Freedom in Limitation

I have more basses than I can easily count. I have a couple of 6-string basses, a handful of 5-string basses, and an endless supply of 4-string basses. I have long scale basses, short scale basses, neck-through basses, active basses, passive basses, an acoustic electric bass, an electric upright bass. I even have a couple of broken basses that I’m keeping around with the intent of fixing them.

I might have more basses than I need, though at the time I bought each one of them, I could justify it as something unique. And I’ve upgraded most of my basses, making them more unique than when I bought them.

But for all my basses owned, I’m still an “okay” bass player at best.

My goal, for whatever time I have left on this earth, is to go from “okay bass player” to “Bassist.” In my mind, “Bassist” is one who encompasses the bass, can play what he is thinking, one who makes the instrument an extension of his own mind, his own body, his own soul.

I’m not planning to purge my collection, but I also don’t need all of my basses to unleash the Bassist within. So for the first quarter of 2024, I’m limiting myself to three basses: a Fernandes P-bass, a Fender Jazz bass, and a fretless Fender Jazz bass.

4-strings. 20 frets. Passive electronics. No effects.

I’m not going to be stupid and say, “There’s nothing worth playing that can’t be played on these basses.” 24 frets give you added range, as do additional strings. There are things worth playing on other basses. But the limitation will force me to be creative within the parameters I’m setting for myself. The limitation will eliminate novelty, without being a limitation on advancing from “okay” to “mastery.”

With a little bit of work, by April 1 I’ll no longer be fooling myself with my bass dreams.

Gear Review: Ibanez PowerPad bass gig bag

Up until the last few years, I’ve considered myself to firmly be an “Ibanez guy.” My first bass wasn’t an Ibanez, but I gave up the instrument before I graduated high school; when I came back to playing bass in college, I got an Ibanez and I’ve never looked back. Sure, I’ve upgraded components, and I’ve picked up a few duds, but for the most part, you can get any Ibanez bass made from the 1970’s through the 1990’s, and you’re getting a lot of bass for your buck.

I recently made a move, and in packing up my basses, I found that somehow I was short one case/gig bag. Little wonder how it happened: I’m sure I just acquired a new bass (or two?) since my previous move, and since I just rotate what’s out on a guitar stand, I didn’t even consider that if I had a few on guitar stands and only one spare case, I might not have enough to pack them all up. Since I’ve always loved my Ibanez basses (even a few I shouldn’t), and even have an older Ibanez gig bag that’s very good quality, I decided to pick up a PowerPad to house an old SR1200.

I never knew what the “PowerPad” referred to, and now that I have one, it’s still a mystery. I assume it’s a suggestion that you could slide your iPad into the large front pocket – and that pocket does seem to have a little padding that might protect your screen, but that’s a pretty minor modification of the sheet music pocket that you’ll find on any other gig bag you might buy; the padding in that pocket is nice, but I’d still be likely to put my tablet in a separate case anyway, then slide it in that pocket. It’s not a big enough of a factor to sway you to choose this particular gig bag, much less to name your product after it.

Beyond that, I was thoroughly unimpressed. I liked the styling when I pulled it out of the box, but when I unzipped it to put my bass in it, I was disappointed with the lack of padding. Sure, it’s a gig bag, and if you really want to protect your instrument you should be putting it in a case. But I have plenty of gig bags that I’m comfortable commuting with, as long as I can carry on my instrument; I’d be a little nervous getting on the train with the PowerPad. The interior is nice and roomy – almost too big for the Sound Gear basses that were Ibanez’s flagship for so many years, though that may provide room for me to put a little extra padding around my bass when it’s in the gig bag. There is a neck strap inside the bag, nothing fancy, but it’s something you don’t see in every bag.

Like I said, the exterior looked nice; my PowerPad is straight black, it’s pretty tough to screw that up. Front pockets are pretty standard: large sheet music pocket (the “PowerPad,” I assume); smaller pocket in front of the sheet music pocket for spare strings, strap, cord (probably need to pick two of the three); and an envelope-style pocket on top of that, for picks, small items, whatever. There’s a small pocket up by the headstock, but it’s a smaller pocket than I’ve seen on other gig bags, including the older Ibanez bag. It would be too small for spare strings or a strap, might work for a tuner with a patch cable, but I’m not sure how I’ll use it right now.

Another minor issue is that there is only one zipper on the side. When I travel with a bass – even if I’m driving – I like to put a small luggage lock on the zipper just to deter anyone looking for an easy score, and locking the zipper pulls together is a simple way to manage that. There is a plastic hook at the head that I could use with a wire loop lock, but it’s not going to be convenient. Like I said, it’s a minor issue, but it’s also an issue that you generally only see on the cheapest gig bags.

I picked up this PowerPad for about $35 on eBay, and for that I’d say it’s a fair value – not a “deal,” like I was hoping. If I’d paid the $40-50 that I typically see these sold for, I’d have moved from disappointed to angry. If you’re looking for a good gig bag, I’ve found much better value in Kaces, RokSak (these are getting a little harder to find), Warwick’s RockBag, or Ritter.

I mentioned the dates above that made me an “Ibanez guy”; for instruments I’ve picked up made after 2000, it’s a bit more hit or miss. The PowerPad, unfortunately, fits this trend – it’s not necessarily a good value alternative for someone who can’t afford a boutique bass or a classic Fender; it’s more a cheaper alternative, and you get what you paid for. The PowerPad lacks any real power, and is insubstantial in its padding.

I might have to start referring to myself as a “vintage Ibanez guy.”

Jesus Christ Superstar: Alan Spenner’s Unheralded Bass Masterpiece

We know the names of the bass legends, those who stood in front and wowed audiences from the start: Jaco Pastorius, the self-proclaimed “Greatest Bass Player in the World” (and he backed it up); Charles Mingus; Stanley Clarke; Victor Wooten; Geddy Lee; Marcus Miller; Norwood Fisher; Les Claypool; Jack Bruce; John Entwhistle; Bootsy Collins.  We know the superstars whose voices overshadowed their surprisingly good bass chops, like Paul McCartney, and my original inspiration, Sting.  Thanks to the work of Allan Slutsky, previously unknown giants have gained increasing notoriety, at least among bass players: obviously James Jamerson (the ORIGINAL Greatest Bass Player in the World), but from their we paid more attention to guys like Duck Dunn, Chuck Rainey, Nathan East, Bob Babbitt, and Lee Sklar, who may be the most prolific bass player in history.

(I keep thinking of more names to add.  The truth is, there are so many great bass players, and if you’re not specifically mentioned, I do apologize.  Like Ron Carter, I did not mean to forget you.  Or Mark Sandman.  Or Chris Wood.  Or Bernie Edwards.  Moving on.)

For the number of many wonderful bass players whose names we’re at least familiar with, even counting Sklar among their numbers, there are countless recordings with bass players who toil in relative obscurity.  Most are adequate, though many are less than; some are downright terrible (I’ll give Sid Vicious a pass for making up for his inadequacies with monster persona).   And some shine out, even if the spotlight never shines on them.


Holidays.  They’re all about the traditions; to this day, I look forward to my chocolate bunny from my mom.  I remember getting up on Easter morning, and spying around the house as I made my way to the living room, looking for any edge over my brother in the Easter egg hunt.  That egg hunt was second only to Christmas morning for excitement; and while I was usually up around 6:00 a.m. on Saturdays to watch “Rocky & Bullwinkle” and “Smurfs,” on those two mornings I think my parents were almost as excited as my brother and I to be out of bed.  “Meaning” was gained as I grew older, and egg hunts were replaced by sunrise church services, and new clothes that couldn’t get dirty under any circumstance.  But as a teenager, understanding, comprehension and meaning were not things usually found at 6:00 a.m. on a Sunday – by that time, I learned that Sunday morning fell after Saturday night.

As I grew older, we lost another tradition that I didn’t even know how much I missed.  I do not come from a musical family, but when I was little – like, single digits young – my dad would play “Jesus Christ Superstar” on our turntable.  When I reached those angsty teen years, as I rejected most of what I believed my parents believed in, “Superstar” was lumped in with John Denver and Stevie Nicks and Helen Reddy for sappy, crappy music my parents liked.  “Rocky Mountain High”? I’d rather be getting high, listen to Bob Marley “Jammin’” about resistance to oppression in “Redemption Song,” imagining myself a “Buffalo Soldier” without having any clue what the term meant.  To this day, I believe Pearl Jam’s Ten and Nirvana’s Nevermind are the seminal albums of their time, because I heard in those albums what I felt in my head daily.  I connected to 2Pac, not because I shared his direct experience, but because in Me Against the World I knew I shared the experience of being alone, but unbowed against the struggle.

At some point, you stop growing older, and decide it might be time to grow up.  I probably had friends who did that faster than I did, but I didn’t have anything like a kid forcing me to grow up fast, it just seemed like the thing to do.  The consistent role models I had were my parents, though even then (or now) I wouldn’t tell them that.  I went to law school, because it seemed a good route to a good job, I stopped riding my bike and started driving a sensible car.  I even started appreciating John Denver, and beat my parents to a Stevie Nicks box set at a yard sale.  (I still have no Helen Reddy, other than “I Am Woman” on a ‘70s compilation somewhere.)

Then, while browsing stacks at a used book store one afternoon, I found the original recording of Jesus Christ Superstar.


Even growing up, I knew that Superstar defied the conventions of the growing “Christian rock” genre, and other than “The Last Supper,” didn’t even fit in the contemporary service I enjoyed most growing up.  (The contemporary service really wasn’t, even then – with its soft acoustic strummings, it was probably a relic from 15-20 years earlier.  It was only in comparison with most other church music that it felt at all “contemporary.”)

The first few times I listened to Superstar after getting the album, it was in pure nostalgia.  It was only after this that I started to listen to it.  Jesus Christ Superstar is a straight up rock-funk opera.  The subject matter is religious; the music is top notch.  Even more, the bass playing could be a clinic.

The “Overture” gives an overview of the musical themes to follow, but little clue as to the bass brilliance to follow.  Likewise, the opening song, “Heaven On Their Minds” starts with an intense, sharp guitar riff that builds intensity (and builds in intensity), joined by Murray Head’s vocal and drums, joined by a second screaming guitar and horns as the first verse builds to crescendo as Judas strives for Jesus’s attention (in soliloquy, of course).  The second verse, however, drops the intensity as the lyric moves toward reasoning with the absent Jesus – and what instrument better represents the best of man’s reason than the electric bass?  Spenner bounces, Spenner is busy, Spenner complements without ever challenging the vocals.

The bass never slows down, despite taking until midway through the second song to establish itself – if you care enough about bass to visit a blog like this, you probably already suspect that bass is the foundation of music (and, perhaps, of the whole Universe).  Spenner’s bass is the foundation of the music in Jesus Christ Superstar.  He bubbles through “What’s the Buzz?”, and gently pushes Yvonne Elliman through “Everything’s Alright” (and underscores the “Everything’s Alright” theme below an argument between Judas and Jesus, musically underscoring the tension that everything is not, in fact, alright).  The music changes wildly, sometimes from song to song, but Spenner never lets up, never lets down.  Whether a quicker paced song, like “Simon Zealotes,” or the slower “The Last Supper” (a favorite when I was little, because the apostles’ chorus, “Always hoped that I’d be an apostle, knew that I could make it if I tried,” amused me, and because the music for that chorus was closest to the contemporary services at my church), or even the ragtime styling of “King Herod’s Song,” Spenner is note perfect throughout.

The only place he seems to disappear, unfortunately, is the album’s secondary hit, “I Don’t Know How to Love Him.”  Elliman’s primary accompaniment in the song is an acoustic guitar, and the bass plays a more traditional role of establishing the root – and staying out of the way.  (Coincidentally, the song was an even bigger hit by Helen Reddy – that one artist my parents liked that I could never accept.)

While I would love to attribute the bass brilliance to divine sources, I think the nature of the work ultimately allowed Spenner to shine.  In most rock/pop groups (especially at that time), the primary “voices” go to the singer and the guitarist.  In the rock opera, however, the voices are primarily, well, voices.  Most of the vocalists are tenors or higher, making the bass a more appropriate complement to the singers than a guitar; as a result, in most of the songs the bass establishes itself as the primary melodic instrument, in addition to anchoring the rhythm.  Of course, this takes nothing away from Spenner as a bassist – plenty of musicians find themselves in ideal situations only to deliver flat performances.  You need go no further than the film soundtrack version of Jesus Christ Superstar to witness a far inferior rendition of the same work.

For a story about the Passion of Christ, the only character in Jesus Christ Superstar to come back from the dead is Judas Iscariot, at the opera’s climax, “Superstar.”  After a magnificent brass fanfare to open the song, Spenner takes over with a funk groove that holds its own against anything performed by any of those front-line bass players I listed earlier.  He dances around Murray Head’s vocal, and lifts up the chorus of angels.  Even as the entire heavenly rock orchestra brings the song to its crescendo, Spenner is weaving through the music at a frenetic pace.


After “Superstar,” Jesus Christ Superstar ends with two more atmospheric pieces: “The Crucifixion” features a spattering of spoken phrases by Ian Gillan, some avant-garde piano and well-used effects to create a feeling of unease; “John Nineteen: Forty-One” ends the opera with a traditional symphonic postlude.  Neither piece makes use of a bass.

After “Superstar,” Alan Spenner continued to work regularly; while his name is not well known, the artists he worked with certainly are.  Even before Jesus Christ Superstar, Spenner was a regular member of Joe Cocker’s band, even appearing at Woodstock, and had recorded with Leon Russell.  He would go on to work with Roxy Music and Bryan Ferry; Peter Frampton; Mick Taylor (post-Stones); Donovan; Steve Winwood; and Ted Nugent, among others.  Unfortunately, Alan Spenner died of a heart attack in 1991 at age 43, undoubtedly with a lot of music left in him, and before we started giving sidemen and session musicians the acclaim they’ve always deserved.

So do yourself a favor this Easter and borrow my family’s tradition, and take a serious listen to Jesus Christ Superstar.  It’s full of revelations and Easter eggs, and it’s just as flavorful (and healthier for you) as a chocolate bunny.

I’ve Been Doing It Wrong

Not everyone who picks up an instrument has “mastery” as their goal. For some, if it happens, that’s great, but the goal might be just to be able to play some chords for a campfire singalong, or know just enough to impress an attractive member of whatever gender they’re into that they have a sensitive, artistic side. For others, getting together with the guys on the weekend, kicking back with a few brews while kicking out some tunes, daydreaming about hanging up the day job and hitting the road provides a few hours every weekend that makes the work week bearable. I’ve lived for those few hours myself.

In no way am I disparaging those goals. Some of the best times of my life involve any of those three, and they emphasize one of the most practical uses of an art that many might consider impractical: music is a catalyst for connection. Few goals are loftier.

But for some of us, whether from the start or through love that blossoms from the simpler goals, understanding music becomes its own end. Music becomes a catalyst not only for connection to each other, but to something deeper, something primordial, something universal.

I’ve been there for a while.

Maybe that goal is too vague. I’ve had moments when I’ve felt the “universal” flowing through me, but those moments don’t last. Like anyone on a quest for enlightenment, often you get just enough of a tease to know that the quest may be attainable, but far more of your time is spent in the desperate, fruitless yearning.

Since I have quit my day job, not to hit the road for rock ‘n’ roll glory but to stay home for the quiet, contemplative life of a writer (same awful pay, lower overhead), I have from time to time hoped to devote more of my flexible time to digging deeper as a musician, to going down that rabbit hole on my crazy quest for universal connection, perhaps even uncovering the elusive “theory of everything.” Science has not yet succeeded – but music is both an art emanating from the heart and soul, and a science of sound waves interacting in a physical world. If the “theory of everything” is to be found, why shouldn’t it be uncovered by a musician?

I have taken the more traditional, serious paths to such a serious undertaking. I’ve tried to learn music theory, beyond my one college course in the subject. I made a mistake here – I started consuming everything, starting with an 18th century “Treatise on Harmony” which was enjoyable, and easily read – whether through insatiable curiosity or uncontrolled insecurity, I also picked up The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Music Theory. Actually, it was a little curiosity AND insecurity; arranging is a topic of pure insecurity, and I had already picked up the same author’s The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Arranging and Orchestration, which suggested that it was necessary to study his book on music theory before attempting to understand arranging. Did I mention my insecurity? Of course I did, and this direction fed right into it. The problem was that TCIG to Music Theory presumed NO knowledge, I was bored with it, but felt that the author (obviously an expert, otherwise how was he pegged to write a book on the topic) clearly knew better than I what I needed to know, so I abandoned the harmony treatise, and have never been able to get engaged in the “Idiot’s” book. It’s not that the “Idiot’s” book is bad – it’s just that the author made me feel like an idiot before I ever got started.

This feeling that a “deep understanding” started with a firm grasp of the fundamentals extended from my theoretical study to the practical – my playing itself. It is a good idea to start with warm-ups every day – it is, I don’t deny that in the slightest – but I find myself going back to the beginning, figuring I’ll quickly run through the basic exercises, do a few different scales in all positions from my Bass Grimoire, then . . . be about out of energy to do much else, because it’s hard to get excited about going that far back to basics. It’s as if I had chosen visual art to pursue my muse, and forced myself to start by only using an 8-color box of Crayola’s on line drawings of puppies before advancing. Or if in my writing life I were to engage in a deep study of “Dick and Jane” books to work the progression to Tolkien or Frank Herbert.

The concept is right – fundamentals ARE important. But the approach is wrong. My approach eliminates challenge, which eliminates mental engagement – which over time eliminates the spark of inspiration that made the endeavor first seem worthwhile.

I recently found The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics as a Kindle deal. I know nothing about physics, though I know it would be useful to my quest in a “theory of everything,” and I know a little more than an average New Age devotee about Eastern philosophy. The book itself is not so much about the relationship between physics and traditional Eastern modes of thought, as it is a book about physics using traditional Eastern modes of thought as a metaphor to facilitate the layperson’s understanding.

Beyond the potential application to my “theory of everything,” the title just stimulated my intellectual curiosity. Not everything has to be so serious. Accepting myself means accepting that sometimes, I may want to read a physics book just because I think it sounds interesting.

One of the joys of being intellectually curious is that when you allow your mind to wander in one direction, you may find answers to problems you’ve been having in other directions. Thus it was that the Dancing Wu Li Masters gave me insight to my stalled progress, even regression, in my musical mastery.

Author Gary Zukav actually borrows from Zen master Alan Watts in defining the problem I’ve been having in pursuing my deeper understanding of music. In the foreward to Al Huang’s Embrace Tiger, Return to Mountain, Watts wrote: “The traditional way . . . is to teach by rote, and to give the impression that long periods of boredom are the most essential part of the training. In that way a student may go on for years and years without ever getting the feel of what he is doing.” Hmmm, “long periods of boredom”? “Years without ever getting the feel of what he is doing”? That sounds familiar – not just to me, but to many who pursue music. Sure, countless hours of practice are necessary, but the boredom of this traditional approach surely has many fall by the side, convinced that they are just not cut out to be musicians.

What The Dancing Wu Li Masters attempts to do is get away from this “teaching by rote,” and get to how Watts identifies Huang’s teaching, and how Zukav defines a “Master”: “A Master teaches essence. When the essence is perceived, he teaches what is necessary to expand the perception.” Zukav further explains the purpose of his book in saying, “this book deals not with knowledge, which is always past tense anyway, but with imagination, which is physics come alive, which is Wu Li.”

Working on scales and finger exercises is important for masterful execution. I won’t suggest that exercises to this end are at all wasted, and even if they are “boring,” they must be done. But scales and fingers exercises are elements to music and performance – they are NOT the “essence.” People may appreciate your performance, you may feel more satisfied with your own performance, because of the hours you spend on those activities; in fact, neglecting those activities may hamper your own ability to touch the essence, and will certainly hamper your ability to communicate the essence to a listener.

So how do you start over working the fundamentals, without getting lost in the tedium that blocks your way to the essence?

As Huang explains to Zukav in The Dancing Wu Li Masters, “Every lesson is the first lesson. . . Every time we dance, we do it for the first time. . . . When I say that every lesson is the first lesson, . . . it does not mean that we forget what we already know. It meanst that what we are doing is always new, because we are doing it for the first time.”

This suggests an elegant solution to all of the many times I “start over” after some time away from my instrument, usually as a result of a lack of engagement as I get lost in the tedium of exercises that were barely challenging when I started playing bass. “Starting over” is the problem – the solution, rather, is just to “start.” Music shouldn’t be considered overly mysterious; sure, some knowledge and skills atrophy if not exercised, but the answer to atrophy is stimulation. If I am on a road trip and stop for the night, I don’t find myself the next morning magically transported back to my starting point – I get back in my truck and continue from the point I stopped. In continuing my quest for the essence, rather than re-starting my quest every few months, I will be exercising my fundamentals in a more stimulating manner, challenging myself – I can skip the building blocks, Lincoln Logs and Tinker-Toys, and try my hand at real nuts and bolts.

The important thing in searching for the essence is to always be doing something new.

Touching eternity

Just a short blurb tonight, but wanted to share it tonight, while I’m still very much feeling it.  I played on my upright for the first time in a couple weeks tonight, and I was horrendous trying to work through a jazz etude with the metronome.  My timing was off, my sight reading was off . . . I was off.  So I turned the metronome off.

In his book “Effortless Mastery,” Kenny Werner suggests that when working on a new piece, you have choices in playing all or sections, and playing in time or with perfection.  It was a longer piece, with tricky timing issues, so playing “all” wasn’t in the cards.  Playing “in time” wasn’t working all that great, either – probably in part because of the tricky timing issues involved.  When I turned off the metronome, I managed to play perfectly.

While the metronome has its place (and a significant one), once freed of its persistent click, my playing was freed. I started to swing – on a piece that doesn’t really swing. It was magic.

I finished with the piece, and just jammed. And accidentally hit a harmonic. I remember when I first discovered harmonics – and maybe the happy accident sparked that original wonder. Maybe I was still on my magical high from my swinging triplets. I hit it again, this time deliberately. I played harmonics on other parts of the fretboard. It was joy. It was simple. It was magic. I loved just listening to tones, not with any idea of music, but just the tones themselves. I felt like a kid.

It’s nice to feel like a kid now and then, playing not with any purpose – but that’s what makes it “playing,” It was fun. It felt like play.

And that’s why we play.

who I am, what I’m doing here

This post needs to be done on this blog, and, well, I’m looking at the “Zero to Hero” blog challenge, and it recommended doing this.  Since I’d already done an intro on my more personal blog, I decided I’d do one here.

“The Book of Five Strings” is meant to be my bass/music blog; it’s also the name of my bass book I started years ago, and one day will get back to.  Music is my passion; in many ways, music is my religion.  Music is the way I best connect to the universe.  I wish I was better at it; heck, I wish I was as good at it as I used to be.  Stupid ol’ life getting in the way.

If “Zero to Hero” is WordPress’s way to get us blogging, “The Book of Five Strings” is my own attempt to get back to being the bass player I used to be, and pushing forward to becoming the bass player I’ve always known I can be.

My playing is partially technical, but more spiritual.  Obviously I’m influenced by Asian philosophy; the works of Chuang-Tzu changed my whole perspective on life, the works of Miyamoto Musashi not only provided the name for this blog, but introduced me to the entire samurai ethic (and a wealth of samurai cinema).  I try to approach the bass by feeling the Way move through me, to use the instrument as an extension and expression of my own being, to take my playing as a way to better know 10,000 things about life.

I hope to reach others interested in infusing a spiritual element to their music, others who are looking to expand their playing.  I hope to use this blog as my own method of accountability; if I’m going to write regularly about my playing, I have to be playing, I have to be thinking about my playing.  I would love to gain readers on a similar quest, but if I keep myself on task, that accomplishes its own purpose.