*BA*ss + *CH*ristmas = Bach

[SixnStones]

Yes, i do think the name is utter genius. Anyway, for christmas i got this (http://www.soundware.co.uk/sc/products/M-Audio%20Fast%20Track%20USB) recording thingamajiggy. I have used the effects on it to produce this cover of Bach's Prelude in G-major, a bit of Praeludium in C-minor, and by this point my hand felt like it was on fire so i stopped.

Let me know what you think:

........X...........
......X.............
....X...............
...X....X.X.......
...X..X.....X.....
.....X.......X.....
........X.X........ (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=3220445&q=hi)

[Jamie]

Nice recording :) I'd love tabs of those pieces!!

You get a nice tone through your Fast Track... Maybe I should save the extra 75 and just get one of them...


Any chance you could review it some time in the future please?



:thumb:

[Manticore Guy]

:( I thought this was another awesome havic video..... Still cool though, looks like an interesting piece of equipment:thumb:

[kaiser]

nice piece, i like the tone aswell, can you review the Fast Track?

[SixnStones]

Yeah, am planning on doing a review once I get a little more experience with it

[SixnStones]

Jamie, i can get you the tab in a few days, np

[antooon]

I don't think that sounded very good actually. Very sloppy, which is understandable. Keep working on it, you may be able to make that sound good.

[HaVIC5]

- The audio needs to be boosted, I could barely hear it.

- You need a steadier tempo. Playing it rubato is one thing, but even when professionals like John Pattitucci play it rubato (which is "wrong", I'll explain why in a second), they have a very defined timesense.

- In order to play it stylistic correct, you need to play the sixteenth notes as evenly as possible. The Baroque style is actually rather foreign to our ears - solo lines were played what is known as moto perpetuo - long melodic and harmonic lines played without interruption or rhythmic variance. The style was to play them as precise and in time as possible, barring a slight ritard at the end of the piece with as little dynamic variation as possible. The rubato way many people have interpreted it - playing with little creedence to strict rhythm for the greatest musical expression - is technically not correct, and I try to stay away from doing that.

- The way I play it is in keeping with this non-rubato tradition, and unlike many other bassists, I've fingered it such that I allow as many notes to ring as possible - like a guitarist rather than a cellist. I would show you my way of interpreting the Cello Suite, but I currently don't have a bass. My 6 string is basically beyond repair, so I'm having to wait to get another. Oh the agony. :(

[katana_manatee]

^Ooft, hope you get a bass soon man!

I actually couldn't hear the piece without headphones, and even then it was the worst fuzz ever... Wonder what's up with this comp... :confused:

For stylistic correctness, playing it metronomic would be the correct way to do it but learn to play it that way and in the way you personally feel the piece.

[thelowsoundofbass]

havic what happened to your bass??? that thing was sweet and you swore by it

lowsound

[thelowsoundofbass]

horrable tempo, but i couldn't play that (well it sounds hard, but if you post a tab i will try it)

lowsound

[Mitchell Royce]

Hey, I got a Fast Track as well. Wonderful little thing though the FX are basically worthless to me. I can now finally make some decent recordings.

[katana_manatee]

Ah, got it working now. It needs a lot of work, I think the rubato is perhaps a bit too extreme at times and there are some mistakes here and there and fret noise. Just keep working on it and you will get it.

[groundzero]

I got the sheet music for the cello suites from my Mom for Christmas so I'll be taking a crack at Prelude in D minor some time in the near future (if I can find time after practicing my band's songs and the tapping blues stuff my teacher gave me to work on).

[SixnStones]

- The audio needs to be boosted, I could barely hear it.

- You need a steadier tempo. Playing it rubato is one thing, but even when professionals like John Pattitucci play it rubato (which is "wrong", I'll explain why in a second), they have a very defined timesense.

- In order to play it stylistic correct, you need to play the sixteenth notes as evenly as possible. The Baroque style is actually rather foreign to our ears - solo lines were played what is known as moto perpetuo - long melodic and harmonic lines played without interruption or rhythmic variance. The style was to play them as precise and in time as possible, barring a slight ritard at the end of the piece with as little dynamic variation as possible. The rubato way many people have interpreted it - playing with little creedence to strict rhythm for the greatest musical expression - is technically not correct, and I try to stay away from doing that.

- The way I play it is in keeping with this non-rubato tradition, and unlike many other bassists, I've fingered it such that I allow as many notes to ring as possible - like a guitarist rather than a cellist. I would show you my way of interpreting the Cello Suite, but I currently don't have a bass. My 6 string is basically beyond repair, so I'm having to wait to get another. Oh the agony. :(

Bach never put performance notes on his pieces, some people say this is because he just expects you to know and play it in the normal style - strictly in time. However some people say it's because he wanted to leave the interpretation up to the player. I follow the second one.

However, in this piece I'm not even trying to do that, I just played it how I felt like, and I quite like it

[SixnStones]

PS Later on today, or maybe tomorrow, I'll put up another recording, sin rubato, to appease are less open-minded MXers ;)

[HaVIC5]

Bach never put performance notes on his pieces, some people say this is because he just expects you to know and play it in the normal style - strictly in time. However some people say it's because he wanted to leave the interpretation up to the player. I follow the second one.

However, in this piece I'm not even trying to do that, I just played it how I felt like, and I quite like it

This just isn't a feature of Bach's music, it is a feature of Baroque music in general. You're right that some people have interpreted the lack of performance notes on his scores to mean that it is up to the performer, but this is just not in keeping with the performance style of the larger and ensemble works of the Baroque era. Dynamics were only included by use of terraced dynamics, meaning loud and soft was dependent on how many instruments were playing at the time. Keyboard instruments like the harpsichord could physically only play at about one dynamic level and it wasn't until later that the pianoforte changed this and in a sense revolutionized the way dynamics were interpreted during the Classical era.

The only way counterpoint and perpetuo in these works could be interpreted is perfectly staight, otherwise performers could never hope to play the intricate lines together (barring the ocassional cadenza) Even in simpler solo works with more than one voice, like two-part inventions and fugues, strict adherance to time was required in order to make any sense of the multiple voices. Ever hear an organ fugue interpreted rubato? I know I haven't. If a single-voiced line like the cello suites or the flute partitas or what have you were played in the Baroque era any differently than the other perpetuo lines, it would represent a radical departure from the norm that would be literally 200 years ahead of its time. The reason why Baroque composers rarely put performance notes in their pieces is because they didn't need them there.

And don't call me close-minded, there are plenty of rubato interpretations that I enjoy. Michael Manring's is probably my favorite out of all interpretations, and John Pattitucci's is ace too.

[SixnStones]

This just isn't a feature of Bach's music, it is a feature of Baroque music in general. You're right that some people have interpreted the lack of performance notes on his scores to mean that it is up to the performer, but this is just not in keeping with the performance style of the larger and ensemble works of the Baroque era. Dynamics were only included by use of terraced dynamics, meaning loud and soft was dependent on how many instruments were playing at the time. Keyboard instruments like the harpsichord could physically only play at about one dynamic level and it wasn't until later that the pianoforte changed this and in a sense revolutionized the way dynamics were interpreted during the Classical era.

The only way counterpoint and perpetuo in these works could be interpreted is perfectly staight, otherwise performers could never hope to play the intricate lines together (barring the ocassional cadenza) Even in simpler solo works with more than one voice, like two-part inventions and fugues, strict adherance to time was required in order to make any sense of the multiple voices. Ever hear an organ fugue interpreted rubato? I know I haven't. If a single-voiced line like the cello suites or the flute partitas or what have you were played in the Baroque era any differently than the other perpetuo lines, it would represent a radical departure from the norm that would be literally 200 years ahead of its time. The reason why Baroque composers rarely put performance notes in their pieces is because they didn't need them there.

And don't call me close-minded, there are plenty of rubato interpretations that I enjoy. Michael Manring's is probably my favorite out of all interpretations, and John Pattitucci's is ace too.

Bach wasn't just a Baroque composer. Really if we think about it he's damn close to being a jazz musician. Go through "rules" of jazz and Bach's done them all first. he WAS 200 years ahead of his time. He even has some pieces where there are improvised sections (i think). I was only joking about the close minded thing, hence the little winky face.

[HaVIC5]

Believe it or not, those "rules" of jazz were also "rules" of the baroque in general even before Bach came around. Baroque composers and performers regularly improvised over a complex series of chord changes called the basso continuo, notated in what's known as figured bass. Fugues were improvised around a subject, and to this day, the art of improvised fugue is alive and well. One of my uncles is an amazing organist who introduced me to this art, and to see an organist at the top of his craft improvise a three or four voice fugue is one of the most amazing things you'll ever see. However, the chord progressions, lack of syncopation, infrequent call and response (although a case for that could be made in fugues) and phrasing are most decidely not jazz. Besides improvising, to what aspects of jazz are you referring?

And while Bach was one of the great geniuses, he wasn't nearly 200 years ahead of his time genius no matter what way you stretch it. His music simply is nothing remotely similar to the late Romantic and Impressionistic composers. To compare Bach to Debussy is laughable.

[SixnStones]

god damn thats a pwning if i'v ever had one. I was talking bout what scales are used over what chords, and some of the progressions. :upset:

[HaVIC5]

What is rather ironic to your argument is that the chord progressions in most of Bach's compositions are more complex than that of the typical jazz tunes. Most of jazz can be explained in the simple ii-V-I relationship, but with Bach it goes a hell of a lot further.

The melodic minor scale is used frequently in Baroque as well as jazz, which is what you might be reffering to, but in a completely different matter and with different harmonizations.