Don't hate me for what I am going to ask.

I know that a major/minor scale is what it is across the board for any instrument. I am guessing that mode is a mode.

My question is this....are there any serious problems learning what notes I can use for fills and such by picking up guitar riffs by ear?

I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I don't really know enough theory to know the difference. Basically, I learn a guitar riff, listen and figure out the bass line and then at various points of the song, I try to use a few of the notes that the riff uses. I pay attention to the chord that I am playing when the time comes to throw in fill.

For some reason, my mind can grasp this, but learning straight theory is just not working for me. I want to make sure that in the least I am not getting worse for doing this.

No harm no foul.

Music is music. An instrument is just an interface to make music.

Of note for bass, some things do not translate well to lower frequencies. For example, playing a guitar riff using the same fingerings (TAB) can sound muddy or worse. Playing up an octave will produce the same pitches as guitar.

You think all those great bluesmen knew theory? Me neither. That said, don't give up on trying to learn theory. For one thing, it's pretty interesting when you get into it and it helps with your "vocabulary" when talking and thinking about music. It can also help with improvisation. If you're adept at playing by ear, stick with that by all means. The theory will get easier over time.

Theory and harmony go hand in hand.

In a 4-piece rock band harmony at any point in time is realized by the simultaneous notes sounded by the vocals, guitars and bass.

In practice (typically) the rhythm guitar plays chords that define the harmony. This is anchored by the bass while the vocals and lead guitar take turns laying a melody on top.

Guitar riffs are more of a melody (or counter melody). They may contain chord tones that define the harmony but they don't have to. Just like a walking bass line can use chromatic leading tones outside of the scale.

For example, in the key of C a chord progression may end with a G7 going to a C major. You can play a Db on beat 4 of the G7 to lead into a C on beat 1 of the C major, but Db is not part of the harmony (chord tones) for G7 (G B D F). Basically you are creating a momentary dissonance (tension) which resolves (releases) on the downbeat.

Likewise, a lot of rock guitar riffs are built on pentatonic and blues scales which contain notes outside the chord tones. Since these scales work with the chords and all you are doing is selecting notes from the scales you should be ok as long as you are also playing in a riff/counter melody style. For example, not trying to lay a Db whole note under a G7 chord. (Well, let your ears be the judge on that one, but I'll probably pass.)

If you learn harmony (theory) and you learn the guitar riffs you can harmonize with the riffs. (This is more commonly done with two guitars as "dual lead guitar".)

Or with harmony, as the bassist, you can define the voicing (inversion) of the chords (because you are typically playing the lowest pitch). A common example is D/F# to G. That means a D major chord is played by everyone but the bass plays F#. This has a different sound than when the bass plays D instead. The next chord is a G. Since no note is specified in the bass you can play whatever you want, but that F# will resolve nicely to a G.

I just don't understand theory. I read a book on it and worked some of the exercises, but I can't seem to relate in "real world" situations.

For example, how do you choose between notes of the pentatonic scale vs using the mode of whatever chord you are playing in the progression? Does that even make any sense?

I have read all the threads and played the arpeggios and all that good stuff, but I can't relate it to anything. I can hear when a note doesn't work and vice versa, but I don't know why.

They say to pick apart and study a song. Question why they played this instead of that. I am struggling with studying why someone chose this over that.

Better minds than mine can correct me, but to me theory does two things. It provides a common way to communicate (e.g. "stupid keyboard - that's a C minor chord, not C major). And it informs us about what "fits" (e.g. when playing a Cmaj7, a B will (usually) sound better than a Bb).

I don't think it helps you figure out which of the notes in your chord/scale you should use, or how to combine them, or when to go outside of the scale/chord. That's the creativity part.

One of the (many) issues I've noticed with my playing is that I tend to fill with notes that are somewhat close together. I think that's partly from a "walking" mindset and partially from the comfort in my hand of playing "nearby" notes. One of the reasons that I try to listen to guitar fills is to find stuff that moves me and "moves around". Sometimes that inspires me to fill more ambitiously.

Tom

Learning parts by ear is a great way to find out what notes you can use.

If you can figure what the parts have to do with the chords and how the parts are similar to each other, you are teaching theory.

Music theory was created after music was composed or played as a way of explaining what is going on. Music theory is not an instruction manual, it is a compendium of "what usually works" and why it does.

I tell my students that theory it the "language of music" If you want to live and work in a particulat place, you really need to speak the language.
Rocky

Nobody knows why. It just sounds good.

Theory geeks might tell you what note you *should* play at any given moment over any given chord. They are full of shite. One time I was jamming with a group that had a gtr. player; I was playing gtr., too. The other gtr. player was "schooled," and was playing the jazz-school-approved mixo-phrygian or whatever modes aver certain standard jazz changes. I just, to paraphrase a great jazz bassist, "played any old go-to-hell note that [swang.]" I confess my bias, but I still thought my lines were more musical than hers; hers were flat, lifeless, sounded like they had been learned by rote. Mine had the great virtue of breing spontaneous, if nothing else.

Do your thing, FT. Don't let nobody tell you different.

I'm a theory geek. I don't tell people what notes they should play. I tell them what notes they could play (which is all 12 of them) and why some might work better than others.

The other day one of my students was putting a lot of fourths in his walking line. I told him that he could do that, but he better be pretty careful about when he does it.

When it comes to learning music, listening is paramount. I think it's worthwhile to listen to all of the other instruments if it helps you to become a better musician. So if that means transcribing a guitar part for bass...go for it! Lots of musicians go about transcribing parts that were originally written for other instruments as a musical exercise. Plenty of bass players have done this with Bach cello suits while others have done it with Charlie Parker solos.

It seems like you want to be able to improvise a little bit within the framework of your rock band. I'd recommend learning the pentatonic scales. They've served a lot of rock players well over the years. A major pentatonic scale will be the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 6th degrees of the major scale. A minor pentatonic scale will include the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 7th of a minor scale.

As for learning music theory, there's the potential that it can be kind of dry and difficult to grasp. But then what makes it different from any other field of study? In school I found that the subjects that held my interest the most were the ones where I had a good teacher. It was the teacher's enthusiasm and capability of translating the ideas that made the subjects that much more interesting. A passionate teacher like that is going to lead to a much better engaged and educated student.

Everyone understands things differently. You don't have to be an expert at all the aspects of theory- the punch line is it's got to sound good. So many great musicians couldn't read a note of music, let alone the theory behind it. Learning straight theory is like anything else- it's all gibberish without a good practical application of the theory in order to tie it all together and make sense.

As far as 'getting worse', only if you try to over-think it. At the end of the day, 'theory' should be used as a supplement to instinct. Not understanding theory to the n-th degree doesn't make you less of a bass player, as long as you understand by instinct what you need to do.



That's the main thing I want to learn more theory for- not to make notes fit into some magical musical formula, but to understand where to start looking for ideas to expand my palette of skills. At church, the lead musician is a music teacher and plays a lot of jazz style improv between songs. I'm the only bass player (really the only musician) that even tries to follow what he's doing. I don't do it by 'theory' per say, but instinct. But, it's rather basic. I want to expand that a bit to play some nice fills. For me, it's learning what notes work better than others. I'm a 'nuts and bolts' person anyway, that's a large part of it.

So don't sweat it that you aren't a theory expert. As long as what you are playing sounds good, play it.

Hello Fingertalkin,

Here’s my take on what you should understand and do at this point in your bass playing development.

The essence of most western music is chord progression. Rock, Pop, R&B, Blues, Jazz, and all the other styles are based on the musical progression of chords. Every melody, solo, and bassline will contain plenty of chord tones. Chord tones are the skeleton of most good basslines. When you play bass, think of yourself as PLAYING THE CHORDS.

You were on the right track when you mentioned arpeggios. Learn the fingering to the 4 basic 4-note chordal arpeggios, Dominant 7th, Minor 7th, Augmented, and Diminished. Learn to visualize these 4 patterns on your bass, with the root note on the bottom for now, so you can move them anywhere on the fretboard as needed.

Practice these arpeggios regularly using a Rock/Pop fakebook and a drum machine. Mix up the order of the notes in each arpeggio. Play them with half-notes, quarter-notes, eighth-notes, triplets, any which way you can think of. Many famous basslines were created from simple arpeggios. Once you are comfortable playing rhythmically interesting arpeggios, you’ll be confident playing bass to almost any song.

The next level is to play the notes between the chord tones. This is called Chordal Scales, probably a subject for later in your woodshedding.

PS- Being comfortable with arpeggios is also the secret to singing and playing bass at the same time!

BB

Depends on what everyone else is playing.

You've described two of the commonly used approaches in non-art music:
(1) play the same fingerings (pentatonic/mode/riff/etc.) and reposition for chord changes, or
(2) play in key.

In Zep's "Heartbreaker" the guitar plays the same blues scale-based riff on each chord change. A song could also use phrygian mode for each chord.

If a song is in G major (or its relative minor, E minor) then the chords follow the key: G major (Ionian), A minor (Dorian), B minor (Phrygian), C major (Lydian), D major (Mixolydian), E minor (Aeolian), F# diminished (Locrian). But all you have to remember is to stay in the key of G -- play the G major scale G A B C D E F# -- and all of that falls in place.

For example, for a C major chord in the key of G if you want to play a passing 4th you play F# instead of F because there is no F natural in the G major scale. Who cares what the mode is in this case?

OTOH, if you want to play a song where every chord is played in lydian mode then you need to know lydian is a standard major scale with the 4th raised a half step. It doesn't matter which of the 12 tones you call "root", you play a major scale with the 4th raised.

Some songwriters will try to mess you up with modulations (key changes) or tonicizations. For example Zep's version of "Hangman" alternates between A major and A minor in the same measure: there's no key that has both of those chords.

Like Jeremy says, theory is just a post-mortem description of why something sounded the way it sounded. The note E does not sound so great if everyone else is laying on a Cmin chord (the notes C, Eb, G). You could make the note E work on a Cmin as a passing tone, or just by brute force, but it probably won't be the best choice. We know that in advance by just using some basic theory. You don't have to know any theory, but it might open up your playing for other possibilities if you learned some.

You don't have to know anything about how an engine works to drive a car. But, if you really get into driving, it might help to know why an engine, and a transmission and the tires all function the way they do . . . it just makes for a better driving experience.

I've got a series of articles running in Bass Player (Jan, Feb, Mar, April) on triads. These articles might be a good place for you to start. The articles are theoretical -- how to think of and use triads on the bass.

There are only 4 different types of triads: major, minor, diminished, and augmented. Major and minor are the most used. Since triads are 3-note broken chords, there are three places to start each triad (3 different inversions). If you have a C major triad, you could start it on C (root position), on E (1st inversion) or on G (2nd inversion).

Learn all the major and minor triads, in all 3 inversions, in all 12 keys, and you have a total of 72 broken chords (triads) that you can play all over the bass.

This is just a bit of theory -- easy to grasp, very useful, and it probably won't hurt your playing ;-)

On the other hand, if you are getting along fine by using your ear and copping licks from records, then that is totally cool. Knowing some theory just might point you in some directions that you haven't thought about before.

The other day one of my students was putting a lot of fourths in his walking line. I told him that he could do that, but he better be pretty careful about when he does it.

----I've found fourths sound better in a decending walk line than acending....

You have to be careful with 4ths because they usually clash with major 3rds and/or b5ths, found in a heck of a lot of chords!
I think 4ths sound better decending, though because then they can take on the role of a chromatic approach note to the 3rd of a chord.
BB


The other day one of my students was putting a lot of fourths in his walking line. I told him that he could do that, but he better be pretty careful about when he does it.

----I've found fourths sound better in a decending walk line than acending....[/quote]