I’ve been listening to some CD’s lately of bands/artists where the bass is used a a melodic instrument (Morphine, Primus, Tony Levin). That brought up the thought, in Western music, from the double bass in the orchestra to the electric bass in a rock band, the instrument that can play low notes is always a background instrument, consigned to rythym-keeping. I remember always feeling sorry for the overweight kids in high-school band that got stuck with the tuba, and never got to do anything more than play oomp-pa’s. So my question is, why is the “bottom” almost always a rythym instrument? Is this different in other musical traditions? (Ok, that’s two, but what the hey…)
Strum a high E on a guitar to a regular beat (first string, 12th fret). Then strum a low E on a bass (fourth string, open). Which sounds like it would be better for establishing a rhythm behind? Which is stronger, more powerful?
Keep in mind that music, at least in the west, is built on rhythm. So, it’s the foundation, and melody and harmony is built on top of it.
P.S. Tony Levin is God.
You tend to feel the low notes vibrating through you, so that makes them ideal for establishing rhythm. A melody is always going to sound most natural to the human ear when it is in the range of the human voice, and most humans don’t sing in the range of a tuba or bass.
I was under the impression that the human brain automatically keyed in on higher pitches, particularly those in human range hearing. There’s a reason that standard chords usually have the root as their lowest note.
Back in Bach’s day, the musical literati decided on a specific musical style with a flowery (high) melodic line, stepwise accompaniment in the base, and something filling in the harmony between the two (harpsichord, harp, or strummed lute/guitar). This basic setup stuck for quite a while.
One reason is that the higher-pitched sound will tend to cut through the rest–one violin, flute, or trumpet can be heard playing the melody, even through a full orchestra. One string bass? Not so good. However, do bear in mind that even the biggest orchestras only have one tuba…
Speaking as somebody with a B.A. in Music Performance on the Tuba, I’d like to point out that I only met three overweight tuba players in 15 years hauling the damn thing around. We actually tended to be a pretty scrawny bunch.
In the Symphony N[sup]o.[/sup] 1 in D Minor “Titan” of Gustav Mahler (1860-1911), the second movement begins with the melodic theme played on the string basses. (It’s “Frère Jacques” in a minor key, darkly suggesting a nursery rhyme gone horribly wrong.)
Then there was that radical passage in the middle of the third movement of Beethoven’s Symphony N[sup]o.[/sup] 5 in C Minor where the celli and basses together were in the forefront and had to execute a rapid, very difficult figure. Up until then, all that bass players had ever been expected to do was a simple note here and there. This passage demanded more of them than had ever been imagined. Legend has it that at the first rehearsal of this symphony, one of the bass players freaked out at the sudden difficulty: he threw the sheets of music on the floor and stomped on them.
Thanks for the input. And Ethilrist, sorry for reinforcing a stereotype, but that at least held true in high school marching bands in the area where I grew up. I am not surprised that such strereotypes are abandonded at the college level. Jomo, thanks for reminding me about the Mahler and Beethoven. I’ll have to listen to the Fifth again for that passage.
The Fifth is, in a way, one of the strangest pieces int eh classical repertory. The opening is soooo familiar that it has become cliche’. The rest of the piece is so strong and powerful, but almost no-one listens to it because they think ‘Oh, I know that. Ba-Ba-Ba-Ba-Buuum.’ Kinda strange.