Danny,
I should have prefaced my comment with it depends on if the high notes are runs or if the whole bass part is played up an octive without regard for the low end.  I was referring to runs.  If the bass player played the whole part up too high, then yes, something needs to fill in below.
So far as today's music being different from the 70's, please realize that I too have lived through the era's and understand the differences! 

All the best,

Rimshot

If the song sounds like the bass dropped out, it could be bad producing and arranging.  IMHO, as an arranger, I learned that contrast was a big part of quality music but sometimes genre dictates what is appropriate.  (I'm not saying that all music has to have these qualities - sometimes simply entertaining is good enough to get the job done.)

It it's situation where an immature musician may want to play something driven by personal ego (a little showboating.)  That's where the producer should step in and suggest that a part isn't working for the overall vision of the song.  Genre and vision go hand in hand so if the the song is a modern hard rock/metal type of song and the guitars are chugging along, it would be very out of place for the bassist to be noodling around like a piccolo player.  Or it could be a situation where the key of the song is bad for the bassist.  You're chugging along on an open E loving life and now you have to go to a D chord and you're playing a 4 string and have to shift it up an octave.  That would feel a bit like the bottom dropping out.  (Time to drop tune or pull out the 5 string.)

If you are going for contrast where you have "thick" sections of rhytmic content and "thin" areas where a bit of delicacy is in play then you wouldn't want to add any lower fundamental.  In contrast to that approach I could cite examples where Chris Squire as a bass player would lay down a solid fundamental with bass pedals and then play something much higher (and sometimes faster) over the top of it but he wasn't going for "delicate" in those bits.

So, all this in three paragraphs to say, "it depends." 

Agreed Dave.  Good comments.

Rimshot

Rimshot


So far as today's music being different from the 70's, please realize that I too have lived through the era's and understand the differences! 

All the best,

Rimshot

It's ok man, you never seem to agree with me on anything lol and I'm totally cool with that and respect you. Yet Dave said pretty much what I said and you agreed. He mentioned he felt genre and vision walk hand in hand and mentioned a metal situation. 
 
See that's my point, you didn't have that type of stuff going on to the extent it is now. If I'm playing guitar in a metal tune and am the only guitar in that tune, as soon as I go into a lead part, that rhythm guitar drops out and it sounds as though something is missing no matter what genre it is.
 
Even if I play a riff for too long that is higher up, the listener misses the rhythm chunk I had going on in there. However, if the bassist in my band knows how to compensate and may switch to chords or I have a keyboard player as well...or maybe a rhythm guitar guy, I'm in good shape.
 
Apply that to a bass and well, to me it's even worse of a drop out because now the kick is the only low end instrument in the mix. In the 70's and earlier, this was accepted a bit more because what you heard was what you got. The sonics of the mixes were not like they are today.
 
4 guys jamming in a room live vs. 4 guys jamming with a more direct sound and more over-dubs to orchestrate and well, sometimes with more instruments, you risk even more of a drop out because each instrument needs to be eq'd for its space in the mix. When something leaves a mix today....you really notice it left.
 
Here's a prime example of what I'm talking about. If Creed or Nickelback had their bassist play high up the neck, rest assured the bass drop out is going to be intense enough to nearly ruin the song. They are both known for their rich low end in tunes. Now a band like Iron Maiden is going to get away with this a bit easier.
 
Why? Easy...two rhythm guitarists and Steven Harris (the bassist) doesn't use a lot of low end to begin with. So when HE goes up, the drop isn't as drastic. This is what I meant by genre specific playing a role in this. Again, I'm not, and never meant to imply playing up high on a bass is wrong....I'm just saying there IS a drop out that can affect the tune.
 
I hated it when Paul from the Beatles did it, but the cover for him was George always had his back and was a superb rhythm player with a killer sound to fill things out. High notes can work if the other players in the band fill in the gaps. When they don't, it's drop city and that's what my point has been all along which can definitely be genre specific.
 
You claim you know about this stuff bro yet all your examples usually include something classic rock...which is cool, but most people do not record like that anymore. Trust me, I'm old and have lived through it too and have been at this a really long time and make my living at it today.
 
I'm not one that likes to drop names, but I work with Emmy award winning engineers/producers like BZ Lewis on a daily basis and know a little something about what I'm talking about here, honest. Though I have no awards myself, I've learned from and worked with many that have them. I just did an album with BZ and a band called Points North. We did so well together as a team the label hired us to do their video.
 
So I don't just come on here and blow smoke man. I think sometimes you doubt me because maybe you think I don't know what I'm talking about? Or maybe you just like to disagree with me because I'm me? Whatever the case...it's all good. I'm not here to power trip with you or anyone else. I really don't care who the guru engineer of the Sonar forum is. I just share things as I've lived them having dealt with just about every style of music out there.
 
And, since I live them on such a wide scale with different genre's TODAY, I'm probably living it a bit differently than you may have in the past perhaps? I don't mind if you never agree with me for the rest of our time on the forum. But you can't blame me for thinking something is a little fishy when I say something, you sort of call me on it and then agree with someone that basically says the same thing as me. Either way, it's all good man. :)

I thought the kick and the bass were supposed to play together? Like peas and carrots?

Hey Danny, no offense and I am not trying to challenge you at all!  I agreed with Dave in that he said it "depends".  That was a good statement to me and that is what I was trying to say too.  If the bass player wants to play high up and the producer is OK with it then that's pretty much it.  If the bass player should not be playing it up, then maybe the producer will "talk him down".  My only example was Paul McCartney and I did not point out the years at all.  The only comment that you said that got me was  
It WAS more acceptable in the 70's. You're looking at an entirely different style of music today. Sonics, playing, lack of layering in the 70's, 4 piece recorded live verses 4 piece recorded in sections with layers, room ambience verses up front and direct...totally different ball game, trust me. 


I did not bring the 70's era into this topic.  I just said Paul was a super bass player!  I also tried to make clear I was talking about runs.  Anyway, sorry this got off track.    One thing that I have learned in my years is that music is about people whether they sing about someone or the creators/arrangers/musicians themselves.  I tend to react if you are trying to tell me that things are different today than yesterday.  I have been there and I am here now.  I don't write music today that reflects the genre of today but that's OK.  It doesn't mean I can't or don't understand it.  I also don't need to challenge anyone with my background.  I just want to contribute where I can and speak to the things I know are true for me.  They may be completely different for you.  I am OK with that.


So far as disagreeing, we had different views on the ambiance of rooms and we both ended that well.  I love listening to your music and read all of your comments and appreciate what you bring to the forum.  I am not against you in any way Danny.  I think you have misread me.  Sorry about that. 


Rimshot

bandontherun19


I thought the kick and the bass were supposed to play together? Like peas and carrots?

I kinda have to agree. With all due respect to the technical discussion about bass playing etc, low toms and the kick can indeed replace the bass. To my ear, the best bass is when it is working as a unit with the low tone drums.


Just my 2C.

Rimshot

My point being that if the musician's elect to play something a certain way, they really should know what the impact of that will be...

I agree 100%.  When I play in a higher octave, it's because that's how I want it.  The absence of low end is deliberate, not an unwanted side-effect.  It's the same when I leave gaps (i.e. "rests").  It's not necessary or desirable to fill every space in the music, unless you are trying to create a wall of sound.  "Holes" can be effective if they are well-placed.

I just mixed a song where the bass line was in three different sections, verse, chorus and bridge. And each of those sections was recorded with not only a different sound, but the verse was done with fingers, while the other parts were done more aggressively with a pick. Each of these sections required completely different EQ and compression just to get them into the land of the living, never mind actually sound coherent. Getting it to sound in any way flowing was pretty challenging. However, I'm really pleased with the end result, and I think the differences between sections work really well now. I'd tend to agree with Danny that you probably want to avoid any sense that the bass has suddenly disappeared or boomed out louder or whatever. But that doesn't mean it can't *change*.

Kev999 and John T, that was what I was trying to say in my posts. If it is/was desired then so be it.  

Rimshot