I feel like I am 2bpm slower than that

 

[Ed S]

Well, you know, it kinda makes a difference. 150 BPM in two, one bass note every beat, mandolin chops in between, is a sprightly tempo. 150 BPM in four, bass note every other beat, mando chops in between, is quite slow.

So, if I set my metronome at 130, and I play so that the 1 and 3 correspond with every beat - with the space between the beats the 2 and 4, I'm actually playing in 2 at 260 bpm? (I really hate that I'm so stupid about something so basic!)

 

[AGCurry]

So, if I set my metronome at 130, and I play so that the 1 and 3 correspond with every beat - with the space between the beats the 2 and 4, I'm actually playing in 2 at 260 bpm? (I really hate that I'm so stupid about something so basic!)

If you think this is confusing, ponder some classical music that's marked only with Italian tempi. As far as I can tell, "Allegro" can mean anything except "slow."

 

[Ed S]

Right - I've never seen a classical piece - including pieces in 2/2, identified as in the 2-300s. And I've played w/ many different people, and outside of this forum, I've never heard anyone mention such high bpms.

I think I know what turf3 is saying. I generally fall into the habit of just tapping/counting the 1s and 3s. But the idea of 200-300 bpm just makes my head hurt.

 

[neddyrow]

Ah - I KNEW someone would offer that! I've been confused by such discussions in the past. I'm pretty certain what it means to play a tune in 4/4 at 130 bpm. These forums are the only place I've encountered confusion as to what that means.

It is fun to "put a little air under" a tune, and I acknowledge that a BG band absolutely hitting it at top speed is great fun to listen to. But IMO&E, once you get N of 130 bpm, it is extremely common for groups to lose the musicality. And when you get N of 150, I get the feeling it is more for the enjoyment of the pickers, rather than the audience. Kinda like, it is impressive that they can do it, just not terribly enjoyable to listen to. Add in that, unless you get into an oldtime vibe, how quickly do you want to get through each tune?

With my 3-piece string band, sometimes we enjoy playing fiddle tunes much slower than the usual jam speed. In the neighborhood of 90-120. Gives them a totally different feel, and allows for a lot more subtlety IMO.

This was one of the reasons I wanted to bring up this topic. We like to play fast upbeat tunes but sometimes it feels as if we are playing too fast. We want to make sure the lyrics are heard and understood. Also, our singers can pull off some great harmonies that sound better a little slower.

When you listen to the Osborn Brothers for example, they are at lightning speed. We are trying to find the, “sweet spot” for our songs.

Some do sound good at 145 but lots of our tunes are usually in the 125-135 range and they sound better.

 

[Steven Ayres]

At 145bpm in bluegrass you're playing in 2, and that's 290 in 4. In most genres this is generally considered much too fast for dancing.

 

[Keith Rawlings]

Last night we played a few songs with the bpm meter and clocked in at 150!

Death metal bluegrass!

 

[Ed S]

Can someone explain the exact meaning of "playing in 2 or 4"? I know in my tiny brain I always have trouble with the idea of cut time and the difference between 2/4 and 4/4. Yeah, they have a different feel, with different beats emphasized. But in my mind, it just seems like 2 measures of 2/4 = 1 measure of 4/4...

I think my confusion comes from saying the bass plays on the 1 and 3 and the mando on 2 and 4. Instead, the bass plays on the beat, and the mando on the "and" - the half beat.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Can someone explain the exact meaning of "playing in 2 or 4"? I know in my tiny brain I always have trouble with the idea of cut time and the difference between 2/4 and 4/4. Yeah, they have a different feel, with different beats emphasized. But in my mind, it just seems like 2 measures of 2/4 = 1 measure of 4/4...

I think my confusion comes from saying the bass plays on the 1 and 3 and the mando on 2 and 4. Instead, the bass plays on the beat, and the mando on the "and" - the half beat.

It’s not an uncommon confusion. Cut time doesn’t mean 2/4, but rather 2/2:

The confusion arises from people still talking about playing on 1 and 3 when they are actually playing on 1 and 2.

The same confusion arises when playing Brazilian styles, only these are often actually notated in 2/4, but with the main subdivision is 16th notes.

 

[Ed S]

"expel"

???

But in 2/2, the bpm is per half note, correct?

At the same practice yesterday when my band discussed this, our cellist/mando actually handed around copies of a chart she thought clearly explained the circle of fifths. Sometimes I wonder if I am subconsciously REFUSING to grasp some of these concepts...

Even when intelligent, well-intending folk try to explain such things, they don't seem to stick.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

???

But in 2/2, the bpm is per half note, correct?

At the same practice yesterday when my band discussed this, our cellist/mando actually handed around copies of a chart she thought clearly explained the circle of fifths. Sometimes I wonder if I am subconsciously REFUSING to grasp some of these concepts...

Even when intelligent, well-intending folk try to explain such things, they don't seem to stick.

Sorry, that was a fat thumb iPad autocorrect error. I meant to type "people" rather than "expel". What happens is the music is actually in 2/2, but people are still talking about it as though it was in 4/4.

Yes, in 2/2 the bpm is the half note. But it's easily possible to feel 2/2 in 4, just as it's possible to feel 4/4 in 2. It all depends on where you feel the beat. If you are in cut time but tapping your foot 4 times per measure, you're feeling the music in 4, and it's not uncommon to do this. But when you do this, you're tapping your foot to the 8th note rather than the quarter note.

 

[turf3]

"Cut time" is 2/2 - two beats per measure, half note gets the beat.

This comes from march music played from printed music. Two beats per measure because marching soldiers have two feet. The half note gets the beat, because then all those twiddly bits up in the flute and clarinet ranks can be notated as eighths and sixteenths and they're easier to read that way.

Much of bluegrass and old time music is "in 2", related to dancing and the fact that dancers have two legs. If you're thinking of it and counting it in 2, then you've got two beats per bar, bass plays on 1 and 2, mando plays on 1and, 2and. (If you're playing in 2/2, the "and" of 1 comes on the second quarter note (notated). Of course, none of this was written down in the old days.

Now where the confusion comes in is a) when you start playing in 4 ("walking" on bass) at times; and b) when you start letting jazz influences into bluegrass (that darn Bill Monroe!), and jazz players have been playing "in 4" for a long long time. ; and c) you start writing stuff down. All those old Broadway standards, show tunes, etc., that jazz players have been playing for ages, have sheet music originally, almost universally written in 4/4 (except waltzes, of course) - and with the bass notes either two to the measure in half notes, or four to the measure in quarter notes.

So you've got guys like me, with a lifetime of playing jazz and rock, everything thought of as in 4/4, and if you're playing in "two", the bass is on 1 and 3, and the mando on 2 and 4. Then you've got people who just naturally think of the same tune as "in two" or as if there are two beats per measure, and the bass plays on each one, and the mando plays in between beats.

So if you're playing basic basic bluegrass bass, making two notes per measure, mando making two notes in between your two notes, and 150 bass notes occur per minute, some of your musicians are thinking "150 BPM, 2 beats per measure. bass on 1 and 2", and others are thinking "300 BPM, 4 beats per measure, bass on 1 and 3" and it's all the same thing. Kind of. But the guys who're thinking "300 BPM, four beats per measure" are probably more likely to start playing 4 bass notes per measure - like most of us do on occasion, especially behind a hot solo.

Of course, introducing terminology like "offbeats" or "backbeats" doesn't help either, and of course it also depends on just HOW jazzy/rocky your bluegrass band is.

Honestly, I haven't found a good way to bridge the terminology gap other than by demonstration.

And then you get the people who are confused between tempo and how many notes you're playing. I've had many times when we play a tune at say 120 BPM in 2, then the singer can't get all the words in without sounding like an auctioneer. So we slow it down to 100, but I start playing in 4 (each chord is still lasting 120/100 as long, the singer singing more slowly, just as intended) and someone will chime in "you're playing too fast!" NO I'M NOT. I'm just playing more notes!

 

[Ed S]

I repeat, I have never heard of anyone describe bpm over 200, outside of this forum. Yesterday, my 2 bandmates (not that they should be considered the final word) thought such description ridiculous.

 

[turf3]

I repeat, I have never heard of anyone describe bpm over 200, outside of this forum. Yesterday, my 2 bandmates (not that they should be considered the final word) thought such description ridiculous.

I count 336 BPM. Bass playing one note per beat.

I guess what you mean is you've not heard BLUGRASS players describe a tempo of a BLUEGRASS tune as greater than 200, and I'd agree, since BG is almost always PLAYED in two - except when it isn't....

But if we're playing a BG tune and I'm playing 120 bass notes per minute, two per bar, and then I switch over to four per bar, 240 bass notes per minute, the chords keep coming along at the same number of seconds per chord, the words of the song are sung at the same pace, you can't really say the tempo changed from 120 to 240 when nothing sped up except I started playing twice as many notes per minute and the rhythmic feel changed.