Basses that changed history

Basses that changed history

I was thinking about this and have a short listing of innovations that
changed the course of basses or bass playing.

In sort of chronological order:

Fender Precision Bass: The "first" electric bass

Rickenbacker basses: This bass is not limited to the bottom

Fretless basses: Just the opposite of why a "precision" bass was invented.

Active electronics: Improved fidelity

5 string basses: E is not longer the bottom

Multi string basses: 8 or 12 for a fuller sound.

Steinberger: Launched headless basses

Electric Upright basses: Combo upright and electric

So what does the future hold for basses?

Re: Basses that changed history

I think there=92s room for innovation in the materials used to make the
instruments (high-tech polymers like the graphite basses, etc.), and
also in pickup design. Maybe better peizo pickups or other designs
besides the old electromagnets-n-steel. For that matter, different
string materials, too (I know, the little silicone string basses came
first, but they=92re not perfected yet).

I think there is a lot of room for improvement where speakers &
cabinets are concerned, but I guess that=92s another newsgroup :)

Re: Basses that changed history

I should also add to your list: Alembic-style basses, which all the
companies seemed to be making from the late seventies thru the mid
eighties.

Re: Basses that changed history

It's my opinion that the only bass that really qualifies for your topic as
stated is the Pbass. Everything else are just descendants that rode it's
wake or coat tails if you will.
The others listed may have "made" history but did they really "change"
history? I think it was individual players that did the changing after the
electric bass was invented, which was the Precision. Steady improvement took
place but name one other bass that did to music what the Pbass did.
Let's say the Rick had never been invented, does that mean there would be
no Chris Squire or Geddy Lee? Would Paul's bass lines suck with out Hofner?
Would Victor Wooten have not come to the public eye with out Fodera? Stanley
Clarke gone unnoticed with out Alembic? etc. etc. No F'in way. Everything
they do, they could do on a Pbass because of their talent and skill. All
these basses have a distinct sound and character BUT, as we all know, the
magic is in the player.
As for some of the others mentioned. Steinberger? how many people do you
see playing them? They were a flash in the pan that has held on because it's
essentially a high quality instrument. They may have an enduring legacy of
causing the industry to explore space age materials. But honestly Ovation
did that years ago with their plastic :"lyrachord" bowls, which we learn
they stole from Helicopter blades lol.
I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts on my assessment.

SotR

Re: Basses that changed history

"SotR" <flippy@ssm . com > wrote in message
news:du6Vj.24$qH4.4@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc . com ...

> It's my opinion that the only bass that really qualifies for your topic
> as stated is the Pbass. Everything else are just descendants that rode
> it's wake or coat tails if you will.

I agree. Given the things the OP noted, the original subject heading more
accurately might have been, "Changes to Basses through History"

Re: Basses that changed history

I'll give it a go:

Your argument is a lot like saying every mass-produced car is riding the
coattails of the Ford Model T. That was the originator for sure, but lots of
cars have "changed history" since then, AND were not clones or knockoffs of
the Model T (Jeeps for example).

From a phenomenological standpoint, most things we call a "car" have 4
wheels and an internal combustion engine.This similarity doesn't mean that
they are "knockoffs" of each other, but that these things are intrinsic to
something called an "automobile" as opposed to a motorcycle or whatever.

In the same way, a "Bass" produces semi-percussive musical tones in a
certain pitch range that provide the low end frequencies for a piece of
music - be it electric, upright, keyboard, tuba, etc. In that sense, the
method used to produce the tone is not as important.

In practical terms, it all depends on how much of a purist you want to be;
how far back you want to go. I mean, you could say that the P Bass is no big
deal, because it has 4 strings, and the same range and role as an upright
bass - frets being merely a minor modification that has nothing to do with
its function in the band. And the upright is of course a knock off of the
Viola da Gamba, which DID have frets... and so on.


Last, it seems like you're assuming the P Bass was "revolutionary" because
it appeared on so many records, when in fact it's the recordings themselves
that made the P Bass sound popular.

What if the P Bass had flopped? Would it still be revolutionary?

Gibson sure had a lot of their own "revolutionary" ideas about bass design;
they made a lot of basses; they even had well known "revolutionary" artists
use them (Jack Bruce for example). Yet they never came close to even a
fraction of the P Bass' popularity. Does that mean they are LESS
revolutionary? Or just not as well known?

In other words, since the Les Paul came before the Strat, wouldn't the LP
Bass be "more revolutionary" than the P Bass?

I Remember something Jimmy said years ago in here in a "P Bass is the
greatest blah blah" discussion. He said something like "if you could only
own ONE bass, it should be a PBass, simply because that is the sound that
live and studio engineers know how to dial in, and you can always be
guaranteed a good sounding session or gig". I'd say this is very true. I'd
also add that in the recording world, "hit" producers tend to "steal" their
next hit from the sound of the current crop.

Beyond the practical reasons, I'd say the P Bass became insanely popular
because it originally appeared on some hit records whose sound was copied by
other producers, and so on - which eventually became "standard" bass sound
that every producer/engineer looked for on a session, and so on.

In that sense, The very fact that guys were able to carve out a distinctive
sound using NON-Ps is in ITSELF "revolutionary".


Speaking of which, I haven't even touched on the instrument/player/sound
connection, but I will say this:

Stanley Clarke used a "Fender Bass" in the early days of Return To Forever.
The story goes that after a gig, he was approached by an Alembic rep who
told him that his playing was great but his sound sucked, and gave him an
Alembic bass. And the rest as they say, is history...


Stanley plays "Fender Bass" on the RTF "Hymn of the Seventh Galaxy" album.
Listen to that, and tell me if it would have been possible to make the
"School Days" record with that bass sound. I'm not saying it's bad, But can
you imagine him being able to bang out "School Days" with it?




"SotR" <flippy@ssm . com > wrote in message
news:du6Vj.24$qH4.4@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc . com ...
> It's my opinion that the only bass that really qualifies for your topic
as
> stated is the Pbass. Everything else are just descendants that rode it's
> wake or coat tails if you will.
> The others listed may have "made" history but did they really "change"
> history? I think it was individual players that did the changing after
the
> electric bass was invented, which was the Precision. Steady improvement
took
> place but name one other bass that did to music what the Pbass did.
> Let's say the Rick had never been invented, does that mean there would
be
> no Chris Squire or Geddy Lee? Would Paul's bass lines suck with out
Hofner?
> Would Victor Wooten have not come to the public eye with out Fodera?
Stanley
> Clarke gone unnoticed with out Alembic? etc. etc. No F'in way. Everything
> they do, they could do on a Pbass because of their talent and skill. All
> these basses have a distinct sound and character BUT, as we all know, the
> magic is in the player.
> As for some of the others mentioned. Steinberger? how many people do you
> see playing them? They were a flash in the pan that has held on because
it's
> essentially a high quality instrument. They may have an enduring legacy of
> causing the industry to explore space age materials. But honestly Ovation
> did that years ago with their plastic :"lyrachord" bowls, which we learn
> they stole from Helicopter blades lol.
> I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts on my assessment.
>
> SotR
>
>

Re: Basses that changed history

js wrote:

> From a phenomenological standpoint,

Phenom-a-what?

> I Remember something Jimmy said years ago in here in a "P Bass is the
> greatest blah blah" discussion. He said something like "if you could only
> own ONE bass, it should be a PBass, simply because that is the sound that
> live and studio engineers know how to dial in, and you can always be
> guaranteed a good sounding session or gig". I'd say this is very true. I'd
> also add that in the recording world, "hit" producers tend to "steal" their
> next hit from the sound of the current crop.

I just want to chime in on this point. I've never been a big fan of
Fender basses. There's nothing wrong with them, but my tastes always
kind of leaned elsewhere - mostly in the way of how they feel. Thus I've
rarely played one in the last 15 years.

I'm also not much of a slap bass guy. I'll piddle around with it, but
it's really not my thing. Again, I've got nothing against it.

Well, I had the occasion to take an afternoon and play a $25,000 worth
of basses (comments at
* w w w .azwebpages . com /bass/BunchOfBasses.htm). I picked up a couple
of P-basses and did some some of my rudimentary slap stuff.

Damned if it wasn't the sound I always wanted in my head. I gotta tell
you that no amount of tweaking on my other basses ever got the slap
sound close to what the Precision did the first time I tried with the
"neutral" settings on the amp I was using.

It made me decide that I want a P in my stable.

Re: Basses that changed history

On May 10, 1:32 am, Jim Carr <newsgro...@azwebpages . com > wrote:
> js wrote:
> > From a phenomenological standpoint,
>
> Phenom-a-what?
>
> > I Remember something Jimmy said years ago in here in a "P Bass is the
> > greatest blah blah" discussion. He said something like "if you could only
> > own ONE bass, it should be a PBass, simply because that is the sound that
> > live and studio engineers know how to dial in, and you can always be
> > guaranteed a good sounding session or gig". I'd say this is very true. I'd
> > also add that in the recording world, "hit" producers tend to "steal" their
> > next hit from the sound of the current crop.
>
> I just want to chime in on this point. I've never been a big fan of
> Fender basses. There's nothing wrong with them, but my tastes always
> kind of leaned elsewhere - mostly in the way of how they feel. Thus I've
> rarely played one in the last 15 years.
>
> I'm also not much of a slap bass guy. I'll piddle around with it, but
> it's really not my thing. Again, I've got nothing against it.
>
> Well, I had the occasion to take an afternoon and play a $25,000 worth
> of basses (comments at * w w w .azwebpages . com /bass/BunchOfBasses.htm). I picked up a couple
> of P-basses and did some some of my rudimentary slap stuff.
>
> Damned if it wasn't the sound I always wanted in my head. I gotta tell
> you that no amount of tweaking on my other basses ever got the slap
> sound close to what the Precision did the first time I tried with the
> "neutral" settings on the amp I was using.
>
> It made me decide that I want a P in my stable.


i had a similar experience with my aerodyne PJ.
slap is a snap and playin fast is a blast.
very punchy and articulate.
like none i've ever played.

Re: Basses that changed history

js wrote:
> I'll give it a go:
>
<snip>
> Last, it seems like you're assuming the P Bass was "revolutionary" because
> it appeared on so many records, when in fact it's the recordings themselves
> that made the P Bass sound popular.
>
> What if the P Bass had flopped? Would it still be revolutionary?
>

To be certain, it's all a bit "chicken or egg", but the Pbass still
covers a certain sound that I feel is inherently more versatile. Most
specialized basses, it's a lot harder to move away from the
specialization. The P is just a middle-of-the-list instrument that can
move to where the specialized instruments go.

It's the Telecaster of basses.

<snip>
>
>
> Stanley plays "Fender Bass" on the RTF "Hymn of the Seventh Galaxy" album.
> Listen to that, and tell me if it would have been possible to make the
> "School Days" record with that bass sound. I'm not saying it's bad, But can
> you imagine him being able to bang out "School Days" with it?
>

Yes. Er, at least I could imagine it once active electronics were in
the picture - it's mostly the preamp distorting, to my ear - you can
do that now with a PBass with EMG. Obviously, you could not do that
then, unless Fender's came with preamps (or could have them added ).

The thing sounds now to me like a really lo-register juice harp, not
so much a bass. The guy from Brothers Johnson got a better Alembic tone
to my ear.

>
>
>
><snip>

--
Les Cargill

Re: Basses that changed history

Hi js
My retort would be that you are equating "revolutionary" to "Changing
history". In essence they can mean the same thing or result in the same end
but in our context I don't see that the other's "Changed" history. They only
added to or redirected it, some very dramatically I'll admit. And in this
light, if any of those other basses had come first they would certainly
hold this title we are debating. The Pbass I'll argue holds that distinction
because it came first (as a bass GUITAR it should be noted).
I don't think the model T analogy works because they were not the first
car. Karl (Mercedes) Benz invented the "car" and other's there after had
been making them for years. Ford did not invent the car, he just mass
produced as you noted. Leo Fender "invented" the electric bass guitar, he
didn't merely streamline and mass produce someone else's invention. There
was nothing like it before and with the Pbass all of music was forever
changed.
We might compare the model T to some of the decent quality non-American
instruments that flooded the market in the wake of the R&R explosion:
Functional and affordable. And yes, it's no secret that many a future Rock
God started on one of them. But did Eko or Hagstrom change history?
There was a very interesting article in a music mag (bass player?) about
how it was the electric bass guitar that was responsible for Rock and Roll,
not the electric guitar. I can't remember the details but the writer sure
made his point I found it to be totally valid. The bottom line was, because
of the volume and ease of play (both compared to an upright) made available
by the electric bass. Would rock have grown past Elvis/Chuck Berry/Buddy
Holly etc. with-out the electric bass? We can only speculate but certainly
it would not have become what we know today. Would Acid Rock and then heavy
metal had ever come along with upright bass??? All this hinges on the Pbass
(again because it was first).
Also, we are saying "Changed History". I still meet musicians who have
never heard of Alembic, but even the reasonably informed "man on the street"
has heard the words "Fender bass". Brands like Alembic surely have had a
substantial impact but changed history? I don't believe so. Stanley Clarke
has certainly influenced players and that in turn had an impact on music but
like I said, we don't know him "because" of Alembic but we do know him
because of the Fender electric bass guitar.




SotR

Re: Basses that changed history

First, I would say that Fender was in fact NOT the inventor of the "electric
bass". It goes back to at least the 1930's:

* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bass_guitar#History


Fender WAS the first to create an instrument with both guitarists and
bassists in mind, design it SPECIFICALLY for modern mass production, AND
market it successfully by exploiting the burgeoning rockabilly/Rock and Roll
movement.

That's why I chose the Model T analogy, which i still think is apt.

Second, I'd say that you're applying post hoc reasoning to the historical
significance of the P Bass. True, the musical landscape would be much
different than it is now were the P not around - but is not like things
would have come to a dead stop or anything. They would just be different.

Third, if you don't believe Stanley Clarke changed bass history, you need to
go to Guitar Center some Saturday and hang out in the bass dept.

Yes, Stanley was certainly adept at "Fender Bass". But those double stops,
bends, pops, strums, and general "solo bass" sounds would NEVER have had the
same impact on a P. I know because I tried it... : D

Ditto for Jaco. Again, I'm sure he could tear up a P bass like nobody's
business. But the thinner neck and midrange "honk" of the Jazz Bass are what
allowed him to rise above the rhythm section and do his thing.

IMO, there are 2 camps of great players: Those who take whatever they have
and make magic with it; and those who hear a sound in their head and seek
out the instrument that best expresses it.

So, are the basses themselves revolutionary, or do revolutionary players
seek out an instrument that best expresses the sound they want to create?
That is a whole other debate, I guess.



PS: Understand that I'm just playing Devil's advocate here.








"SotR" <flippy@ssm . com > wrote in message
news:d_bVj.2768$7k7.1538@flpi150.ffdc.sbc . com ...
> Hi js
> My retort would be that you are equating "revolutionary" to "Changing
> history". In essence they can mean the same thing or result in the same
end
> but in our context I don't see that the other's "Changed" history. They
only
> added to or redirected it, some very dramatically I'll admit. And in this
> light, if any of those other basses had come first they would certainly
> hold this title we are debating. The Pbass I'll argue holds that
distinction
> because it came first (as a bass GUITAR it should be noted).
> I don't think the model T analogy works because they were not the first
> car. Karl (Mercedes) Benz invented the "car" and other's there after had
> been making them for years. Ford did not invent the car, he just mass
> produced as you noted. Leo Fender "invented" the electric bass guitar, he
> didn't merely streamline and mass produce someone else's invention. There
> was nothing like it before and with the Pbass all of music was forever
> changed.
> We might compare the model T to some of the decent quality non-American
> instruments that flooded the market in the wake of the R&R explosion:
> Functional and affordable. And yes, it's no secret that many a future
Rock
> God started on one of them. But did Eko or Hagstrom change history?
> There was a very interesting article in a music mag (bass player?) about
> how it was the electric bass guitar that was responsible for Rock and
Roll,
> not the electric guitar. I can't remember the details but the writer sure
> made his point I found it to be totally valid. The bottom line was,
because
> of the volume and ease of play (both compared to an upright) made
available
> by the electric bass. Would rock have grown past Elvis/Chuck Berry/Buddy
> Holly etc. with-out the electric bass? We can only speculate but certainly
> it would not have become what we know today. Would Acid Rock and then
heavy
> metal had ever come along with upright bass??? All this hinges on the
Pbass
> (again because it was first).
> Also, we are saying "Changed History". I still meet musicians who have
> never heard of Alembic, but even the reasonably informed "man on the
street"
> has heard the words "Fender bass". Brands like Alembic surely have had a
> substantial impact but changed history? I don't believe so. Stanley Clarke
> has certainly influenced players and that in turn had an impact on music
but
> like I said, we don't know him "because" of Alembic but we do know him
> because of the Fender electric bass guitar.
>
>
>
>
> SotR
>
>

Re: Basses that changed history

On May 12, 3:31 pm, "js" <nothing AT nothing DOT com> wrote:
>
>
> Ditto for Jaco. Again, I'm sure he could tear up a P bass like nobody's
> business. But the thinner neck and midrange "honk" of the Jazz Bass are what
> allowed him to rise above the rhythm section and do his thing.
>

To my surprise Jaco recorded Shadows And Light with a fretted P bass
neck bolted to his Jazz body. I never would have guessed from the
sound, he sounds exactly the same.

> IMO, there are 2 camps of great players: Those who take whatever they have
> and make magic with it; and those who hear a sound in their head and seek
> out the instrument that best expresses it.
>

I've heard Hendrix play an SG, I couldn't tell the difference. Once I
saw Otis Rush -- he's not that famous, but no better blues guitarist
ever lived -- play a Jaguar and I couldn't tell the difference from
his usual 335. I'm told that Jimmy Page recorded those famous albums
with a Telecaster.

> So, are the basses themselves revolutionary, or do revolutionary players
> seek out an instrument that best expresses the sound they want to create?
> That is a whole other debate, I guess.
>

Then there are the musicians of who I can humbly claim to be one who
can make anything sound like crap.

> PS: Understand that I'm just playing Devil's advocate here.
>

Re: Basses that changed history

On Mon, 12 May 2008 04:31:56 -0400, "js" <nothing AT nothing DOT com>
wrote:

>Ditto for Jaco. Again, I'm sure he could tear up a P bass like nobody's
>business. But the thinner neck and midrange "honk" of the Jazz Bass are what
>allowed him to rise above the rhythm section and do his thing.

he always said he couldn't play a P bass beacause he needed the bridge
pick-up.


--

More ME in the monitor!!!

Re: Basses that changed history

js wrote:
> First, I would say that Fender was in fact NOT the inventor of the "electric
> bass". It goes back to at least the 1930's:
<snip>
> Third, if you don't believe Stanley Clarke changed bass history, you need to
> go to Guitar Center some Saturday and hang out in the bass dept.
>

You misspelled "Les Claypool". :) It's always "Jerry Was A Racecar
Driver", which is now.... one year short of being old enough to
vote....

> Yes, Stanley was certainly adept at "Fender Bass". But those double stops,
> bends, pops, strums, and general "solo bass" sounds would NEVER have had the
> same impact on a P. I know because I tried it... : D
>

Speakin' a' Jaco....
* w w w .davidpastorius . com /

ah... pbass...
* youtube . com /watch?v=njkjRIgXqfg

Real scratch golfers play with blades.


> Ditto for Jaco. Again, I'm sure he could tear up a P bass like nobody's
> business. But the thinner neck and midrange "honk" of the Jazz Bass are what
> allowed him to rise above the rhythm section and do his thing.
>
> IMO, there are 2 camps of great players: Those who take whatever they have
> and make magic with it; and those who hear a sound in their head and seek
> out the instrument that best expresses it.
>


* w w w .rickrosas . com /

<snip>
--
Les Cargill

Re: Basses that changed history

On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:57:17 -0400, "js" <nothing AT nothing DOT com>
wrote:

>I Remember something Jimmy said years ago in here in a "P Bass is the
>greatest blah blah" discussion. He said something like "if you could only
>own ONE bass, it should be a PBass, simply because that is the sound that
>live and studio engineers know how to dial in, and you can always be
>guaranteed a good sounding session or gig". I'd say this is very true. I'd
>also add that in the recording world, "hit" producers tend to "steal" their
>next hit from the sound of the current crop.

Actually, I said Jazz Bass back then, the reason being the bridge
pickup adding an extra layer of sonic versatility that the Precision
doesn't have. Even though a soloed Jazz neck pickup doesn't sound
exactly like a Precision, it's pretty close. And I still believe that
it's the bass to have if you can only have one and you want to be a
bassist for hire, purely from a versatility standpoint. There are
some gigs where a Precision may not be the right thing, but I've never
played a gig that you couldn't do on a Jazz. But the insane heaviness
of most Jazz Bass has led me away from them and back to the Precision,
although the ones I play the most these days are PJ's and not "true"
Precisions.