The Hal Leonard Bass Method thread

#81
So, I have been plugging away at this for about a year now. In the last couple of months, I have noticed that my fretting fingers have started to feel more relaxed and comfortable getting around on the fret board. And using a metronome seems to be paying off as my once horrible sense of rhythm seems to be improving.

After all this time and work I have been putting in, I started thinking I would like to find some actual tunes + sheet music and try my hand at learning real songs. But, I am not having much luck finding any sheet music for bass. All the sheet music I come across is on the treble cleff. Everything I am finding for bass is in tabs. Interesting that so many people preach on the importance of being able to read sheet music, yet all the resources I have found so far use tabs. I have to wonder how much use we are going to get out of being able to sight read once we get through this book and start playing real world music? Maybe I am just not looking in the right place?
 
#82
SbassmanSpiff said:
All the sheet music I come across is on the treble cleff. Everything I am finding for bass is in tabs. Interesting that so many people preach on the importance of being able to read sheet music, yet all the resources I have found so far use tabs. I have to wonder how much use we are going to get out of being able to sight read once we get through this book and start playing real world music? Maybe I am just not looking in the right place?
Click to expand...

Good post, good points. Congrats on your progress.

The unfortunate side-effect of the popularity and ease of TAB is, book publishers, whose primary goal is to sell their product, are including TAB in a large portion of their stringed-instrument offerings. I actually have to use painters blue masking tape to cover up the TAB with some of the method and songbooks I use with my students.

But you can find non-TAB songbooks for bass if you look around.

Here's an example of something I use with my students, this three-part series are the partner songbooks for the Friedland/Hal Leonard method books:

http://www.amazon.com/Easy-Pop-Bass...313&sr=1-9&keywords=hal+leonard+bass+songbook

There are many more useful non-TAB bass songbooks on Amazon.
 
#84
I studied Simandl Method when I played String Bass.

It works well for symphonic playing, as you are reading music and NOT looking at your instrument.

I love bass method books..but was turned off as soon as someone mentioned Simandl/ 3 finger method earlier in this thread.

I'll look at it..but every time a guitarist worked out jazz tunes with me..always asked why I only used 3 fingers, He showed me his 4 finger scale fingering..1 noie-per-finger- MUCH more efficient and consistant throughout the finger board, exept maybe open strings and first 3 frets or first 3 semi tones. I can understand using only 0 1 3 4 in lower positions.

Simandl method still messes with me after decades of trying NOT to employ it.

Again...it is THE method for symphonic playing....but for electric bass?? I don't know any great players who would be so self- limiting.

If I am mistaken or if I have misunderstood..please feel free to elaborate...
 
#85
I started the course last week and am into book 2. Really, it's been hard to put it down. I don't know much about music instruction. But from my real-world work I know a lot about education and have seen all kinds of textbooks, from stellar to awful.

These books are really good. The way he introduces notation one string at a time has you reading music before you even realize you're doing it. The musical exercises are fun to play and sound like simplified but plausible examples of real musical styles, as opposed to the nursery rhyme melodies I've seen in some other books. Not too expensive either.

I went ahead and ordered his blues, walking bass line, and groove books to tackle once I've finished this course.
 
#86
zon6c-f said:
I studied Simandl Method when I played String Bass.

It works well for symphonic playing, as you are reading music and NOT looking at your instrument.

I love bass method books..but was turned off as soon as someone mentioned Simandl/ 3 finger method earlier in this thread.

I'll look at it..but every time a guitarist worked out jazz tunes with me..always asked why I only used 3 fingers, He showed me his 4 finger scale fingering..1 noie-per-finger- MUCH more efficient and consistant throughout the finger board, exept maybe open strings and first 3 frets or first 3 semi tones. I can understand using only 0 1 3 4 in lower positions.

Simandl method still messes with me after decades of trying NOT to employ it.

Again...it is THE method for symphonic playing....but for electric bass?? I don't know any great players who would be so self- limiting.

If I am mistaken or if I have misunderstood..please feel free to elaborate...
Click to expand...

I'm new to bass but a long time guitar player. I spent a few weeks figuring things out for myself on bass, drawing on the internet or carrying concepts over from the six-string, before buying this book.

I had just begun to get comfortable with the 1-string-per-finger method when I started the Leonard books which emphasize the 1-2-4 method.

I would say, don't let that stop you from checking out the books. I think the idea is to play with less strain on the wrist and also get used to sliding your hand from one position to another. If you decide to stick with what you're doing, you can still get a lot from the books.

I tend to use all four fingers on guitar, possibly too much. I've noticed that a lot of players whose playing I admire actually use their pinky fingers less than I do. They're much more fluent in sliding from position to position. Check out Pete Thorn's videos on youtube for an example of this.

One of my main goals in studying bass is to become a better six-string player. I'm hoping that learning the three-finger technique might actually help there.
 
#87
SbassmanSpiff said:
I am not having much luck finding any sheet music for bass. All the sheet music I come across is on the treble cleff.
Click to expand...

I just bought the James Jamerson -Standing in the Shadows of Motown book, which is all notation and NO tab at all; it's kind of a biography of Jamerson with a lot of fairly well known 60's Motown songs in it. It doesn't look particularly easy, and I'm probably mental for getting it at this stage, but I'm saving it up for when I finish all 3 Hal Leonard Bass Method books,and hoping that I'm then good enough to play some of the songs. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: EddiePlaysBass
#88
I started using 124 per the lessons in the book. After a while I decided to learn to use 1234 so I just went through all of the exercises from the beginning. Really wasn't a big deal. After a few of evenings it became fairly comfortable. No reason you can't learn both, or just use whatever you're comfortable with.

Ed Friedland wrote the lessons in the book and if you watch him play on utube, he uses both methods.
 
#90
I'm currently working my way through book one. I've played for a few years, but so far I've only learning songs by tab or ear.

It's amazing how the simplest of bass lines can become infuriatingly difficult once you're trying to learn them in a way that's not familiar to you! I've been forcing myself to work out how to play each exercise BEFORE I listen to it on the CD which stops me just working it out by ear.

So far the experience has been an enjoyable but frustrating one, it's clearly highlighted areas where I need to improve if I want to become a good bassist (rhythm, timing, reading music, learning the notes of the fretboard) and given me a plan / direction for doing so.

I'm hoping that once I get further in to the books it's going to go over some more "theory" type stuff to help me make up my own basslines. Can anyone confirm?
 
  • Like
Reactions: vishalicious
#91
zon6c-f said:
I studied Simandl Method when I played String Bass.

It works well for symphonic playing, as you are reading music and NOT looking at your instrument.

I love bass method books..but was turned off as soon as someone mentioned Simandl/ 3 finger method earlier in this thread.

I'll look at it..but every time a guitarist worked out jazz tunes with me..always asked why I only used 3 fingers, He showed me his 4 finger scale fingering..1 noie-per-finger- MUCH more efficient and consistant throughout the finger board, exept maybe open strings and first 3 frets or first 3 semi tones. I can understand using only 0 1 3 4 in lower positions.

Simandl method still messes with me after decades of trying NOT to employ it.

Again...it is THE method for symphonic playing....but for electric bass?? I don't know any great players who would be so self- limiting.

If I am mistaken or if I have misunderstood..please feel free to elaborate...
Click to expand...

I had started a thread about this a little while back, when I first got the Hal Leonard book:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f21/hal-leonard-1-2-4-fingering-vs-1-2-3-4-fingering-1002478/

I originally learned to play ONLY using 1-2-3-4 method and was taught/told that doing anything but that was cheating (as in, cheating myself and not using proper technique).
When first introduced to 1-2-4 I felt that it was the "easy way out" and that people that didn't want to "work hard enough" (tongue in cheek) only used 1-2-4.

I then understood the concept that 1-2-4 was being used up to the 5th fret or so, to accommodate for the large fret spacing, and to not injure the fretting hand. Above the 5th fret 1-2-3-4 is recommended.

It took some getting used to, both physically and mentally, but now it works for me quite simply and flawlessly. I simply see it as another tool in my toolbox of techniques.
Nothing wrong about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vishalicious
#92
electracoyote said:
I actually have to use painters blue masking tape to cover up the TAB with some of the method and songbooks I use with my students.
Click to expand...

That got me laughing because at some point in the Hal Leonard books (can't remember if it's 1 or 2) TAB is introduced. My reaction was something like this:

http://nooooooooooooooo.com/

I used to be able to sight read, MANY moons ago. Part of my getting these books was to learn how to sight read again. I've relied too much on TAB. When it was introduced in the HL books, I had thoughts of blacking it all out or some such. ;)
 
#93
GKon said:
I then understood the concept that 1-2-4 was being used up to the 5th fret or so, to accommodate for the large fret spacing, and to not injure the fretting hand. Above the 5th fret 1-2-3-4 is recommended.

It took some getting used to, both physically and mentally, but now it works for me quite simply and flawlessly. I simply see it as another tool in my toolbox of techniques.
Nothing wrong about it.
Click to expand...

That's it in a nutshell.

The majority of my students have small-to-medium sized hands. Using fingers 2 and 3 to span a full two-fret step in first position is asking too much. 1-2-4 in first position seems to be generally more efficient and result in faster, cleaner playing.

Of course, after you master the basics, rules are meant to be bent and broken, right? I catch myself using finger 3 in first position sometimes. I think the point is to get the newer player up to speed as quickly and efficiently as possible.
 
#94
GKon said:
I used to be able to sight read, MANY moons ago. Part of my getting these books was to learn how to sight read again. I've relied too much on TAB. When it was introduced in the HL books, I had thoughts of blacking it all out or some such. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't have the book in front of me, but I seem to recall that Ed introduces TAB and spends only a brief section (a few pages?) on the concept. He then goes right back to full standard notation exclusively.

I think he only introduces the concept as a courtesy and in an effort to be thorough and comprehensive. I have actually had students who had never used TAB and it required a (brief) explanation.
 
#95
HelpImaRock said:
This 1, 2, 4 method interests me. why is the third finger is left out?
Click to expand...

I find that player with small to medium hands use this method. I use it without thinking. But if you watch Chris Squire he fingers 123 and hardly uses 4 because his hands are so large that works better ergonomically for his hands on the fretboard.
 
#96
GKon said:
That got me laughing because at some point in the Hal Leonard books (can't remember if it's 1 or 2) TAB is introduced. My reaction was something like this:

http://nooooooooooooooo.com/

I used to be able to sight read, MANY moons ago. Part of my getting these books was to learn how to sight read again. I've relied too much on TAB. When it was introduced in the HL books, I had thoughts of blacking it all out or some such. ;)
Click to expand...

I used black electricians tape to block out the TAB in my book...My instructor says it looks like a CIA response to a FOIA request!
 
  • Like
Reactions: vishalicious
#97
Difference is String Bass [Simandl Method] employs 1-2-4 all the way to octave[7th] position...THEN..it['s 1-2-3..WITH NO USE OF #4.

Theory is that ring [#3] finger is weak amd \n cannot effectively plauy lower positions ..ON A STRING BASS...Agreed..but electric bass requires very little fingerstrnngth ..even if you use higher action..most of us don't.

Here's a major scale fingerinG for 1-2-4 method on anE String, from F# UP...: 2 -4, 1-2-4 1-2-4.

4 finger method: E: 2-4 A: 1-2-4 D:1 3 4..OR...E: 1 -2-4, A: 1-2-4 D:1-3-4..much easier using 4 string method in my opinion...
 
#98
I started struggling with the note recognition when I got to the D string and the exercises started crossing over 3 strings with the sharps and flats introduced. So I started to very lightly pencil the lettered notes under the staff notation. It did a good job of training my eye to recognize the note. Then I went back and erased the penciled letter notes that I wrote and the notation recognition did become easier, but still had to re-play the exercises several times before I was able to play them well enough to move on.

It's a nice little crutch to initially get through the exercises , but pretty critical to go back at some point make sure you can recognize just the notation the notes by sight. Also takes longer to get through the book, but definitely helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bafonso
#99
Zoomer22 said:
It's a nice little crutch to initially get through the exercises , but pretty critical to go back at some point make sure you can recognize just the notation the notes by sight. Also takes longer to get through the book, but definitely helps.
Click to expand...

This is a very good point! I have started to find that I am reading the notation, playing the piece of music, then playing it through a few times without reading it, because I can now play it. I think that I will need to go back and re-do some of the earlier exercises as well :rolleyes:
 
#100
electracoyote said:
I don't have the book in front of me, but I seem to recall that Ed introduces TAB and spends only a brief section (a few pages?) on the concept. He then goes right back to full standard notation exclusively.

I think he only introduces the concept as a courtesy and in an effort to be thorough and comprehensive. I have actually had students who had never used TAB and it required a (brief) explanation.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I like TAB and find it a very easy and practical way to learn new songs. I find that it is absolutely useful and good that it's introduced in the book(s).
By the way, it is used sporadically on various of the exercises throughout the rest of the book(s) after it is initially introduced.

I personally was trying to get away from TAB for now, hence my reaction (all done tongue in cheek).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back