The Bass in Fifths

[Jeff Moote]

We have a 5 string bass thread, so I thought I'd start this one. I'm currently still tuning in 4ths but I'm seriously considering the change depending on the outcome of some discussion with a few teachers.

To begin discussion:
Do any of you currently tune in 5ths?
Have any of you tried it and gone back? If so why - was it the left hand challenges, or was it lack of acceptance by your peers or teacher(s)?
For those who are tuned in 5ths: What strings are you using? Who have you studied under - did you keep your teacher at the time, or did you find another (who was either more open minded or a 5ths player themselves)?
For those who've never tried it: What are your thoughts? Have you heard someone tuned in 5ths perform live?I'll be posting in this thread as I continue the path toward fifths (or turn back running at some point ;)). I've had email exchanges with a few players, and I'm constantly researching any info I can find in the way of who is using this tuning, how/why, what books are available, string choices, etc.

[Ken Smith]

The concept has been around for centuries. It takes a great player to do this and be able to play all the material and play it in tune. The Bass is hard enough to play in tune in fourths, so why make things even more difficult.

I think the 5ths thing is interesting but thinking about it and doing it for real are not the same thing!

[Jeff Moote]

edit: Ken posted while I was writing this, so my later post and not this one is a response to his.

I'll begin with how I came to be interested in fifths tuning. I think the first time I heard anything about it was in reading about Joel Quarrington who I'm sure you're all familiar with at this point. I read his website and various comments on the message boards. I quickly learned of all the other people who are tuning their basses this way, as well as the history behind it (3 string basses tuned GDA, etc.)

Last year I heard Mr. Q premier the Harbison concerto, which was commissioned by the ISB but the fact that Quarrington would be playing it did have some influence in its composition (open strings, harmonics, etc.) as did the fact that some might use orchestra tuning and some solo.

More recently I heard Joel perform the Bottesini Gran Duo Concertante, but by this time I'd already become interested in the tuning as something I might want to try.


Recently I've become increasingly frustrated with intonation issues on the bass. Intonation that coordinates well with the other string instruments (all tuned in fifths) is one of the benefits usually presented by a defender of this tuning. Another that usually comes up right away is the open, sonorous texture that the bass takes on - this is what really got me. I recently tuned my E down to a D to grab the low note for a certain passage. In doing this the overtone series that was created really did something for the sound of my bass, as did the slightly lower tension (and yes, you don't need to get on me about using some lower tension strings than my favoured Original Flexocor)

All this combined with my desire for the contra C (which I'd otherwise get an extension for) really makes fifths tuning appeal to me. The fact that I'm young and not too far in my education, but far enough to handle the bass alright also means that I'm at a good point to be re-learning the instrument.


Right now my biggest obstacle is finding an appropriate teacher. My most recent studies were with a player from the Toronto Symphony and it was a very fruitful time for my learning. I'd love to continue those studies but for now school and location get in the way of that. The problem is that all the TSO players and in fact many of the pros in Ontario all studied under the same teachers - specifically under Tom Monahan (then principal of the TSO) at the University of Toronto. All of these guys are very strong on their idea of the "right" way to play the bass - that is: french bow, std tuning with a C ext (many using machines still) and a very conservative Simandl left hand technique. While this is a great way to play the bass for much of the orchestral repertoire, it has its limitations.

I've got a few names and the list of pros tuning in fifths grows as students of people like Joel head out into the world.

That's all for now, but like I said, more later as I learn more and get closer to making the switch...

[Jeff Moote]

The concept has been around for centuries. It takes a great player to do this and be able to play all the material and play it in tune. The Bass is hard enough to play in tune in fourths, so why make things even more difficult.

I think the 5ths thing is interesting but thinking about it and doing it for real are not the same thing!Interesting that you say this. I agree entirely that it is a huge challenge to re-learn the instrument, and certainly to gain the left hand proficiency required. It does take a great player to do this well, but in tune?...

Playing in tune would not be a challenge I think fifths presents, as for each individual string the intervals are all the same. The increased shifting does add a degree of difficulty, but shifting is not the biggest cause of intonation problems for most players (tuned in fourths) anyway.

Still, your thoughts are valid and the challenges are very real. It certainly is something else altogether to actually do this and play the bass in fifths but like I said above the advantages are really appealing to me right now...

[Ken Smith]

Jeff, on your comment about "3 string basses tuned GDA, etc." do you have the G-string on top or bottom in 5ths? I think in England at least it was 3 of the 4 strings we have now with the A on the bottom all in fourths. Over 99% of the Orchestra players in the world (maybe less) use fourths with or without an Ext. or a 5er to Low B or C. If this 5ths thing was a better option, more than just one or two players would have switched by now.

Next factor is the Bass. Many of the Basses we play today with 4 high tensioned steel strings in fourths were originally made for 3 lower tensioned Gut strings in 4ths or some other combination.

Many Basses today have sunken Tops from the extra pressure of 4 steel strings. Joel has a fine old Bass but I'm am not sure if it is a G.P. Maggini, a Santo Maggini (not related) of some other nice old Italian or even English made Italian copy. Regardless of who made his Bass, it is a 'smokin' instrument. I don't know if all the Basses out there could be successfully converted to 5ths and hold up structurally. Playability is the other factor. The Bass is hard enough to play as it is. Many a concert I shook my hands afterwards from fatigue.

I did recently and a long time ago as well tune my Bass in 5ths to give it a try. I was LOST!!:confused::confused:

On d-tuning, I have also tuned down to Eb, D, Db and C on occasion and it was no picnic. I had to put fingerings in the music to remind myself where to play the notes up to the Ab before crossing over, etc. Also, I had to tune down and up during the music and count the turns on my tuner that I rehearsed. I look like the guy in the section fumbling with his Bass when in actuality, I'm the guy that is actually playing the written part correctly.

Currently I am working out this summer on my 5er to get ready to play Beethoven's 6th the Storm movement. It is only for a few passages I need the 5er being that the Extension is a lot of jumping and intonation is just about impossible. It is more likely that I will get injured trying than not. The 5-string is most likely what the piece was written for and not a 4-string tuned in 5ths, I think..:confused:

[Ken Smith]

Playing in tune would not be a challenge I think fifths presents, as for each individual string the intervals are all the same. The increased shifting does add a degree of difficulty, but shifting is not the biggest cause of intonation problems for most players (tuned in fourths) anyway.

Shifting not a cause for intonation problems?

I beg to differ... No, I don't beg, I just differ!;)

[Jeff Moote]

Ken, I really appreciate your input since you like my teachers have the advantage of experience I couldn't hope to have at this point in my life. That's what it's all about...

We should probably give others a chance to discuss or we might as well be talking privately, but anyhow..Jeff, on your comment about "3 string basses tuned GDA, etc." do you have the G-string on top or bottom in 5ths? I think in England at least it was 3 of the 4 strings we have now with the A on the bottom all in fourths.Yes, I'm aware of the practice you speak of in England at the time (4ths up from A the same as our current A string). As far as I know though, some of the first examples of tuning in fifths were from the G on the bottom - basically that was the best they could do with the strings at the time. Now with 5 strings being the norm in some circles, we have B/C strings available that make CGDA tuning a reality.

Over 99% of the Orchestra players in the world (maybe less) use fourths with or without an Ext. or a 5er to Low B or C. If this 5ths thing was a better option, more than just one or two players would have switched by now.I don't know how literally you meant "one or two" but there are more than that (and the number is growing fast, as naturally all the students of these players are following). Of course the figure of 99% playing in 4ths either with an ext or 5th string is probably close to the truth. Old habits don't die quickly, but things change over time. At one time Viennese tuning was popular, and it's now making a comeback (mostly for solo use). What I'm getting at is that most players are using what they do because that's what their teacher used. The bass is such a young instrument (in its current form) that it really doesn't have the same background in tradition that the other string instruments do, so naturally players follow what tradition we do have.

Next factor is the Bass. Many of the Basses we play today with 4 high tensioned steel strings in fourths were originally made for 3 lower tensioned Gut strings in 4ths or some other combination.

Many Basses today have sunken Tops from the extra pressure of 4 steel strings. Joel has a fine old Bass but I'm am not sure if it is a G.P. Maggini, a Santo Maggini (not related) of some other nice old Italian or even English made Italian copy. Regardless of who made his Bass, it is a 'smokin' instrument. I don't know if all the Basses out there could be successfully converted to 5ths and hold up structurally.Joel's bass is indeed a 'smokin' instrument as anyone who has heard it will tell you (have you? You should make an effort to if not - he really is a wonderful soloist!). Do you think his students all have a fine old bass like that though? With careful selection of strings, the tension doesn't have to be high at all. For example the strings Joel uses have a total of 276.7 lbs of tension according to Thomastik's figures. A set of regular gauge Flex 92s (notably lighter than my current strings) have 271.4 lbs of tension. I don't think structurally the bass is at risk in the least. Now for generating tone, that's another question, but we face that challenge regardless of tuning.

Playability is the other factor. The Bass is hard enough to play as it is. Many a concert I shook my hands afterwards from fatigue.Alright, we can all relate to that. Playing the bass isn't easy, but I don't feel that fifths make it impossible by any means. I'm not misled to thinking it's easier in any way. This is just one of the factors that must be weighed against the benefits when considering the switch.

I did recently and a long time ago as well tune my Bass in 5ths to give it a try. I was LOST!!:confused::confused:

On d-tuning, I have also tuned down to Eb, D, Db and C on occasion and it was no picnic. I had to put fingerings in the music to remind myself where to play the notes up to the Ab before crossing over, etc. Also, I had to tune down and up during the music and count the turns on my tuner that I rehearsed. I look like the guy in the section fumbling with his Bass when in actuality, I'm the guy that is actually playing the written part correctly.When I tuned to D it was not for a passage in a work I was performing, but an excerpt I was working on (for an audition). Having to switch mid-performance would be deadly, and is a good reason to use one of the choices available (C ext, 5 string, 5ths tuning). About getting confused... I didn't find it too bad at all. I wasn't sight reading, but I didn't need to include extra fingerings or anything to learn it. Perhaps my mind just works well for this kind of thing... engineering school must be good for something. This is clearly a technical task for the mind, not a musical one, so it can be overcome fairly easily.

Currently I am working out this summer on my 5er to get ready to play Beethoven's 6th the Storm movement. It is only for a few passages I need the 5er being that the Extension is a lot of jumping and intonation is just about impossible. It is more likely that I will get injured trying than not. The 5-string is most likely what the piece was written for and not a 4-string tuned in 5ths, I think..:confused:Funny you mention this - I'm performing the last 2 movements of the 6th next week. I don't have an ext so I'm just playing the low notes up (or not at all in the really fast bits). Luckily our conductor is a past cellist and understands that a lot of creative liberty can be taken with that part in terms of how much playing goes on vs. faking the notes. It is supposed to sound like a storm after all :) I don't think it matters what bass you play that on - 5 string or ext (or fifths) - Beethoven could never have intended for each note to be played with precision.

Shifting not a cause for intonation problems?

I beg to differ... No, I don't beg, I just differ!;)I didn't say it wasn't a cause - just not the biggest. Not in my mind anyway. It certainly is a factor in achieving good intonation, but it's usually the big leaps or shifting in upper positions that cause this. Fifths tuning even eliminates some of the big shifts, though everyone admits that more shifting is required period. I never said this was going to be easy... :D

[Matthew Tucker]

I heard Toronto bassist Andrew Downing last week in a small club. He played a german/czech bass tuned in fifths. He played solidly, at a variety of speeds, in tune all the way. Great player.

I don't understand how intonation should be any more of a problem than tuned in fourths? surely it depends what you are trying to play. In fifths, you play 10ths across three strings in the shape we would normally play octaves. In fact, probably a better way to get an in-tune 10th than spanning 4 strings like we do?

[Ken Smith]

I heard Toronto bassist Andrew Downing last week in a small club. He played a german/czech bass tuned in fifths. He played solidly, at a variety of speeds, in tune all the way. Great player.

I don't understand how intonation should be any more of a problem than tuned in fourths? surely it depends what you are trying to play. In fifths, you play 10ths across three strings in the shape we would normally play octaves. In fact, probably a better way to get an in-tune 10th than spanning 4 strings like we do?

I can see 10ths for Jazz playing but the Bow doesn't bend that way..lol

Try playing some of the Beethoven parts or even Mozart. At that point you are working twice as hard as the Cellos. Longer and thicker strings with a bigger body and heavier bow. Jumping octaves with the Bow would actually be more awkward I think especially for the left hand.

In Jazz, you can play any note you like moving the line around. In Classical, you can't. It is 'Jail' as far as that is concerned. A Bass tuned in 5ths to Low C is just another method of avoiding playing a 5-string Bass. I think!

[Ken Smith]

I just pulled up a page from Joel Quarrington's website. Have a look (http://www.joelquarrington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=31) at it and lets talk about this some more.

Currently as of an hour ago, I have two Basses in the shop tuned in 5ths using the regular strings for experimental purposes only. They are my Batchelder with Superflexibles and a Corsini with Helicore Orchestra Strings.

[Ken Smith]

I just emailed Joel and then found his FAQs (http://www.joelquarrington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=3&Itemid=33) which answer some of my questions..oops!

[Jeff Moote]

I have read through Joel's site extensively. For more thoughts from pros using fifths tuning, check out:
http://www.silviodallatorre.com/
http://www.dennismasuzzo.com/

Masuzzo has a method book out (one of, if not the first for fifths tuned bass) which I'm told is great but fairly elementary. Joel is working on one which he tells me is close to being ready.

Currently as of an hour ago, I have two Basses in the shop tuned in 5ths using the regular strings for experimental purposes only. They are my Batchelder with Superflexibles and a Corsini with Helicore Orchestra Strings.Just curious, did you tune the E down to C or put a different string on? G up to A can work but is really tight, and A down to G is usually not too floppy.

[Ken Smith]

I have read through Joel's site extensively. For more thoughts from pros using fifths tuning, check out:
http://www.silviodallatorre.com/
http://www.dennismasuzzo.com/

Masuzzo has a method book out (one of, if not the first for fifths tuned bass) which I'm told is great but fairly elementary. Joel is working on one which he tells me is close to being ready.

Just curious, did you tune the E down to C or put a different string on? G up to A can work but is really tight, and A down to G is usually not too floppy.

I tuned the regular Strings Up and Down as needed to be in Fifths, Low C to High A. That 'party' is now OVER for good for me... Both Basses have been tuned back to normal 4ths.

I have played in 4ths for 42 years. I have 4-string Basses with and without GREAT working C-extensions and I have a 5-string Bass that plays easily and has a Huge sound. Probably my loudest Bass presently.

For me, it's 'fourths' all the way with or without an Ext. or 5er.

By the way, many players have worked their entire life in a professional Orchestra with only a regular 4-string, no Ext.!

'Old dog, NO tricks..:D:(

[Ken Smith]

I just emailed Joel and then found his FAQs (http://www.joelquarrington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=3&Itemid=33) which answer some of my questions..oops!

I just heard back from Joel. Super nice guy. His email was at least as long if not longer than the one I sent him. I will stay in touch with him as he is writing a 5ths method currently. I will also learn more about his re-learning process in 5ths over time but I don't wanna bug him too much as he's a busy guy in great demand. I am thankful enough he replied at all. I was not expecting it so soon and not as much info either. We even discussed his Bass a little and talked about some of mine as well. A real down to earth guy from what I can tell.

This 5ths thing is something serious to look at but it is not a casual one at all.!

[Ken Smith]

I have read through Joel's site extensively. For more thoughts from pros using fifths tuning, check out:
http://www.silviodallatorre.com/
http://www.dennismasuzzo.com/

Masuzzo has a method book out (one of, if not the first for fifths tuned bass) which I'm told is great but fairly elementary. Joel is working on one which he tells me is close to being ready.

Just curious, did you tune the E down to C or put a different string on? G up to A can work but is really tight, and A down to G is usually not too floppy.


Is Dalla Torre also tuning his Orchestra bass, (the Grancino?) in 5ths as well?

[Jeff Moote]

I just heard back from Joel. Super nice guy.He sure is. He wrote me back very promptly as well and invited me to a masterclass he's giving in August. Unfortunately the registration deadline is passed, tuition is reasonable but money I don't have, and I probably couldn't get the day off work anyway.

Is Dalla Torre also tuning his Orchestra bass, (the Grancino?) in 5ths as well?I'm really not sure as I'm not particularly familiar with him actually - just his website which I find gives a nice overview of the different tunings for someone who doesn't know the history of the instrument (i.e. trying to explain it to your friends who play cello or violin etc.)


This 5ths thing is something serious to look at but it is not a casual one at all.!That's for sure! I'm glad though that you've taken a look at it and read what people like Joel have to say. I think everyone should at least know about this tuning, even if it remains that 99% play in fourths. I think though that at or near the beginning of one's education is a great time to start with fifths since there isn't too much to "un-learn" in terms of repertoire.

So reading about you taking your std tuning set up and down to achieve a crude CGDA tuning, I did this just for a few minutes tonight so that I could see how both sight reading and reading a familiar piece went. Not too bad I found... I played the tricky spots from the Trout quintet which I'm preparing for a performance in a couple weeks. There was indeed a little more shifting, but mostly short ones that could be pivots. Not too many bad notes ;) Sight reading was not quite as great, but better than expected, so I'm really feeling good about the reading part of re-learning anyway. All that's left is to find a good teacher and the right set of strings (I think I'll go with Joel's preferred Dominants with Spiro low C, at least at first).

[Andrew Downing]

Hi.

First, let me just say thanks to Matthew for your kind words about my playing a few weeks ago in Toronto.

I stumbled upon this thread doing the obligatory search for 'bass in fifths' that one does when one tunes ones bass in fifths. I just wanted to share some experiences with any interested parties about how it has worked for me.

I have been a double bass player for about eighteen years now. I mostly play improvised music, jazz, and some new music, but play the bass with the bow a good percentage of the time. I decided to experiment with fifths tuning about three years ago, mostly just to try it out and see if I like it. Lucky for me, I live in Toronto, and Joel Quarrington teaches here. I went to him for a few lessons, already having bought some appropriate strings and messing around at home in fifths for a while. After spending a few hours with him I was more intruiged than before, and decided to pursue it a little more seriously. Shortly thereafter, I got called to do a fairly prestigious teaching stint at the Banff Centre, which also afforded me the opportunity to play with Dave Douglas and Jeff Parker. I decided that I wasn't really ready to play in that situation in fifths, so switched back to fourths for a while for the sake of comfort. Then, I received a grant from the Canada Council for the Arts to do some study, so I decided to take a few months off performing to seriously pursue the fifths with Joel.

Joel's method is very complete, and he even convinced me to switch from French bow to German, which I love. He is an incredible and very involved teacher. He has compiled a technique and a practice routine that is very different from what I was used to - I had studied mostly 'Simandl-style' technique up to that point. I worked through the first little bit of Joel's work-in-progress book with him at those lessons, and I really look forward to it being published.

After three months of study with Joel, I started playing gigs again, and had to really concentrate hard on every note while performing to make sure I wan't a tone or two off in either direction depending on the string I was playing. All of the old technical tricks I had accumulated over the years didn't work any more, and I was required to think a lot about simplicity and melody to attempt to sound good. I continued to study with Joel for about another three months, and used both the lessons and experience playing 'in the real world' to develop comfort in fifths. Thankfully, I continue to feel like I'm learning more every time I play, and every day continue to feel more comfortable.

I have two instruments that I play. One is an average-sized 3/4 German bass from the early 1900s, and the other is a New Standard Cleveland plywood bass with a removeable neck for travel (note : it is an incredible bass - plywood never sounded so good!). On my German bass, I have been using Obligato fifths-tuning strings since they came out a few years ago. I currently have it strung, though, as an experiment with Velvet fifths-tuning strings. The Obligatos are really great sounding strings, but tend to 'roll' with the bow, making it a challenge to play cleanly all the time, especially arco at fast tempos. They also tend to unwind at the bridge from time to time. The Velvet strings sound really amazing with the bow - very clean and crisp - and allow the bass to let the low end come out quite nicely. They are maybe not so good for jazz playing, though. They are a bit metallic sounding and don't quite have the body that the Obligatos do, so I will likely switch back to Obligatos soon. On the New Standard, I have an Obligato A string on the top, a Velvet Anima D and G (well, an A tuned down to a G) and an Obligato low C. This combination really sounds great on that bass. I know it's a bit strange to have different 'middle strings', but the obligato actually matches very well with the Anima both pizz and arco. I am constantly experimenting with strings, though, so my setup changes from time to time.

Now, to the difference in sound. I can only really comment on how fifths and fourths differ from one another on the German bass, as I have only recently acquired the New Standard, and only know it in fifths. In my experience, it's true what they say - playing in fifths does change the tone of the bass. It did, however, take a while. My hypothesis is that the bass has to 'get used' to the fifths before it can take advantage of them. Now, I may be wrong about that - it may in fact be the player that has to get used to it, but I'm sure both aspects affect the transition. I feel like my bass has 'opened up' in a beautiful way. The tone of it seems a bit brighter and more focused, and it 'rings' in a way that I never noticed in fourths (I played Obligatos in fourths as well, so I know that different strings aren't the reason for it...). Although my basses are either smallish or made of plywood, they both really sound great all the way down to the low C. Musicians I play with have also noticed the same things - I get a lot of comments on how loud and ‘open’ my basses sound.

Technically, the fifths have also opened a lot of things up in my playing. I can't really comment on being an orchestral bassist, although for my own enjoyment I play a lot of classical music at home. In response to some comments about tenths and octaves, all of those ‘shapes’ that we learn can be relearned and rethought. For example, an octave ‘shape’ in tenths is just a backwards octave ‘shape’ in fourths, with the first finger playing the higher note two strings over from the fourth finger playing the lower one. It does take some time to get used to these things. As for the shifting, fifths is more easily manipulated using pivots on the thumb, extensions and stretches, but isn’t too cumbersome to get used to. Certainly the left hand does ‘move’ more than in fourths, but not to the extent that it becomes a big problem.

Being a bassist who usually doesn’t play in a bass section, I can’t really comment on the question of acceptance by peers. My musical community here doesn’t seem to have any sort of problem with what I’ve done, and in the creative and improvised music scene, individuality and personal style are the things you strive for anyway. It also means, for better or worse, that ‘sitting in’ is a bit difficult in either direction - others on my bass or me on other basses.

So, there you have some thoughts. I don’t think fifths is for everyone, just the same as fourths isn’t for everyone. I really enjoy the sound and the feeling of playing in fifths, and for me it’s the right thing to do right now. If you have the ‘itch’ to try it and can afford the time to do it with some seriousness, I highly suggest it - even if it isn’t for you, it’s worth a try.

[Ken Smith]

Andrew, thank you for that long detailed explanation. Perhaps you could put an edited version in your Profile as it is currently blank.

On your Basses in 5ths, please tell us what the string lengths are for each Bass. Also, if you happen to know please tell us the string length on Joel's Bass as well. Thx..

[Jeff Moote]

I don't know how into podcasts you folks are, but if you look up NACOcast (put on by Chris Millard, principal Basoon of the NAC Orchestra) there's a great interview with Joel about fifths (though it's not done with bassists as the intended audience). He talks about his bass a bit on there.

http://www.nac-cna.ca/en/multimedia/podcasts/index.html: it's the 04.10.2006 NACOcast episode

Joel is playing regular 3/4 Dominants, so I'm guessing his string length is somewhere around 41-42" - anything longer than about 42.25" won't really work with those strings as far as I know.


As a side note, I've talked to my prospective new teacher and I will be starting studies though my university in the fall with him. He is a 4ths player though and through, but we talked a bit and he said if I want to try 5ths that he'd go with it. We agree on a few big tuning independent issues (use of extension fingerings/pivots, the amount of thought that should be given to Simandl, etc.) so I think it will go very well.

I'm hesitant still, but if I'm going to do it I should do so before I learn all the repertoire in fourths, and while I'm young and can learn quicker... we'll see!

[Andrew Downing]

I've just added a small amount of stuff to my profile. The string length on my German bass is just over 42", and the New Standard's string length is pretty close to that as well. I've never played Joel's bass, so I'm not sure what the string length is on that.

[Jeff Moote]

Well, I'm doing it... or at least collecting the necessary strings until I head to my luthier for a long overdue checkup and some minor work. I'll give it at least 6 months and if I'm really struggling at this point I guess it'll be back to fourths! I'll report back here after the change and once I've started with my new teacher in a month.


(if anyone has for sale a used or new Spirocore low C, new or like new Dominant solo F# and solo A please let me know)

[David Powell]

Well, I'm doing it... or at least collecting the necessary strings until I head to my luthier for a long overdue checkup and some minor work. I'll give it at least 6 months and if I'm really struggling at this point I guess it'll be back to fourths! I'll report back here after the change and once I've started with my new teacher in a month.


(if anyone has for sale a used or new Spirocore low C, new or like new Dominant solo F# and solo A please let me know)Have you ever heard "Life Cycles" by Dave Holland. He plays a cello on that album so it is a good example of a player crossing over into 5ths territory. It's a great album too. Good luck with the adventure. Keep us posted. :)

[Jeff Moote]

I haven't heard that album, but thanks for the recommendation - I'll check it out for sure. Just a side note: I don't usually care for bass type parts played on cello, whether that be in jazz, classical or whatever. I guess it's just the bassist in me, but I'd rather hear it played on a bass, and I'd even rather hear cello compositions at pitch on bass than a cellist if done well (e.g. Jeff Bradetich playing the Bach suites).

Anyway, back on topic I've ordered the strings along with the music for the Vanhal concerto. I'm crazy and have entered a concerto competition right when I'm switching to fifths (I'll have to have it ready for Jan 16), so with that plus my orchestra repertoire I certainly won't be short on practice material!

[David Powell]

I'm the same way;- a real low-lifer. Since I have adopted 5 strings with the low BB across all of my basses, I have transposed many of my lines to include the lowest notes possible. If you have a low C, check out Footprints played an octave lower than Ron Carter's line. It's more like "Hoof prints" . Try it also with a bow. Slower. Really dark, IMO. Different and cool spooky.

I've been really curious about how this harmonics / resonance phenomenon works with 5th tuning, so I am doing some ****ysis on the frequencies in the circle of fifths vs. those in the reciprocal circle of fourths. So far it appears that there may indeed be a difference. I'll let you know when I have something more definite. It's all math the way I see it, but how it it heard is more important.

[Jeff Moote]

I've been really curious about how this harmonics / resonance phenomenon works with 5th tuning, so I am doing some ****ysis on the frequencies in the circle of fifths vs. those in the reciprocal circle of fourths. So far it appears that there may indeed be a difference. I'll let you know when I have something more definite. It's all math the way I see it, but how it it heard is more important.I agree that the perceived effect is more important, but moreso I too am into the math of it all. The tricky part is when you start mixing temperament systems which is inevitable since you choose the intonation based on what you hear. I think that's why some people look at the claims made by fifths players and think "no, that's all wrong because a fifth is just a fourth upside down" - well that's only so if you temper your intervals that way. This is also why I think practicing with a tuner to work on intonation is the worst idea ever - you end up with a 12ET sense of intonation which is useless unless you're playing with other 12ET instruments. Even though we often play with pianos, usually the strings grossly outweigh the piano in both numbers and sound, so you end up with a sort of mixed temperament where the pitch center is defined by the piano in whatever range it's playing, but all the interval relationships are locally tempered according to something more like just temperament. This is the reason I don't get too much into the actual math of trying to prove this or that about a given tuning for the bass - it all comes down to subjective factors which are simply the result of our subjective sense of intonation, even though each temperament can be explained easily with math when taken on its own.

[David Powell]

I don't regard ET as harmony, and therefore, very strictly speaking, not pure music. I know people write good music with / for it, but it seems like one of the first perversions to come along. It's a system designed by bureaucrats, not mathematicians. In It can be mathematically described by ascending or descending by the 12th root of 2, but is not a harmonic relation, so it is mostly wrong harmonically except when you get to the octave. All of matter would be destabilized if one tried to impose ET on atoms and molecules. One way of looking at radioactivity is that the atom is trying to lose internal dissonance. It keeps degrading until finally all the parts are "in tune". The whole atomic structure stays together because of harmony.

Just harmony is about the only thing I can hear. It's the whole reason I started getting into fret-less instruments. A guitar is impossible to tune because b cannot simultaneously be the 3rd of g and the 5th of e. I wanted to hear some thirds that sounded like perfect constructive wave interference instead of noise. Perfectly constructive wave interference is how I define harmony. But can you really have that with a perfect third between a fundamental and a fifth? The 3rd has to be related perfectly to both the tonic and the fifth. How many notes can you put into a chord before something interferes destructively? Poly-chords are going to be very problematic. So this is not really an easy project, you see. As notes move through a melody, others must adjust. It's easy with just two notes, but 3 or more get complicated.

I changed teachers once because I just could not dig training myself to hear and play as if there were frets. The teacher was trying to get me to hear and play ET. My practice is to tune the notes to whatever the other instruments are at with slight adjustment of position. I can't hear ET. I can listen for perfect constructive interference. It is more subconscious than conscious and I know in practice most notes go by faster than I can hear them just right. But it gets better with practice. As far as the 5ths, they are very close whether one is in equal temperament or in just harmony. 4ths are also not too far out. The rest is pretty much a mess.

Here's a cool chart (http://www.bazantar.com/grid.html)that ****yzes the differences between ET and pure harmonic music in a couple of different ways. The ratio column is the one I will be using mostly to do the ****ysis. There are a couple of things that can be gleaned right away if you look at G and A on that chart. Before we get into that it is important to recognize that the scale (to me, there is really only one scale per fundamental pitch and then different modes of the one scale) is comprised of simple note relations that follow the series 1:2, 2:3, 3:4, 4:5, 5:6, 6:7, 7:8, 8:9. That is the basis of the scale. It seems 8:9 is the whole step if I remember right. 15:16 is the half-step. Where it tends to be problematic I think, is when one plays chords with stopped notes as the fundamental when another instrument plays the fundamental as an open string. That's the direction to work in to get to why it might sound more like constructive interference with all the instruments tuned in 5ths. But beyond that we need to know what pitches the strings of all the instruments in the ensemble are tuned to. If I get that and get my head right, I can derive some relations that might show something or not. We should divide the work load. Here's what we do. Take the violin, viola, cello, and DB. Make a chart with all the strings pitches tuned in 5ths, and then derive the partials of the different strings in terms of Hz. Then we can use the Hz. to compare the harmonic relations across the strings of the orchestra as different chords are played. What should emerge is a set of preferred positions that play the notes of chords right on a just harmonic position as opposed to one that is off. If we make one chart with the DB in 5ths and another with it in 4ths, that should give us some ideas about what goes on in terms of the constructive interferences we hear, whether these are pure or off the ratios a bit.

[Jeff Moote]

David,

While I respect what you're doing, I really think you're over thinking it - or at least over thinking certain aspects and missing others.

One thing to mention is that you seem to be equating constructive interference of waves and consonant sounds, if I'm not reading you incorrectly. Even if one ignores that a note sounds with significant amplitude on more than just the fundamental, a more constructive relationship between fundamentals doesn't necessarily mean a more consonant sound. Psychoacoustics is the major factor at play, and unfortunately that brings this way outside the realm of physics.

The point is that to use your chord example, you can tune a chord (say, a major triad) and that is very different than tuning a major third and a minor third on their own - so the intervals you choose in the chord to create the most consonant sound will not be the same you'd choose for either on their own.

To take this discussion further off topic, I'll mention the notion that composers and musicologists have held that different keys have different "colours". They absolutely DO NOT - with the emphasis on "absolutely" ;) On a piano tuned to 12ET (I'll use it for reference at first) all keys sound identical. On an instrument of flexible temperament such as strings, as long as the player continues to play just temperament all keys will sound the same, in terms of dissonance. Wind instruments are kind of in between since they generally use just temperament but are somewhat limited by the key of their instrument (unless for example you have a set of natural trumpets - one for every key!). All this combined still points to keys being identical - so where does the idea come from? My guess is that it's more related to instrumentation and variation in timbre: certain keys lend themselves to various instruments playing in different parts of their range. This means that depending on the key, certain instruments are limited to some subset of the timbres they are capable of. When this is summed in an ensemble context some keys may begin to take on a "colour" which leads to the ideas mentioned above. This also explains why there is not universal agreement on this - one composer hears a given key as one thing, and another differently. This could be as simple as one composer preferring a different orchestration leading to that key taking on a certain colour. Even if we limit both composers to the use of their pianos, both pianos are not identical and are certainly tuned differently - for this reason the dissonance may be distributed differently giving them an impression of something about keys, as they hear them.


To bring this back on topic, I think one reason why fifths work better on the bass in the context of other string instruments is that you have a broader range of notes in each position on the neck allowing for different timbres which blend differently. This doesn't explain anything about the supposed increased resonance of the instrument itself though. For that I would come back to the physics of the harmonic relationships, so if you want to do any ****ysis this would be where I'd do it, and not between the bass and other instruments. In doing that we cannot leave out the natural resonances of our instrument either. It could be just that the instrument resonates differently when tuned in fifths as the wood is under different types of stresses, and this is another barrier to ****ysis because it is not as objective. Once you add the varying harmonic response of a single vibrating string to the simple fundamental ****ysis, and then consider the resonating wood (which is not unchanging over time) the task becomes increasingly complicated. There's easily enough material for 10 theses in mechanical engineering, but is this really worth the trouble?? Maybe if you need a topic for your doctoral thesis! As a musician it seems sensible to try the tuning myself, or at bare minimum listen to others using it (which is how it started for me) and if you like the results then it's good. If not, then keep using fourths.

[David Powell]

David,

While I respect what you're doing, I really think you're over thinking it - or at least over thinking certain aspects and missing others.

One thing to mention is that you seem to be equating constructive interference of waves and consonant sounds, if I'm not reading you incorrectly. Even if one ignores that a note sounds with significant amplitude on more than just the fundamental, a more constructive relationship between fundamentals doesn't necessarily mean a more consonant sound. Psychoacoustics is the major factor at play, and unfortunately that brings this way outside the realm of physics.

The point is that to use your chord example, you can tune a chord (say, a major triad) and that is very different than tuning a major third and a minor third on their own - so the intervals you choose in the chord to create the most consonant sound will not be the same you'd choose for either on their own.

To take this discussion further off topic, I'll mention the notion that composers and musicologists have held that different keys have different "colours". They absolutely DO NOT - with the emphasis on "absolutely" ;) On a piano tuned to 12ET (I'll use it for reference at first) all keys sound identical. On an instrument of flexible temperament such as strings, as long as the player continues to play just temperament all keys will sound the same, in terms of dissonance. Wind instruments are kind of in between since they generally use just temperament but are somewhat limited by the key of their instrument (unless for example you have a set of natural trumpets - one for every key!). All this combined still points to keys being identical - so where does the idea come from? My guess is that it's more related to instrumentation and variation in timbre: certain keys lend themselves to various instruments playing in different parts of their range. This means that depending on the key, certain instruments are limited to some subset of the timbres they are capable of. When this is summed in an ensemble context some keys may begin to take on a "colour" which leads to the ideas mentioned above. This also explains why there is not universal agreement on this - one composer hears a given key as one thing, and another differently. This could be as simple as one composer preferring a different orchestration leading to that key taking on a certain colour. Even if we limit both composers to the use of their pianos, both pianos are not identical and are certainly tuned differently - for this reason the dissonance may be distributed differently giving them an impression of something about keys, as they hear them.


To bring this back on topic, I think one reason why fifths work better on the bass in the context of other string instruments is that you have a broader range of notes in each position on the neck allowing for different timbres which blend differently. This doesn't explain anything about the supposed increased resonance of the instrument itself though. For that I would come back to the physics of the harmonic relationships, so if you want to do any ****ysis this would be where I'd do it, and not between the bass and other instruments. In doing that we cannot leave out the natural resonances of our instrument either. It could be just that the instrument resonates differently when tuned in fifths as the wood is under different types of stresses, and this is another barrier to ****ysis because it is not as objective. Once you add the varying harmonic response of a single vibrating string to the simple fundamental ****ysis, and then consider the resonating wood (which is not unchanging over time) the task becomes increasingly complicated. There's easily enough material for 10 theses in mechanical engineering, but is this really worth the trouble?? Maybe if you need a topic for your doctoral thesis! As a musician it seems sensible to try the tuning myself, or at bare minimum listen to others using it (which is how it started for me) and if you like the results then it's good. If not, then keep using fourths.
Well, I'm not sure what you are talking about when you say consonant sounds, so I'm definitely missing that. I do know what I mean about constructive sound wave interference of two or more frequencies. When the sine waves are laid over each other in a perfect simple ratio, one can hear that as a new wave form. Did you look at the chart on the bazantar site?

If you bow two strings you can find some of those off the half step (sometimes called quarter tones). Anyway, it is easy to find some of the more unusual ratios just by ear while gradually changing the pitch of one string while droning the other string. I know how those harmonizing ratios sound and it has everything to do with constructive interference characteristics of the sound waves. I really don't know if psycho-acoustics has anything to do with what I'm talking about. It may. The phenomenon I'm talking about is the same thing that allows me to tune one note on an instrument and then tune the whole thing. It is the same constructive interference I'm hearing when two notes are in tune. I don't think the "color" thing about keys is easy to talk about in any certain terms. Nor do I think that it is of any consequence in the way that I'd like to look at the resonance / constructive interference differences between the tuning.

I would like you to explain the "consonant sound" definition. I couldn't find anything that referenced that terminology or explained it. Depending on the definition, it may or may not have anything to do with what I'm talking about.

I really think if the increased resonance is something that is experienced in an ensemble with other strings, we will miss what's happening without including all the strings in the ensemble in the physical ****ysis. Sure, there should be a pattern just looking at one instrument tuned in fifths, but we need to consider the implications of all of them playing chords at once. Not chords on one instrument, but chords where one plays the tonic, another the third, another the fifth. What changes on the bass between the two tunings is not the pitch played, but the position and string it winds up being played on. Tuning in fifths should not change the stresses on the instrument if we choose strings that give the same overall tension result. That must be kept constant. If there is anything that seems "instrument dependent", in other words it works differently on this bass than that one, the the idea is pretty much invalid. If the tuning itself generally improves something, the effect should be universal across instruments as long as we hold everything else constant. If tension is part of the effect, then the effect is not due to tuning in 5ths and could be achieved by 4th tunings and just using a different set of strings. If an instrument resonates differently, it has to be because of the different series of partials that result on the open strings and on the relation to a specific stopped note before it has much to do with 5th tunings. FYI, I wasn't going to use any instruments in the ****ysis, I was going to chart the partial series of the notes and look at the frequency relationships / ratios. If this turns into something that is instrument dependent in any way, the concept is lost completely and it is just a novelty tuning. I don't think it will take ten mechanical engineers to show what I'm talking about. It will take some time and a calculator, that's about it. In my mind it is not complicated if we stick to a theoretical ****ysis. When we leave the theoretical ****ysis and start considering different instruments, etc., then any meaningful ****ysis is impossible. If a theoretical ****ysis shows up nothing, then I don't think there is anything there dependable. You can try it on this or that instrument and see what you get in the real world, but constructive interference is something that I have found (and how, given physics, could it be different? Sound has it's laws and it abides them.) is the same no matter what one uses to generate the pitches, as long as the pitches generated also generate a partial series of resonances based on the pure harmonic series. To me what wouldn't be worth the trouble is stringing up my instrument differently without having some theoretical foundation for why.

What I am looking for is a general improvement in resonance that can be specifically related to nothing but the tuning difference. That is a problem worked out on paper. My hunch is that there could be something there, that it will probably be somewhat key dependent;- that it also could require playing the notes on each instrument in a specific position and string. It won't prove or disprove anything, but it might point in a direction.

[Johnny Layton]

Do any of you currently tune in 5ths?
Have any of you tried it and gone back? If so why - was it the left hand challenges, or was it lack of acceptance by your peers or teacher(s)?
For those who are tuned in 5ths: What strings are you using? Who have you studied under - did you keep your teacher at the time, or did you find another (who was either more open minded or a 5ths player themselves)?
For those who've never tried it: What are your thoughts? Have you heard someone tuned in 5ths perform live?

I tune in 5ths now...have been doing it off and on for almost a year now I think. The hardest part was finding useful fingering patterns to play some things I liked that sat on the fingerboard more conveniently in 4ths.

I went to one of the pros (Jessica Gilliam-Valls) the Austin area last year to take some lessons (something I do whenever I am able), and I had my bass tuned in 5ths when I started. After talking about it with her and trying out a few things, she directed me to Silvio Dalla Torre's 4-finger method. I've been following his method since, though it's written for a 4ths tuned bass. I was pretty much sold on Silvio's method before I went to her for help, because I got to hear him play and prove his fingering ideas when he came to Austin last year.

I picked up a cello method also and am pacing slowly through it...mostly to get accustomed to where the notes sit on the fingerboard, which is different for all but the D string. I have Masuzzo's book now also, and am using that also to train myself to read better. Masuzzo employs Simandl and Rabbath type fingerings in his method, just in case anybody wants to know.

Here in Texas I know of no teachers who use the 4-finger approach all over the fingerboard, and Paul Unger's interest in 5ths tuning is the only evidence I have of any professional bassist and/or teacher using it. When I was taking lessons with Jessica, she herself didn't tune her bass in 5ths and was wary to do so because she also plays the cello and didn't want to take the chance she'd sabotage her muscle-memory for them.

I'm using the Red Mitchell spiro set right now which I like very much with the bow and with pizz, but I haven't found a low C that I'm completely happy with yet. Sometimes I like the spiro C best, other times I find the Helicore hybrid B best. Likely, it's my own bowing technique that is giving me grief and I just need to woodshed it. I've tried other solo/orchestra string combinations...corellis, helicores, flexocores. Though I haven't tried the dominant set Joel Quarrington recommends yet, I'm sure that's a great combo too.

I have few, if any, peers as I'm an amateur bassist and I like to experiment. But like I said we've got at least one pro bassist experimenting with it here in Texas, and as far as my experience in getting help from the pros around me goes they've all been open-minded with me to at least some degree.

[Charles Federle]

The use of all four fingers in the lower positions at least up here in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area is a bit more then you might think. It is just that most of us hide it very well. Almost all of Bradetich's students use all four fingers, but it is not apparent as we use it for exceptions that we need it on like Mozart 39. I think of it as just another tool in the box, though for me it is a bit of a specialty tool.

[Johnny Layton]

http://www.nac-cna.ca/en/multimedia/podcasts/index.html: it's the 04.10.2006 NACOcast episode

Hey Jeff thanks very much for this link I just found it while catching up to this thread (yeah, I admit it I usually speak before I think LOL).

Looking forward to Joel's method book!

[Jeff Moote]

Hey Jeff thanks very much for this link I just found it while catching up to this thread (yeah, I admit it I usually speak before I think LOL).

Looking forward to Joel's method book!

You're welcome! Joel's method has been a long time coming but he says it's nearing completion now. I'm very much looking forward to it, as the only other bass method for fifths I know of is Denis Massuzo's book which seems very good and thorough for beginners, but not so much a comprehensive method as a guide to fingerings.


From the way Joel speaks about playing the bass I have no doubts his method will be a great resource for fifths tuning.

[Paul Warburton]

[quote=Ken Smith;5433]
Joel has a fine old Bass but I'm am not sure if it is a G.P. Maggini, a Santo Maggini

[quote]
G.P.Maggini

[Ken Smith]

[quote=Ken Smith;5433]
Joel has a fine old Bass but I'm am not sure if it is a G.P. Maggini, a Santo Maggini

[quote]
G.P.Maggini



Not sure what your post is about Paul but I do have an update about his Bass. We recently exchanged emails about 5ths, basses and mutual acquaintances. It turns out that although either of the two names listed above have been used for his Bass with the Santo Mag. used as a default for G.P., it is not actually known who made his Bass or even where it was made. It is also possible that it is a British Bass as well. So, there you have it..;)

[Johnny Layton]

Almost all of Bradetich's students use all four fingers, but it is not apparent as we use it for exceptions that we need it on like Mozart 39. I think of it as just another tool in the box, though for me it is a bit of a specialty tool.

Hello Charles. I remember reading about Bradetich a while back being taught to play bass from a cellist, and I thought that was pretty cool.

In my Sankey edition Simandl book, Sankey also recommends a 4 finger approach at times.

Have you or any of the others at UNT done any experimenting with 5ths tuned bass? If so, how do you like it?

[Charles Federle]

I can actually only think of one person that has been tuned in 5ths before up here, and he changed back after a while finding it was to much shifting especially for orchestral type things. There could be a few more people that have tried and I just don't know about, after all we have a huge amount of bassits here.

I myself have given some thought to the idea, but I have an extension (which means I can get close to fifths tuning fairly easily) and the tuning would require my bass to get much to bright, using a solo A string on my bass would not blend well within an orchestra section.

However, Jeff and I have talked a bit about 5ths and his conclusion was basically that the important things that we learn about the left hand are even more important with 5ths tunings.

[Johnny Layton]

Yeah as far as Jeff Bradetich's insights with the left hand, no doubt about it in my mind...would likely bring great value regardless of the bass' tuning.

[Jeff Moote]

That is also a notion that Joel Q has expressed - any left hand issues that are present in fourths tuning will be a bigger problem in fifths, so it is important to focus on a strong technique. This sounds obvious for any tuning, but many get away with a lazy left hand in fourths because we can play so much of the repertoire in half and 1st position if desired.

[Johnny Layton]

...many get away with a lazy left hand in fourths because we can play so much of the repertoire in half and 1st position if desired.

I think sometimes that it isn't so much a matter of convenience as a matter of habit...one starts to play in 4ths and can end one's professional career remaining so.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with playing the bass in EADG tuning. At times, I do wonder if doing CGDA tuning isn't being redundant...the cello already tunes this way and offers that tonal character...and an element of "richness" will be lost.

But, when I'm working on my scales, my arpeggios, my favorite lines...or just goofing off...I feel like I play better in tune with myself, which is for me a very gratifying experience though it may not be what you or another listener might expect from my making this claim LOL

Anyway thanks again y'all :)

[Jeff Moote]

I think sometimes that it isn't so much a matter of convenience as a matter of habit...one starts to play in 4ths and can end one's professional career remaining so.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with playing the bass in EADG tuning.I agree entirely! My point was not that we shouldn't tune in fourths, but that we shouldn't get sucked into that Simandl/play everything in the lowest position possible/etc system which is very limiting. This is independent of tuning, but fifths both forces you to be conscious of the left hand/requires facility, and also offers other things (contra C without an extension, favourable intonation for some people)

[Tomas Bouda]

two years ago, i began studying with andrew downing - i was practicing in fifths and still gigging in fourths. it didn't make any sense. so, about 6 months in, i made the decision to go fifths full-time. i have been tuning in fifths since then. let me tell you that my bass has never sung so nicely, with a cello-like voice. being a really big guy (6'8") i find moving around on my 4/4 bass to be relatively easy, although, i must admit that i'm always looking for a 5/8 bass to totally shred on. i can't say enough good things about tuning in fifths...just give it a year, if you're going to give it a shot because you need that time to really get it under your fingers.

one problem with this tuning is that the concerto rep is really much more difficult to play - if anyone has any suggestions for concertos that work well in fifths, that info would be greatly appreciated.

[Calvin Marks]

two years ago, i began studying with andrew downing - i was practicing in fifths and still gigging in fourths. it didn't make any sense. so, about 6 months in, i made the decision to go fifths full-time. i have been tuning in fifths since then. let me tell you that my bass has never sung so nicely, with a cello-like voice. being a really big guy (6'8") i find moving around on my 4/4 bass to be relatively easy, although, i must admit that i'm always looking for a 5/8 bass to totally shred on. i can't say enough good things about tuning in fifths...just give it a year, if you're going to give it a shot because you need that time to really get it under your fingers.

one problem with this tuning is that the concerto rep is really much more difficult to play - if anyone has any suggestions for concertos that work well in fifths, that info would be greatly appreciated.

Hey Tomas, welcome to the club. I honestly haven't found much concerto repertoire that's more difficult in fifths than in fourths. Have you played the Koussevitzky? That one works well in fifths. I like playing the first cello suite in the lower octave, really good practice!!