@@BamboozleHQ : In the past I've concentrated on arpeggios just prior to an exam (abrsm grade 4 double bass now). So now, each time I practice a scale, I'll do the accompanying arpeggio too.
@@BamboozleHQ I’m confused…! When you played C you said put two fingers down, and you also said put all fingers down for B, I think it was. So my question is, if you put a finger on C and one either below it or above it, for two fingers down, wouldn’t that be playing the note below or above C, respectively, instead of playing C itself? Same question for four fingers down to play B…? In other words, if I want to play the note C, why would I put a second finger either above or below it? Wouldn’t that be playing another note? Same question for putting 4 fingers down for playing note B? I’m not a bass player …obviously. Guess I should be asking instead, why put 2, or 4 fingers down to play any note? Or by 2 and 4, do you mean put the number 2 finger down for C, and the number 4 finger down for B? Or am I just totally lost, not being a bass player…?
Hey, so with a double bass, as the strings are so thick, the best technique is to have all fingers pressing down above the one that is creating the note. Basically, the lowest finger you have held down dictates which note is being played, but the fingers above it strengthen the quality of the note, pressing down harder and stopping any string vibrations, this is especially important when playing with your little finger, as it isn’t as strong as the others. Does that make sense? The important finger is the bottom one, but holding them all down gives extra pressure.
@@BamboozleHQ Ooohh! Makes all the sense in the world, now! And well explained. Thank you, much appreciated. So… It’s the placing of a finger on a note below the finger that’s on the “intended” note that would give us that unwanted lower note rather than the note intended when the string is played. I see …now that makes sense …the lowest finger rules, as you say, since wherever along a string a finger is placed we’re essentially and effectively shortening the string length and thereby shifting or transferring, if you will, the top open string fret (the nut), or open string note. In effect, we make the E string, say, become, in effect only, mind you, and just for that moment, the G-sharp string, sort of speak, when we place our finger(s) on the G-sharp position on the E string. So that the E string then at that moment, for example, is no longer the E string, sort of speak, when we place our finger(s) at any note or point below the topmost fret (the nut) of the E string which gives open E its quality when that string’s played open, naturally. I was hearing and seeing you wrong in thinking you meant hold a finger, or fingers below the intended note… so I was prompted to ask my question in reply to your explanation, which I misunderstood. But I now see that you mean hold a second finger above the finger that’s holding C, or four fingers above the finger that’s holding notes A or B. Got it! But two more questions, hope you don’t mind. First, and if I’m asking the question correctly, in playing scales, say the C major scale, for instance, and staying within 1 octave, as you do here, is the reason we’d play notes D and G of the scale by playing strings D and G open because all the D and G notes on all the other strings within that octave are out of both ascending and descending “sequence” with respect to “frequency”? My second question, and that somewhat along the same line of reasoning, relatively speaking, that is, the question of “frequency” along different points on a string, and immediately ascending or descending in “sequence” and doing all that by staying within one octave to the exclusion of playing any of the notes at the second octave, in playing a scale, again, the C major scale, for example, if we physically played a scale on one single string, say we played the C major scale on the E string alone, say, no other strings involved, could that rightly be called a true scale in the strictest sense with respect to the concepts or ideas of “sequence” and “frequency,” whether ascending or descending, since the “frequency” of the notes as well as their positions on the string are played out of sequence after after playing and with respect to notes C and D? For example, the notes C and D on the E string have the correct sequence both in terms of their ascending order as well as their ascending frequencies relative to each other. But notes E, F, G, A, and B, though all are also in “proper” ascending sequence relative to each other (like notes C and D are with respect to one another) and all are also in “proper” sequence with respect to each other and with respect to their relative ascending frequencies, are out of an ascending sequence and frequencies with respect to notes C and D. Long story short, is physically playing a scale on one string alone, say E, whether playing that scale within one octave to the exclusion of the notes beginning the second octave, or playing that scale over the length of two, or more octaves, if there are more than two octaves, considered “playing a scale” …when you physically “play a scale” along one string alone can you have it said afterwards that a scale was correctly and therefore truly played in spite of the fact that both the frequencies and the playing sequence were disordered, or, out of order in both sequence and the resulting pitches (frequencies) …if any of what I’ve tried to ask makes any sense at all? In other words, is it correct to “play a scale” on one sting only, can that really and truly be called playing a scale, seeing that both either the ascending or descending pattern, arrangement, or order, and the frequencies are out of “proper” order?! Pardon the long post… I should’ve also pointed out that I ask my two questions with my frame of reference being an octave from C to C, and all octaves above and below it on the piano keyboard. Don’t know if such reference confuses my understanding of things with regard to the questions I ask about scales on the upright.
The reason is because I am wondering if you could do a tutorial of ace in the hole by George Strait covered by Jasper T Jowls here is the link th-cam.com/video/Taor6zesOUI/w-d-xo.html
I first fell in love with the steel guitar because of country music and that is why, when you have Dave on the pedal steel, it brings the vibe of country music, in my view
![เปิดบ้าน พี่ตูน Bodyslam หลังใหม่คนแรก ที่ภูเก็ต l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/flFwcmyDQSk/mqdefault.jpg)
Really clear and helpful, thanks !
Can’t wait for your next tutorial
Thank you for making it slow and simple for us older folks who are just starting out "Bucket List"
Bass is a great bucket list!
wow briliant
@@danram69 thank you 🙏
This is really go for a beginner like me thankyou for this lesson.want many more
Thanks Theron! Glad you enjoyed it. I’m planning on doing a whole series on scales and beginners theory so keep subscribed!
Bass geetar player just started the upright. Wow this is so different yet so the same
I know the feeling but backwards. Still want to hold my guitar sideways 😉 welcome to the club!
Too pretty
Keep these lessons coming please! 😁
Will do!
So a triad is more or less the same as an arpeggio? I didn't know that (or much music theory).
Exactly ☺️ a triad is just an Arpeggio with all the notes played at the same time.
@@BamboozleHQ : In the past I've concentrated on arpeggios just prior to an exam (abrsm grade 4 double bass now). So now, each time I practice a scale, I'll do the accompanying arpeggio too.
@@BamboozleHQ
I’m confused…! When you played C you said put two fingers down, and you also said put all fingers down for B, I think it was. So my question is, if you put a finger on C and one either below it or above it, for two fingers down, wouldn’t that be playing the note below or above C, respectively, instead of playing C itself? Same question for four fingers down to play B…? In other words, if I want to play the note C, why would I put a second finger either above or below it? Wouldn’t that be playing another note? Same question for putting 4 fingers down for playing note B? I’m not a bass player …obviously. Guess I should be asking instead, why put 2, or 4 fingers down to play any note? Or by 2 and 4, do you mean put the number 2 finger down for C, and the number 4 finger down for B? Or am I just totally lost, not being a bass player…?
Hey, so with a double bass, as the strings are so thick, the best technique is to have all fingers pressing down above the one that is creating the note.
Basically, the lowest finger you have held down dictates which note is being played, but the fingers above it strengthen the quality of the note, pressing down harder and stopping any string vibrations, this is especially important when playing with your little finger, as it isn’t as strong as the others.
Does that make sense? The important finger is the bottom one, but holding them all down gives extra pressure.
@@BamboozleHQ
Ooohh! Makes all the sense in the world, now! And well explained. Thank you, much appreciated.
So… It’s the placing of a finger on a note below the finger that’s on the “intended” note that would give us that unwanted lower note rather than the note intended when the string is played. I see …now that makes sense …the lowest finger rules, as you say, since wherever along a string a finger is placed we’re essentially and effectively shortening the string length and thereby shifting or transferring, if you will, the top open string fret (the nut), or open string note. In effect, we make the E string, say, become, in effect only, mind you, and just for that moment, the G-sharp string, sort of speak, when we place our finger(s) on the G-sharp position on the E string. So that the E string then at that moment, for example, is no longer the E string, sort of speak, when we place our finger(s) at any note or point below the topmost fret (the nut) of the E string which gives open E its quality when that string’s played open, naturally. I was hearing and seeing you wrong in thinking you meant hold a finger, or fingers below the intended note… so I was prompted to ask my question in reply to your explanation, which I misunderstood. But I now see that you mean hold a second finger above the finger that’s holding C, or four fingers above the finger that’s holding notes A or B. Got it!
But two more questions, hope you don’t mind. First, and if I’m asking the question correctly, in playing scales, say the C major scale, for instance, and staying within 1 octave, as you do here, is the reason we’d play notes D and G of the scale by playing strings D and G open because all the D and G notes on all the other strings within that octave are out of both ascending and descending “sequence” with respect to “frequency”?
My second question, and that somewhat along the same line of reasoning, relatively speaking, that is, the question of “frequency” along different points on a string, and immediately ascending or descending in “sequence” and doing all that by staying within one octave to the exclusion of playing any of the notes at the second octave, in playing a scale, again, the C major scale, for example, if we physically played a scale on one single string, say we played the C major scale on the E string alone, say, no other strings involved, could that rightly be called a true scale in the strictest sense with respect to the concepts or ideas of “sequence” and “frequency,” whether ascending or descending, since the “frequency” of the notes as well as their positions on the string are played out of sequence after after playing and with respect to notes C and D? For example, the notes C and D on the E string have the correct sequence both in terms of their ascending order as well as their ascending frequencies relative to each other. But notes E, F, G, A, and B, though all are also in “proper” ascending sequence relative to each other (like notes C and D are with respect to one another) and all are also in “proper” sequence with respect to each other and with respect to their relative ascending frequencies, are out of an ascending sequence and frequencies with respect to notes C and D. Long story short, is physically playing a scale on one string alone, say E, whether playing that scale within one octave to the exclusion of the notes beginning the second octave, or playing that scale over the length of two, or more octaves, if there are more than two octaves, considered “playing a scale” …when you physically “play a scale” along one string alone can you have it said afterwards that a scale was correctly and therefore truly played in spite of the fact that both the frequencies and the playing sequence were disordered, or, out of order in both sequence and the resulting pitches (frequencies) …if any of what I’ve tried to ask makes any sense at all? In other words, is it correct to “play a scale” on one sting only, can that really and truly be called playing a scale, seeing that both either the ascending or descending pattern, arrangement, or order, and the frequencies are out of “proper” order?! Pardon the long post…
I should’ve also pointed out that I ask my two questions with my frame of reference being an octave from C to C, and all octaves above and below it on the piano keyboard. Don’t know if such reference confuses my understanding of things with regard to the questions I ask about scales on the upright.
Is toxic nightmare in a minor?
Yes, it is ☺️
Do you like country music
The reason is because I am wondering if you could do a tutorial of ace in the hole by George Strait covered by Jasper T Jowls here is the link th-cam.com/video/Taor6zesOUI/w-d-xo.html
@@kennethbelbin7922 love it
I first fell in love with the steel guitar because of country music and that is why, when you have Dave on the pedal steel, it brings the vibe of country music, in my view