Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I'm sure this question is going to put my ignorance in the forefront. What scale did the Beatles use for their songs? I started playing SRV when I picked up guitar. So I know the "Blues Scale." But now that I play bass I find myself just plucking away looking for that right sounding note, not having a clue how to get there, or what to do after.

The Beatles were unschooled musically, picking up their knowledge and techniques on the run as they pursued their careers.

McCartney grew amazingly as a bass player. His bass lines are some of the best and most creative of their day. Their earlier stuff had some pretty straightforward bass playing, but the later stuff--oh my!

I'd say, listen carefully, learn the stuff pretty much in chronological order, and you'll progress as Paul M. did!

Well, wow. Where do we begin? This might be a better topic for the "musicianship" forum!

All the early Beatles stuff consists mainly of root-5th on bass, with some occasional root-3rd-5th arpeggiating. There are exceptions, naturally - "All My Loving" comes to mind.

Your "blues scale" - which is probably in reality the pentatonic scale - actually translates very well onto bass, and you can hear some pentatonic riffing in McCartney's repertoire. "Come Together" for example is pure D minor pentatonic.

Sometimes finding a creative way to stick to the roots can be very effective - listen to "Dear Prudence". Paul is basically following John's chromatic fingerpicked guitar part, but manages to find a way to make it sound unique via a cool rhytmic pattern and a more in-your-face tone.

Paul's ultimate tour-de-force is undoubtedly Sgt. Pepper. In Geoff Emerick's book, he mentions that during the recording, Paul spent more time after hours working on his basslines then he ever had before or ever did again. Often, there's simply no way to improvise ones way around them - you're going to have to sit down with some sheet music or tab, the album, and just work at it.

'Dear Prudence' is an excellent example. I'm just picking up the bass as well and this is one of the first tunes I did. While simplistic in nature it is unique to the overall rhythm of the song. I did cheat however, by following a bass tab, but it helped me in understanding the structure.

I'm no music theorist, but there are your straight 1-5-4 rockers (which in the Beatles case were mostly covers). And then there are your classic early Beatles chord progressions like "This Boy" furinstance. (D Bm Em A7.... etc)

George, being a fan of Carl Perkins, learned a different style than his peers who were into the blues, Keef for example. "She's A Woman" is a rocker with a country-type lead, for example.

Country riffs show up a lot in the early stuff. IMO he was left a little behind when blues based guitarists became heroes, but more than made up for it with his unique brand of slide.

Other examples being Baby's In Black, and I'm a Loser.

sometimes a lack of training leads players to beg, borrow and steal the riffs they find interesting, without ever really analyzing what it is they are actually playing...........they simply play it cuz they find it interesting, and they like it...............my personal feeling is that sometimes those guys play with a lot more passion than some trained players.........and that over-analyzing their motives isn't going to help understand what they do or how they do it................big difference between hearing,...and listening.........jmho....

I agree.

I'm not a bass player but seems that much of Paul's lines are what a guitarist who switched to bass might play...lots of melody and not just bottom.

Ah, do I jump in here. Treading on sacred territory . . . McCartney’s bass playing . . . oh, well, what the heck.

I’m not sure what the original question really means – which scale did the Beatles use in their songs. Everybody uses the same scales – major scale, harmonic minor scale, etc.

As far as Paul’s bass playing goes, I wouldn’t say he was melodic at all, in the beginning at least, whether he started out as a guitar player or not. (Unlike another previous guitar player – Jack Casady – whose playing style has always been melodic.)

John B is correct. Paul’s early stuff was extremely basic and simple – all root or some root and fifth stuff. Which is kind of surprising when you think about it. By the time they recorded their records, Paul had been playing bass for how long? Five years?

That’s not to say it was bad or wrong. Hey, I’m the first one to admit that a bass player’s main job is to get and keep a groove going and keep in harmony. But I certainly wouldn’t call his early playing particularly inventive or masterful.

On later stuff I really can’t say. I haven’t paid that much technical attention in detail to later Beatle music. Just as a casual listener only.

great point george............i can say for sure that playing guitar as a first instrument has affected how i play bass,...........and my bass playing has affected how i now play guitar......

but i never over analyze any of it............i just go with what interests me at the time........and as my interests evolve,.....so does my playing...........
sometimes i do go back and listen to some old recordings to see how i played then.......and compare it to how i'd play the same part now......then i move on.........afterall,........i only have another 30 or 40 years left to play my ric before i'm gone.......no time to waste.... .......

I won't argue, but I will say that Paul's early playing was light years removed from most of what was happening in other bands at the time. He's far more active than root-fifth. Listen to "I Saw Her Standing There." Yes, it's a pretty straight rock pattern, but he's SINGING at the same time. Listen to "Devil in Her Heart." That's an active bass part, and not all in the first five frets. On "I'm Happy Just to Dance with You," the bass doubles the melody during "Before this dance is through ..." . "All My Loving." Again, a walking bass part. All that said, I doubt that Paul actually "knew" what he was doing. He knew what sounded good, knew what fit the chord, but may not have known technically what scale he was using, what mode. There's a story, apocryphal or not, that someone once transcribed one of Charlie Parker's solos, then showed it to him. At which time he denied he could have played what was written. In my first band, the sax player could solo over any changes, but he could not read music and did not know what he was playing. Sometimes, genius really is just that. Even to this day -- I've been playing bass 41 years and in no way claim to be a genius -- I play things automatically, without thinking, that are quite imaginative (I've been told) compared to what many other bass players would do in the same situation, but it is only after I hear it played back that I will realize what I've played. Yes, I would love to think, beforehand, "I'm gonna rip off a run from the Hungarian minor scale here." But by the time I figured out what that is, the chance would be gone.

Mark wrote:
"Paul’s early stuff was extremely basic and simple – all root or some root and fifth stuff. Which is kind of surprising when you think about it. By the time they recorded their records, Paul had been playing bass for how long? Five years?"

Uhh...Actually Stu left the band in 1961, and the Beatles started recording in 1962. So that would be more like one year. As far as the basic playing claim goes, look at All My Loving. A great, effective walking bass line, on another one that Paul sings! They played this one in concert a lot, also.

I'd like to second that mention of All My Loving. I'd say that was a very inventive bass line, especially considering the time. Now maybe on some of their really EARLY stuff that dates from when Paul and John first began to incorporate originals into the band he was pretty basic (pun intended)