The Role of Instrumental Technique in Creative Process:

Applying the ‘Canadian School of Double Bass’ to Jazz Performance

Samuel Dobson

This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of

Master of Music (Performance)

Sydney Conservatorium of Music

The University of Sydney

2020

ii

Statement of Originality

This is to certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the content of this thesis is my own

work. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or other purposes.

I certify that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work and

that all the assistance received in preparing this thesis and sources have been acknowledged.

Samuel Dobson

________________________________________

September 30th, 2020

iii

Abstract

Contemporary research exploring embodiment in music has suggested that creative

musical thought is directly linked to a performer’s learnt physical techniques. Within this

strain of discourse, it is understood that an improvising musician’s embodied physical

techniques play a primary role in informing their creative processes. The implications of

this view suggest that subsequent changes or developments to a jazz musician’s physical

technique may fundamentally influence the ways in which musical ideas are conceived

while improvising. This thesis utilises an innovative combination of practice-led

methodologies to explore this phenomenon. At its core, it presents a case study of the

author’s attempt to transition to a new way of playing the bass, informed by Joel

Quarrington’s The Canadian School of Double Bass. This transition is mapped out through

the analysis of improvised arco solos performed over jazz standards. There were a number

of technical developments observed following this practice intervention including

transformations in hand-frame, an increased use of vertical shifts, extended use of register

and improved dexterity. This reformed technical approach affected the physical

accessibility of certain intervallic options and appear to have fundamentally impacted the

conception and construction of melodic content on a cognitive level. Overall, this thesis

aims to challenge the ways in which we analyse the effect of applying new technical

methods within the context of jazz improvisation while setting into play a new kind of auto-

ethnographic enquiry for studies of performance practice.

iv

Acknowledgements

Firstly, I’d like to thank my partner Kate Wadey and all of my family for their unrelenting

love and support throughout this whole process. None of this would have been possible

without each of them in my life.

A big thank you to my supervisor Dr. Christopher Coady for all of his invaluable

guidance, advice and support in helping me plan out, work through and assemble this project.

An extra special thank you to Joel Quarrington for all of his time, advice and tutelage.

His teaching and method truly have had a profound impact on my relationship to the bass, and I

look forward to continuing my journey down this path moving into the future.

A big thank you to all of my bass teachers over the years including Craig Scott, Ron

Philpott, David Clayton, Milica Stefanovic, Craig Herbert, Mark Shelley, Ben Ward, Josef Bistits

and Jaan Pallandi. Also, a very special thank you to Alex Henery for all of his lessons over the

years and for providing much need guidance and advice on this specific project.

Finally, I’d like to acknowledge the financial support of the University of Sydney and the

PPCA in the form of the Albert Scholarships, Sydney Moss Scholarship, the PRSS and the PPCA

Performer’s Trust Foundation. Thank you for helping me make all of this possible!

v

Contents

Acknowledgements iv

List of figures v

Introduction 1

Chapter One: Literature Review 5

Chapter Two: Practice Based Research 27

Chapter Three: Methodology and Method 42

Chapter Four: Experiment Overview 47

Chapter Five: Practitioner-State-of-Play 61

Chapter Six: Intervention 78

Chapter Seven: Documentation and Comparison & Analysis of Outputs 134

Chapter Eight: Conclusions 147

Appendix A: Full Recordings from ‘Documentation’ Phase 152

References 153

vi

List of Figures:

2.1 James McLean’s “Practice/Research Cycle.” 37

3.1 Revised experiment model (linear structure). 45

3.2 Revised experiment model (cyclical structure). 46

5.1 (Video) Binary fingerings. 64

5.2 (Video) Three-note chromatic cells. 64

5.3 (Video) Positional playing or “getting stuck” in positons. 65

5.4 (Video) “Tricks” for moving through positions. 66

5.5 (Video) Increased shifting at slow tempos. 66

5.6 (Video) “Stuck in positions” at fast tempos. 66

5.7 (Video) “Comfortable areas.” 67

5.8 (Video) Horizontal approach in lower positions. 68

5.9 (Video) Use of D and G strings in middle register. 68

5.10 (Video) Use of G string in upper register. 68

5.11 (Video) Intonation problems when shifting and outside safe zones. 72

5.12 (Video) Getting tangled at faster tempos. 72

5.13 (Video) Running out of bow at slow tempos. 72

6.1 “Simandl Style” hand-frame. 82

6.2 Hand at 90° angle. 84

6.3 Hand at 45° angle. 84

6.4 (Video) Vibrato oscillating flat of the pitch at 45° angle. 85

6.5 High left wrist and knuckle (angle one). 85

vii

6.6 High left wrist and knuckle (angle two). 85

6.7 Ballpoint pen markings on Quarrington’s fingertips highlighting his callouses. 86

6.8 Position of the arm balancing in the hanging position. 87

6.9 (Video) “The Move” in neck position. 89

6.10 (Video) “The Move” in thumb position (variation one). 89

6.11 (Video) “The Move” in thumb position (variation two). 89

6.12 (Video) Different sized vertical shifts using “the same” movement. 90

6.13 (Video) Slow and fast vertical shifts, ending with rotation and guided by the ear. 91

6.14 (Video) Shifts resulting in pronounced 45° angle. 91

6.15 (Video) Shifts resulting in “almost imperceptible wave.” 91

6.16 Position of the first finger. 92

6.17 Position of the second finger. 93

6.18 Position of the third finger. 93

6.19 Position of the fourth finger. 94

6.20 (Video) “Scale Progressions” exercise. 95

6.21 Semitone fingered 1-3. 96

6.22 Semitone fingered 2-4. 97

6.23 Tritone fingered 1-3. 97

6.24 Tritone fingered 2-4. 98

6.25 Major third fingered 3-1. 98

6.26 Major third fingered 4-2. 99

6.27 Tone fingered 1-4. 99

viii

6.28 Fifth fingered 1-4. 100

6.29 Minor third fingered 4-1. 100

6.30 (Video) “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position. 101

6.31 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position one). 101

6.32 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position two). 102

6.33 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position three). 102

6.34 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position four). 103

6.35 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position five). 103

6.36 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position six). 103

6.37 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position seven). 103

6.38 (Video) “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position. 104

6.39 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position one). 104

6.40 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position two). 105

6.41 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position three). 105

6.42 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position four). 106

6.43 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position five). 106

6.44 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position six). 107

6.45 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position seven). 107

6.46 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position eight). 108

6.47 Excerpt from Francesco Petracchi’s “Simplified Higher Technique,” demonstrating

various four-note hand frames. 109

6.48 Callous on Quarrington’s thumb. 110

ix

6.49 “Slow Shift and Pivot” original exercise (excerpt). 113

6.50 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Dorian/Aeolian mode). 113

6.51 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Lydian mode). 113

6.52 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Phrygian mode). 114

6.53 Gallery of Quarrington’s fingertips. 115

6.54 Bow grip (before). 118

6.55 Bow grip (after). 118

6.56 Angle of the bass from the front (before). 119

6.57 Angle of the bass from the front (after). 120

6.58 Angle of the bass from the side (before). 121

6.59 Angle of the bass from the side (after). 121

6.60 Stool height before (right) and after (left). 122

6.61 Sitting on stool (before). 123

6.62 Sitting on stool (after). 123

6.63 Height of bass (before). 124

6.64 Height of bass (after). 124

6.65 Left knuckle (before). 125

6.66 Left knuckle (after). 125

6.67 The natural C shape. 126

6.68 Thumb on the back of the fingerboard (before). 127

6.69 Thumb on the back of the fingerboard (after). 127

6.70 Position of the thumb when playing on the E string (before). 128

x

6.71 Position of the thumb when playing on the A string (before). 128

6.72 Position of the thumb when playing on the D string (before). 129

6.73 Position of the thumb when playing on the G string (before). 129

6.74 Position of the thumb when playing on the E string (after). 130

6.75 Position of the thumb when playing on the A string (after). 130

6.76 Position of the thumb when playing on the D string (after). 131

6.77 Position of the thumb when playing on the G string (after). 131

6.78 Position of the thumb when playing in thumb position (before). 132

6.79 Position of the thumb when playing in thumb position (after). 132

7.1 (Video) Three-note hand-frames greater than a tone. 135

7.2 (Video) Binary fingerings greater than a tone. 135

7.3 (Video) Expanded hand-frames in thumb position. 135

7.4 (Video) Various four-note hand-frames. 135

7.5 (Video) Mobile thumb. 136

7.6 (Video) Extended register of thumb position. 136

7.7 (Video) Lines with multiple consecutive shifts. 137

7.8 (Video) Lines which could be played in one position, instead played up the string. 137

7.9 (Video) Lines played up one string, influencing the next idea to start in a new

position. 137

7.10 (Video) Large vertical shifts. 137

7.11 (Video) Large vertical shifts used to relocate to a new area of the bass. 137

7.12 (Video) Middle register. 138

xi

7.13 (Video) Upper register. 138

7.14 (Video) Extreme upper register. 139

7.15 (Video) Melodies played up the octave. 139

7.16 (Video) Use of upper register at fast tempos. 139

7.17 (Video) Extended use of register on the E and A strings. 140

7.18 (Video) Vertical intervals connected using portamento and the ear. 141

7.19 (Video) Relaxed right-hand and wrist. 143

7.20 (Video) Relaxed double-stops. 144

7.21 (Video) Multiple shifts at fast tempos. 144

A.1 Blues for Alice (Charlie Parker). 152

A.2 Along Came Betty (Benny Golson). 152

A.3 After You’ve Gone (Turner Layton & Henry Creamer). 152

A.4 Jean De Fleur (Grant Green). 152

A.5 Monk’s Mood (Thelonious Monk). 152

A.6 Embraceable You (George Gershwin). 152

A.7 Cockroach (Samuel Dobson & Peter Farrar). 152

1

Introduction

Discourse on the role of instrumental technique in improvisational process has

produced a number of contrasting perspectives. A view amongst certain performers and

pedagogues exists suggesting a duality between matters of physical technique and actions

with “creative intent.”1 Within this school of thought, technique is regarded a tool for

translating the creative intentions of the performer onto their instrument. Technique and

creative practices are considered “two separate task categories” and physical techniques

are not regarded as intrinsic to an improviser’s creative outputs.2 In certain contexts, it is

even argued that “mechanical memory can…have many negative implications for the

improvising musician” resulting in “uncreative, inexpressive performers” who are unable to

1 James McLean, “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by

Embodied Music Cognition,” (PhD Diss., The University of Sydney, 2018), 36; Eugene Ball, “The

Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for Improvising Trumpet Players,” (Masters diss.,

Victorian College of the Arts, 2004); John Sloboda et al, “The Role of Practice in the

Development of Performing Musicians,” British Journal of Psychology 87, no. 2 (1996): 287-309;

Christopher Tarr, “Practising jazz performance: An investigation into the process that underpins

optimal instrumental practice in the jazz idiom,” (Masters diss., Western Australian Academy of

Performing Arts, 2016).

2 Sloboda et al, “The Role of Practice in the Development of Performing Musicians,” 290,

quoted in Tarr, “Practising jazz performance,” 15.

2

play “in the moment.” 3 It has been noted that these views can significantly impact the

ways in which performers consider, practice and value the role of physical techniques in

creative practice.4

However, a second strain of scholarly thought exists that challenges these notions

by suggesting that our physical techniques contribute to a complex web of embodied

knowledge. This school of thought regards the body and mind as one system and considers

learned techniques as a deeply integrated, embodied ancillary to our creative intentions.5

3 Tarr, “Practising jazz performance,” 18-19; Kratus, “A developmental Approach to Teaching

Music Improvisation,” 34, quoted in Tarr, “Practising jazz performance,” 16; Antonio Sanchez,

“Good Practice,” interviewed by Craig Macfadyen, Good Practice, 3 January 2013,

https://itsgoodpractice.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/antonio-sanchez/, quoted in Tarr,

“Practising jazz performance,” 16.

4 Sloboda et al, “The Role of Practice in the Development of Performing Musicians,” 290,

quoted in Tarr, “Practising jazz performance,” 15; McLean, “A New Way of Moving,” 50; Ball,

“The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method, 12.

5 Jonathan De Souza, Music at Hand: Instruments, Bodies, and Cognition, (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2017); Vijay Iyer, “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition

With and Without Bodies,” in The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, Volume

1, ed. George E. Lewis and Benjamin Piekut, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 74-90;

Vijay Iyer, “Improvisation, temporality and embodied experience,” Journal of Consciousness

3

Specifically, this research implies that the adoption of new techniques may fundamentally

impact the ways in which an improviser conceives and structures their creative musical

thought.

This practice-based research project aims to explore the relationship between

technique and creative process by presenting my attempt to transition to a new way of

playing the bass, informed by Joel Quarrington’s method The Canadian School of Double

Bass. Through the development of a unique, auto-ethnographic experiment I illustrate how

changes in my technical approach on the double bass impact my creative practice. This is

achieved through the comparative study of performance footage, recorded before and

after a twelve-month practice intervention, used in conjunction with phenomenological

observations and autobiographical information. Using this data, I outline noticeable

transformations in my physical technique and illustrate how these developments can be

linked to changed melodic outputs achieved while soloing over a select repertoire of jazz

standards. In chapter one, I present a literature review of pertinent works offering various

perspectives on the relationship between physical techniques and creative process. In

Studies 11, no. 3-4. (2004): 159-173; McLean, “A New Way of Moving”; Jeff Pressing,

“Improvisation: methods and models,” in Generative Processes in Music: The Psychology of

Performance, Improvisation, and Composition, ed. John Sloboda, (Oxford Scholarship Online:

March 2012); Joti Rockwell, “Banjo Transformations and Bluegrass Rhythm,” Journal of Music

Theory 53, no. 1 (2009): 137-162; David Sudnow, Ways of the Hand: The Organization of

Improvised Conduct, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978).

4

chapter two, I justify my use of the practice-based approach by unpacking the findings and

methodologies of several related practice-based research projects. In chapter three, I

discuss the experiment model used in the current project and in chapter four I unpack the

various components of this model, including academic precedence for each methodological

decision. In chapters five, six and seven I present the results of the various stages of this

experiment. Finally, in chapter eight, I present my conclusions along with suggestions for

further research.

5

Chapter One: Literature Review

Maurice Merleau-Ponty was one of the earliest thinkers to consider the role of the body

in sensory perception in his seminal Phenomenology of Perception.1 Dermot Moran, in his

Introduction to Phenomenology writes that Merleau-Ponty:

Undoubtedly produced the most detailed example of the manner in which

phenomenology can interact with the sciences and the arts to provide a descriptive

account of the nature of human bodily being-in-the-world.2

Merleau-Ponty aligned himself with the phenomenologists, a philosophical movement

which moved away from esoteric thought experiments that questioned the very existence of

reality in an attempt to return “back to the ‘things themselves’,” and to understand the

relationships between subject and object.3 Merleau-Ponty, like a number of his

contemporaries, argued that a subject could not be removed from their context of being-in-the-

world. However Merleau-Ponty considered being-in-the-world an essentially embodied

experience and uniquely focused much of his attention on the “material” or “corporeal” body.4

1 Dermot Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology (London: Routledge, 2000), 391.

2 Ibid., 433.

3 Edmund Husserl, Logical Investigations, (London: Routledge, 2001 [1900/1901]), 168; Moran,

Introduction to Phenomenology, 4-6.

4 Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology, 13.

6

Moran explains “Merleau-Ponty was convinced that our experience of objective things in the

world was deeply conditioned by the kind of perceptual apparatus we have.”5

In other words, for Merleau-Ponty, perception was essentially “a bodily activity” and he

rejected all concepts of a mind-body dualism.6 He argued that perception could not be

separated from the structure or experience of physically being in a body, stating that it was

impossible to “grasp the unity of the object without the mediation of bodily experience.”7

The implications of this view extend beyond merely the seeing, touching, smelling,

etcetera of physical objects to the structuring of conscious thought. As Merleau-Ponty argued,

“consciousness is originally not an ‘I think that’ but rather an ‘I can’,” where “I can” represents

certain potentials available to a subject in relation to an object.8 The scope of the subject’s “I

can” is constantly mediated through the physical structures and abilities of the body and

“spread out [before the subject] like a field of possibilities.”9 This perspective suggests that the

scope of a subject’s conscious thought is not only entangled with the physical structure of their

body, but also with the subject’s embodied technical motor skills. Merleau-Ponty thus suggests

5 Ibid., 430.

6 Dan Zahavi, Phenomenology: The Basics (New York, NY: Routledge, 2019), 12; Moran,

Introduction to Phenomenology, 391.

7 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception (New York, NY: Routledge, 2012), 209.

8 Ibid., 139.

9 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Primacy of Perception, Ed. James Eadie, (IL: Northwestern University

Press, 1964), 162, quoted in, Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology, 428.

7

that the physical body is the lens through which we perceive and interact with the world and

fundamentally the apparatus that shapes the structure of our conscious thought. This view of

perception as an essentially embodied experience suggests that the physical techniques

embedded within a performer may fundamentally impact the ways in which ideas are

conceived within the context of improvised musical performance.

David Sudnow’s Ways of the Hand: The Organization of Improvised Conduct teases out

this idea as it charts out an autoethnographic account of learning to improvise on the piano in a

jazz style. Sudnow’s work is one of the earliest texts to describe the influence of the physical

body on musical thought and improvisational process from a first-person perspective. Changes

in the structure of Sudnow’s musical thought abound as the study progresses. Early in his

development, the author articulates “a lopsidedness between what my hands could do in

principle and in fact do,” suggesting a divide between both the physical and technical

limitations of his hands and a discrepancy between his body and mind.10 With time and

experience Sudnow describes this discrepancy diminishing, offering innumerable examples of

the ways in which his physical developments were impacting his musical thoughts and the

melodies he produced. For example, at a more advanced point in his development, he observes

that “it is not the case… that in doing jazz improvisation I project a sung sound independent of

how the hand finds itself situated,” with “sung sound” here meaning audiated musical

10 David Sudnow, Ways of the Hand: The Organization of Improvised Conduct, (Cambridge,

Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978), 2.

8

content.11 This observation suggests that the improvised melodies audiated by Sudnow, or his

projected sung sounds, were inextricably linked to the notes made accessible through the

physical position of his hands. This is one of countless examples where Sudnow observes his

mind’s “melodic intentionality” being directly related to his hand’s “engagement with

the terrain,” or the piano.12

In discussing these phenomena, Sudnow develops his own term – “melodying” – which

describes his process of creating melodies while improvising.13 “Melodying” is both an audiated

process as well as what he terms a “handful practice,” or a practice entangled in the hand’s

embodied physical processes.14 These observations suggest that, for Sudnow, the process of

audiating or constructing improvised melodies could not be extricated from the physical

positioning of his hand.

Sudnow’s work exemplifies how the physical body can be understood as influential to

the structure of musical ideas conceived while improvising. Ways of the Hand provides first

person perspectives exemplifying Merleau-Ponty’s view of conscious thought as “the mediation

11 Ibid., 73.

12 Ibid., 40; Ibid., 36.

13 Ibid., 42.

14 Ibid., 146.

9

of bodily experience.”15 Sudnow’s observations also suggest that there may be traceable

manifestations of this embodied impact in the melodic outputs of an improvised performance.

Jeff Pressing’s essay Improvisation: Methods and Models further highlights the role of

the physical body in improvisational process by delving into the realms of physiology and

neuropsychology.16 Pressing’s work explores the multitude of processes at play for the

improvising musician and examines the various stages through which new physical techniques

are incorporated into a performer’s embodied knowledge.17

Pressing posits that certain cognitive skills required for musical improvisation may in fact

have “physiological locations,” further supporting the link between cognitive processing and

15 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 209; The phenomenological approach used by

Sudnow foreshadows a popular movement in musical literature whereby personal experiential

insights are used to reveal how musicians learn and develop techniques. These include Barry

Green’s The Inner Game of Music (1986). Kenny Werner’s Effortless Mastery (1996), and

Madeline Bruser’s The Art of Practicing (1997). These works offer the inner workings of

practicing musicians and discuss the various factors at play while learning new skills. These self-

help books aim to improve a musician’s yields while practicing their instrument or learning new

physical techniques.

16 Jeff Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” in Generative Processes in Music: The

Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition, ed. John Sloboda, (Oxford

Scholarship Online: March 2012), 130.

17 Ibid., 139.

10

the physical body.18 His findings suggest that these physical locations can be impacted by learnt

motor skills and he discusses three broad phases of motor skill acquisition recognised in “all

existing theories” surrounding “motor control and skilled performance.”19 The first stage

involves an initial introduction to the new physical techniques or, as Pressing puts it, the

assembly of the “basic movement vocabulary.”20 This is followed by an intermediate stage

where novel gestures are combined commensurate with a “developing cognitive framework.”21

Finally, he describes an advanced stage where “all motor organization functions can be handled

automatically (without conscious attention) and the performer attends almost exclusively to a

higher level of emergent expressive control parameters.”22

This three stage process reveals how new physical techniques are incorporated into a

performer’s embodied knowledge, resulting in a “feeling of automaticity.”23 These findings

appear congruent with Sudnow’s experience of “melodying” as a monism of audiated cognitive

processes coupled with “handful,” physical processes.24 Pressing’s work illustrates that new

physical techniques can be integrated into the embodied knowledge of an improvising musician

18 Ibid., 130.

19 Ibid.,” 139; Ibid., 131.

20 Ibid., 139.

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid.

24 Sudnow, Ways of the Hand, 19.

11

and that, at the final automatic stage, these learnt techniques appear to impact the cognitive

processes of a performer while improvising.

Moving beyond the realm of music, Drew Leder’s The Absent Body expands on how

newly embodied techniques may fundamentally alter what is accessible within a subject’s “field

of possibilities” by suggesting that physical changes in access may impact the conception and

construction of conscious thought.25 Leder’s work explores “all the ways in which the body is

absent” in our embodied experience of being-in-the-world, and unpacks how the acquisition of

physical techniques fundamentally changes our perception of something as accessible.26 As

Leder explains, “the use qualities and accessibility of surrounding objects always refer back to

my own corporeal powers. To see something as reachable... is to implicitly experience my

body’s capacity to reach.”27 The implications of this view suggest that our awareness of

something as accessible can be linked to various experientially absent, embodied physical

processes.

Leder, like Pressing, claims that our “corporeal powers” can be augmented through the

acquisition of new physical techniques and uses learning to swim as an example.28 Similarly to

25 Merleau-Ponty, Primacy of Perception,162, quoted in, Moran, Introduction to

Phenomenology, 428.

26 Drew Leder, The Absent Body, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1990),

Abstract.

27 Ibid., 22-23.

28 Leder, The Absent Body, 30.

12

Pressing’s first-stage assembly of “a basic movement vocabulary,” Leder explains that this first

involves the development of discrete physical processes stating “I am told to cup my hands, lift

my arms from the water, and breathe to one side.” 29 The next stage requires the subject to

“take the plunge,” and combine these discrete actions, similarly described by Pressing as the

second stage of “stringing together the existing movement vocabulary.”30 Leder states that in

this second stage “I consciously monitor my own movements... The problematic nature of these

novel gestures tends to provoke explicit body awareness.”31 Leder, like Pressing, similarly

describes an advanced stage of skill acquisition, stating, “The successful acquisition of a new

ability coincides with a phenomenological effacement of all this. The themization of rules, of

examples, of my own embodiment, falls away once I truly know how to swim.”32

However, this “successful acquisition” does more than trivially add a new action to the

body’s range of movements.33 Leder claims that the embodiment of new skills changes what

the subject perceives as accessible and, by directly referencing the Merleau-Pontian concept of

“I can,” states that the new technique has fundamentally redefined the body’s “actional

fields.”34 To reiterate Leder’s earlier quote, “to see something as reachable... is to implicitly

29 Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” 139; Leder, The Absent Body, 30.

30 Leder, The Absent Body, 31; Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” 139.

31 Ibid., 30-31.

32 Ibid., 31.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid., 31; Ibid., 23.

13

experience my body’s capacity to reach,” and in the example of swimming, one’s ability to swim

across the lake grants access to whatever lies on the other shore.35 Leder explains, “the lake

outside my window... looks different than in my preswimming days, when it could not be

crossed and offered no access. [emphasis added]”36

Leder’s work illustrates that the acquisition of physical skills and techniques

fundamentally impact what a subject perceives as accessible. The implication of this within the

context of melodic improvisation is that the acquisition of physical technique is a likely

influencer on the range of melodic ideas accessible to a performer.

Wendy Hargreaves’ Generating ideas in jazz improvisation: Where theory meets

practice, looks more specifically at “idea generation” and offers examples of physical technique

functioning as an influencer to an improviser’s ideas.37 Hargreaves identifies and defines three

“sources” from which jazz performers derive their ideas; “Strategy-Generated,” “Audiation-

Generated,” and “Motor-Generated.”38 Hargreaves defines these three categories as discrete

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid., 32.

37 Wendy Hargreaves, “Generating ideas in jazz improvisation: Where theory meets practice,”

International Journal of Music Education 30, no. 4 (2012): 354.

38 Ibid., 359; Ibid., 360; Ibid., 362.

14

sources of either conscious or unconscious design with the aim of affecting “contemporary

educational practice in jazz improvisation.”39

The primary factor distinguishing Hargreaves’ three sources can be found in their

conscious or unconscious formulation. For example, the Strategy-Generated category is the

only source defined by Hargreaves as “consciously formulated.”40 Some examples of Strategy-

Generated ideas include the intentional implementation of rhythmic devices, chromaticisms,

specific intervals, licks and chord scales, and Hargreaves states that these devices can be pre-

planned and/or taught.41 On the other hand, Audiation-Generated and Motor-Generated ideas

39 Ibid., 359-363; Ibid., 354.

40 Ibid., 359.

41 Ibid., 360; There are a number of jazz method books which explore these teachable, strategy-

generated ideas. Some aim to be comprehensive guides to jazz improvisation, for example

Mark Levine’s The Jazz Theory Book (1995), or Hal Crook’s How to Improvise: An Approach to

Practicing Improvisation (2015), some explore certain specific aspects of harmonic theory such

Dave Liebman’s A Chromatic Approach to Jazz Harmony and Melody (1991), or the various

different books in Jerry Bergonzi’s Inside Improvisation Series (1994), while others focus on

building vocabulary through the study of licks and patterns for example Jerry Coker’s Patterns

for Jazz (1970) or Yusef LaTeef’s Repository of Scales and Melodic Patterns (1981). These books,

and many more, focus on these various teachable aspects of jazz performance as described by

Hargreaves above. While the importance of technical facility is often emphasised, there are no

15

are said to unconsciously present themselves to a performer in the form of either audiated

material or “unconsciously triggered movements” respectively. 42 Audiation-Generated ideas

are said to unconsciously appear to a performer “in a manner that the brain mentally ‘hears’

and processes without sound being present,” whereas Motor-Generated ideas manifest in the

physical actions of the performer, as Hargreaves writes “here positioning or movement is the

primary, unconscious trigger.”43 Hargreaves adds that while Audiation-Generated and Motor-

Generated ideas can be affected by the study of “licks, patterns, scales, and solos” she insists

that the surfacing of these influences while improvising “occurs without conscious direction,”

and in this way are not Strategy-Generated. 44 She further adds that both Strategy-Generated

and Motor-Generated ideas “do not require prior audiation,” however there is an implication

that they may be pre-heard.45

While Hargreaves defines these three sources as discrete, she acknowledges the

potential for “overlapping domains” in her conclusions, stating that “the arrival at three

discrete sources of idea generation is by no means the limit of possibilities.”46 Moreover she

references suggesting that physical techniques may fundamentally inform the way that a jazz

musician conceives their ideas while improvising.

42 Ibid., 362.

43 Ibid., 360; Ibid., 362.

44 Ibid., 361.

45 Ibid., 362.

46 Ibid., 365.

16

adds “that a synthesis of the sources may occur in the later stages of development,” suggesting

that this concept of discrete sources may only apply to the earlier stages of jazz education.47

Hargreaves work suggests that an improviser’s ideas may originate from a variety of

sources, both consciously and unconsciously formulated. Furthermore, her conclusions

acknowledge that, at a more advanced stage, these sources may exist in a state of flux. These

views imply that changes in physical technique may not merely effect the execution of Motor-

Generated ideas, but may also have a significant impact on both Audiation-Generated and

Strategy-Generated ideas as well.

This view of improvisational ideas as the product of interplaying sources is typified in

much of the work of Vijay Iyer, whose research explores the various facets underlying our

embodied experience. His essay, Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition

With and Without Bodies, explores the various aspects of embodiment in improvisation and

emphsises that “the body, the brain, and the mind” should be considered a single,

interconnected system.48 Iyer supports the importance of the physical body within

improvisational process and his research has proved pivotal in bringing together the worlds of

embodied cognition and musical performance.

47 Ibid.

48 Vijay Iyer, “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition With and Without

Bodies,” in The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, Volume 1, ed. George E.

Lewis and Benjamin Piekut, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 76.

17

Iyer situates his work within “the paradigm of embodied cognition,” a movement within

cognitive science responding to the mind-body dualism suggested by 17th century philosopher

René Descartes.49 Iyer explains:

The paradigm of embodied cognition emerged in the late 1980s as a corrective response

to the Cartesian “dualist” theories of mind that had prevailed in cognitive science since

the field’s inception in the mid-twentieth century. Dualism held that the mind exists in a

realm separate from the brain—that is, that the mind could be understood as “the

software” and the brain and body as “the hardware.” The dualist paradigm known as

“cognitivism” thereby presupposed that cognition was a kind of rule-based computation

that could happen in any machine using the same rules, and that there was therefore

nothing special about the bodies that housed our brains.50

Iyer further explains that the paradigm of embodied cognition, the origins of which can

be traced to the work of Merleau-Ponty, radically reconsidered the role of the body in

cognition:

Theories of embodiment hold that the body, the brain, and the mind must be

understood as one system, and that the brain is an organ optimized for producing motor

(i.e., bodily) output in response to sensory stimuli. 51

49 Ibid.

50 Ibid.

51 Ibid.

18

Iyer’s explanation of Cartesian Dualism and the “corrective response” of embodied

cognition links intimately to many of the ideas presented so far in this literature review, in

particular the works of Merleau-Ponty, Sudnow and Leder.52 These works all exemplify

different ways in which “the body, the brain, and the mind” can be understood as a unified

system, highlighting the various impacts of the physical body on musical thought.53

Iyer’s work describes the complex interplay of physical, social and cultural factors

behind the “patterns of behavior” employed by musicians in the act of improvisation.54

Rather than delineating discrete origins or sources of improvised ideas, Iyer suggests a

mélange of embodied factors, including aspects of the physical body, motor skills and

culture.55 These views reveal that “music cognition should be understood as intimately tied in

with the body and its physical and sociocultural environment” and highlighted the need to

move away from antiquated dualist views both of mind and body as well as creativity and

physical technique.56

Jonathan De Souza’s Music at Hand continues to explore the role of embodiment in

creative musical practice and further acknowledges the interplay of “techniques and

52 Ibid.

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid., 75.

55 Ibid.

56 Ibid., 76.

19

technologies” as an inextricable constituent of musical thought.57 Music at Hand is a collection

of essays which bring together the various aspects of physical technique, creative thought, idea

generation, and embodied situatedness at play in musical practice, including examples of the

ways in which “the acquisition of instrumental technique... affects the ways that players

perceive, understand, and imagine music [emphasis added].”58 As a result of his research De

Souza concludes that “musical knowledge is not grounded in bodies alone, but in an interplay of

techniques and technologies” further claiming that a “player’s experience is not simply

embodied but also technical.”59

De Souza explores examples of this “interplay of techniques and technologies” in

creative practice in his essay Beethoven’s Prosthesis, where he discusses Beethoven’s practice

of composing at the piano even in his deafness.60 The physical structure of the piano and

Beethoven’s technical relationship to it appeared to be intrinsically linked to his aural

imagination. De Souza states that this continued use of instruments while composing “connects

Beethoven’s bodily actions and his inner hearing... [resonating] with arguments that present

musical experience as essentially embodied.”61 De Souza concludes:

57 Jonathan De Souza, Music at Hand: Instruments, Bodies, and Cognition, (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2017), 2.

58 Ibid.

59 Ibid., 2; Ibid., 6.

60 Ibid., 2; Ibid., 6.

61 Ibid., 7.

20

Beethoven’s mind was [therefore] integrated with his hands, his tools, and a broader

musical world. This means that Beethoven’s imagination, which might have been

understood as an instance of purest interiority, instead shows how interiority and

exteriority are irreducibly entangled.62

Beethoven’s Prosthesis highlights the entangled flux of sources and embodied processes

which were at play in Beethoven’s creative musical thought. De Souza’s work further illustrates

the difficulty of separating a musician’s internal creative processes from the ways in which

physical techniques, bodies and instruments interact.

Turning now more specifically to performance practices in jazz, there have been a

number of research projects which have investigated this interaction of techniques,

technologies and musical thought in the outputs of established jazz improvisers. One such

study, Steven Bright’s Red Mitchell: Tuning in Fifths and the Walking Bassline, compares Red

Mitchell’s improvised basslines before and after his change from fourths to a fifths tuning.63

Bright transcribes and analyses several of Mitchell’s performances either side of Mitchell’s

transition and notices a number of discernible differences in his improvised outputs. For

example:

Mitchell’s use of the upper range of the bass in his lines increased in fifths tuning. What

makes this finding significant is that even though the change in tuning from fourths to

62 Ibid., 27.

63 Ibid., 2.

21

fifths expands the range of the bass by two whole tones in the lower register and one

tone in the higher register, Mitchell’s bass lines expanded into the octave C5 to B5. This

range is not found in the three recordings in fourths.64

Here we can see that a change in tuning impacted Mitchell’s use of register beyond the

extended range afforded by the change in tuning. Furthermore, upper registers which were

available to Mitchell in both tunings, were exploited to a greater extent in the new tuning

system. Bright suggests that these minor changes in the bass’ overall range acted as a

“springboard” for Mitchell to access different registers of the instrument, highlighting the

relationship between improvised imagination, technique and technology.65

Bright’s findings also reveal that, within the context of the double bass, the position of

the hand on the fingerboard allows different notes to “fall under the bassist’s fingers” further

impacting a performer’s creative decision making.66 He suggests that this was another factor

effected by the change in tuning:

The increase in pitch range can be linked to the left hand positions Mitchell adopted

once he changed to fifths tuning. The fifth position on a fifths tuned bass places the

64 Stephen Bright, “Red Mitchell: Tuning in Fifths and the Walking Bass Line,” (Masters Diss.,

University of Toronto, 2013), 56.

65 Ibid., 39.

66 Ibid., 56.

22

bassist's hand position further up the fingerboard. The notes that fall under the bassist's

fingers are higher in pitch than on a fourths tuned bass.67

Beyond these changes in register there were a number of other surprising

transformations observed in Mitchell’s improvisations. These included “constructing longer

phrase lengths,” use of “larger melodic intervals” and an increased use of double stops.68

Bright’s findings highlight some of the ways Mitchell’s improvisational approach was

impacted by this change in tuning while suggesting that these differences extended into diverse

realms than could not be explained simply by the extended range of the bass. It appears that

there was a fundamental shift in Mitchell’s improvisational approach, reflected in his

improvised outputs. The technical adaptations made by Mitchell in order to navigate this

altered instrument resulted in changed improvised outputs further highlighting the ways in

which “musical knowledge is not grounded in bodies alone, but in an interplay of techniques

and technologies.”69

Another research project exploring the function of instrumental technique in creative

process is James Dean’s Pat Metheny’s Finger Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar

Improvisation which analyses jazz guitartist Pat Metheny’s physical and technical approach

while soloing in order to investigate “the relationship between instrumental technique and

67 Ibid.

68 Ibid., 57; Ibid., 42; Ibid., 44.

69 De Souza, Music at Hand, 2.

23

improvisation.”70 Dean presents fragments of Metheny’s solos transcribed from live

performance footage in an attempt to draw meaningful correlations between Metheny’s

“physical movements” and his “creative approach at particular stages of the improvisation.”71

Dean’s analysis is based on transcriptions from filmed performances of Metheny’s

improvisation. Dean explains that the use of video footage was essential for analysis of this

type, “in transcribing the improvisations as they are both heard and seen, Metheny’s technique

is presented as fairly and as accurately as is possible from this type of footage, in order that

some meaningful conclusions might be drawn.”72A benefit of this methodology is that it most

accurately portrays the technique of the performer and Dean suggests that transcriptions

without the aid of visuals are “in danger of presenting the preferred technique of the

transcriber, rather than the player.”73

Furthermore, Dean suggests that the necessity of video footage in studies such as this

may also be linked to the idiosyncratic structure of stringed instruments. He explains, “The

same sequence of notes can be played in a variety of ways, using different strings and frets,

leading to differing combinations of left hand fingerings [and] fret board positioning.”74 As such,

70 James Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar

Improvisation,” Jazz Perspectives 8, no. 1 (2014): 45.

71 Ibid.

72 Ibid., 49.

73 Ibid.

74 Ibid., 48.

24

Dean suggests that transcriptions derived from audio alone may result in “speculative” and

“possibly misleading” fingerings.75 One reason for this specific focus on fingerings and physical

locations on the fingerboard is suggested by findings from previous studies, presented here by

Dean, which reveal that “it is evident that ideas which fall under the fingers play a discernible

role in improvisation.”76

This concept of certain ideas “falling under the fingers” and impacting the improvised

outputs of a performance is further supported by Dean’s results.77 Dean categorizes a number

of Metheny’s unique physical techniques such as the use of “Transitional Phrases” and “Pivot

Notes” to “play through positions,” and/or “transition from one position on the neck to

another,” impacting the “links between musical ideas or phrases.”78 These findings illustrate

ways in which Metheny’s physical movements and techniques can be linked to his musical

thought, revealed in his melodic outputs while soloing. They also suggest that, in the context of

stringed instruments, specific finger routes resulting in different physical locations on the

fingerboard may also impact an improviser’s imagination by effecting what ideas “fall under the

fingers.”79

75 Ibid.

76 Rob Van Der Bliek, “Wes Montgomery: A Study of Coherence in Jazz Improvisation,”

Jazzforschung/Jazz Research 23 (1991): 153, quoted in Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes,” 48.

77 Ibid.

78 Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes,” 58; Ibid., 57.

79 Van Der Bliek, “Wes Montgomery,” 153, quoted in Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes,” 48.

25

Dean’s study concludes that physical instrumental techniques appeared to be playing a

crucial role in Metheny’s “creative approach at particular stages of the improvisation.”80 This

study further illustrates the growing interest in understanding the impact of embodied physical

process on the imagination, supporting the view that “musical knowledge is not grounded in

bodies alone, but in an interplay of techniques and technologies.”81

Here I have presented a cross-section of academia investigating the various embodied

and technical factors which influence the construction of musical thought and creative process.

Merleau-Ponty posited that we could not separate sensory perception or conscious thought

from our material body, and Sudnow demonstrated how this physical situatedness impacted his

interior musical process while improvising. Pressing and Leder illustrated how new techniques

could be embodied, further suggesting that the acquisition of these new motor skills may

impact our concept of access, fundamentally shifting the lived experience of being in that body.

Furthermore, Hargreaves and Iyer emphasised that musical ideas were the result of several

conscious and unconscious embodied factors, influenced by a mix of learnt musical theory,

physical techniques and cultural situatedness. De Souza’s work highlighted how embodied

processes were also inextricably entangled with “techniques and technologies,” and that

musical thought was in fact a byproduct of this miscellany of these factors.82 Finally, Bright and

Dean’s research exemplified these various aspects at play through the analysis of several jazz

80 Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes,” 45.

81 De Souza, Music at Hand, 2.

82 Ibid.

26

musicians improvisational outputs and suggested how these outputs where impacted by the

performer’s physical and technical relationship with their instruments. From this literature it

can be gleaned than an improvising musician’s embodied physical techniques appear to play a

primary role in informing their creative process. These perspectives have inspired growing

interest amongst performers and pedagogues alike and can be seen reflected in a growing

number of practice-based research projects, outlined in the following chapter.

27

Chapter Two: Practice Based Research

Interest in the role of physical techniques in creative process can be seen in a burgeoning

number of practice-based research projects on this topic. Given the complex interplay of factors

involved in creative process, and the nebulous task of accessing interior perspectives, there is

still much unknown about the various specific impacts of techniques on creative process.

However, practice-based research has made important steps towards meeting these demands

by using an eclectic range of methodological approaches, revealing first-person practitioner

perspectives. As such, practice-based research has proved important for elucidating various

facets of the function of physical techniques in creative process.

Eugene Ball in his dissertation The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for

Improvising Trumpet Players, investigates “the perceived split between technique and creativity

as reflected in trumpet methods” and the implications of this view on the way trumpet

technique is taught and practiced.1 He asks:

How has the division between the technical and creative components in instrumental

instruction come to be almost axiomatic? What has led to the notion that technique is

something that serves merely to facilitate, yet remain separate from, musical ideas?2

1 Eugene Ball, “The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for Improvising Trumpet Players,”

(Masters diss., Victorian College of the Arts, 2004), 2.

2 Ibid., 12.

28

Ball discusses the historical context of this “technique/creativity dichotomy” and turns

to pedagogical resources and trumpet methods in an attempt to rethink how technique is

taught and practiced in preparation for improvisation.3 He begins firstly with “A Review of

Existing Trumpet Methods” followed by “A Review of the Demands of Improvisation” and finally

a synthesis of these two approaches in “The Adaptation of Existing Exercises.”4 In these

adaptations he alters the structure of existing technical exercises to better meet the needs of

the improvising trumpeter. He suggests what he calls “primary level adaptations” or the

refiguring of technical methods to utilise scales and modes pertinent to the jazz improviser, and

then “secondary level adaptations” which attempts to apply an improvisational approach to the

execution of technical exercises.5

While the aims of this research project were primarily focused on impacting pedagogical

methods, Ball’s practice-led methodology also revealed the effect of this reconfigured technical

approach on his own performance practice. In his conclusions Ball states, “when performing

during this time, I felt a stronger connection with the act of improvising, including a greater

confluence of technique and creativity.”6 Ball’s observation suggests that this reconfigured

approach to matters of technique had a noticeable impact on his improvisational process.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid., 19; Ibid., 27; Ibid., 31.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid., 57.

29

Ball’s research outlines the historical context responsible for the “technique/creativity

dichotomy” which the writing of Merleau-Ponty, Leder, Iyer and De Souza’s work were all

directly responding to.7 Rather than considering a dualism between the mind and body, or

technique and creativity, all of these works suggest that “the body, the brain, and the mind

must be understood as one system” and Ball’s recontextualisation of his technical practice was

a further reaction to dualist views on technique and creative process.8 He articulates the ways

this divergence between technique and creativity led to a pedagogical imbalance, offering his

reconfigured approach to studying technique as a potential solution. Importantly, Ball’s

approach appears to suggest the necessity of practicing matters of technique in context. Much

like Leder’s description of the discrete actions which collectively surmounted to swimming, the

successful acquisition of a technical skill requires that one “take the plunge,” or apply the “basic

movement vocabulary” in context, in order to reach the final stage of “automaticity” where a

newly embodied skill can impact a performer’s embodied sense of access.9 Ball’s work

7 Ibid., 12.

8 Vijay Iyer, “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition With and Without

Bodies,” in The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, Volume 1, ed. George E.

Lewis and Benjamin Piekut, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 76; Ibid., 12.

9 Drew Leder, The Absent Body, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1990), 31; Jeff

Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” in Generative Processes in Music: The

Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition, ed. John Sloboda, (Oxford

Scholarship Online: March 2012), 139.

30

highlights an interest and need amongst performers and pedagogues to reconsider the function

of technique and technical practice in the creative process. Furthermore, Ball’s project

exemplifies the appropriateness of a practice-led approach in gleaning performer oriented

perspectives on this relationship.

Moving from pedagogy to performance, Monika Kwiatkowska Technical Exercises for

Double Bass: A Study of Selected Methods and Their Effect on the Development of Performance

Technique explores a number of “technical exercises and method books used by double bassists

to develop their technique” in order to assess their varying impact on the performance of two

double bass concertos.10 In this work Kwiatkowska records these concertos over a number of

months and links specific transformations in her performance to technical knowledge gleaned

from the various methods she studied.

Kwiatkowska writes that over the course of the twentieth century “double bass

performance technique was highly developed,” and her project begins by collating various

double bass methods taught and studied internationally.11 Performers and pedagogues from 28

countries were surveyed to develop a list of the most commonly studied methods.12 Based on

10 Monika Kwiatkowska, “Technical Exercises for Double Bass: A Study of Selected Methods and

Their Effect on the Development of Performance Technique,” (Masters Diss., The University of

Gothenburg, 2016), abstract.

11 Ibid.

12 Kwiatkowska’s thesis lists a significant number of technical bass method published since the

beginning of the 19th century including the works of Wenzel Hause, Giovanni Bottesini, Franz

31

the responses to these questionnaires she developed her own list of methods and exercises she

then used for the practical component of her study.

Kwiatkowska’s practice-based methodology involved a comparison of solo

performances, filmed before and after different periods of technical intervention, in order to

analyse changes in her performance technique. The pieces were initially performed solo and

then later with piano accompaniment and the recordings were retrospectively analysed for

transformations in certain technical aspects of her performance.13

Kwiatkowska’s findings show that each period of technical intervention had differing

and traceable impacts on her performance outputs revealed in her rhythmic feel, phrasing,

intonation, string crossing, shifting, quality of sound as well as speed and agility.14 However she

observes the methods with the most “groundbreaking” impact on her performance were those

Simandl, Francois Rabbath, Ludwig Streicher, Francesco Petracchi, Klaus Trumpf, Gary Karr and

Eugene Levinson. (Kwiatkowska, 2016) These method books all focus on specific technical

aspects of playing the bass, some focusing on left-hand techniques, arco techniques, developing

the upper register of the instrument, the exploration of etudes and standard classical

repertoire, or some combination of these various elements. However, none of these works can

be said to explore how these techniques inform the creative process of the performer. Rather,

they focus on how the development technique will develop the classical musician’s virtuosity,

expressivity and ability to interpret material from scores.

13 Ibid., 52-53.

14 Ibid., 46-54.

32

which radically reconfigured the frame of her left hand, extending the register of thumb

position and using all of the left-hand finger, namely the methods of François Rabbath and

Francesco Petracchi.15 She reports that performances following the periods where she studied

these methods were the most profoundly affected noting that the “modern way of using thumb

positions and pivot technique of the left hand” combined with these method’s approaches of

“using all fingers” resulted in “a greater ease of dealing with hard passages, intonations and

shifts.”16

While Kwiatkowska’s work illustrates the impact of contemporary technical methods on

her performance technique, the performances in question were derived from scores and as

such cannot be discussed in terms of how observed transformations in technique inform the

melodic outcomes of the performance. Kwiatkowska also states that her study does not

“discuss techniques used in jazz” which makes it difficult to relate to improvised performance

15 Ibid., 46.

16 Ibid., 46; Ibid., 40; Ibid., 54.

33

practice.17 Unfortunately, this exclusive focus on the composed repertoire pervades most

research exploring contemporary technical methods for the double bass.18

Kwiatkowska’s work exemplifies the varying impacts of differing technical approaches

on the outcomes of her performance practice. Most importantly, her findings reveal that the

17 Ibid., 2; The absence of jazz methods and techniques discussed in Kwiatkowska’s work is not

due to a lack of technical methods for the jazz bass. There are many including Rufus Reid’s The

Evolving Bassist (1974) and Evolving Upward (1977), Ron Carter’s Ron Carter’s Comprehensive

Bass Method (1998), Ray Brown’s Ray Brown’s Bass Method (1999), and John Goldsby’s Jazz

Bowing Techniques for the Improvising Bassist (1990), and The Jazz Bass Book (2002), just to

name a few. Much like their classical counterparts, these jazz methods aim to develop certain

technical aspects of bass playing alongside other skills particular to jazz performance. These

include building walking bass lines, soloing over harmonic structures and exercises for

developing improvisational skills in general. While a number of these works do acknowledge

the necessity of developing certain physical techniques in order to best execute ideas while

improvising, none specifically addresses how these techniques may in fact inform these ideas.

18 For example: Samuel Cross, David Neubert, “New Left Hand Techniques of François Rabbath,”

American String Teacher 38, no. 4 (1988): 67-71; Eric Hilgenstieler, “The Application of

Contemporary Double Bass Left Hand Techniques Applied in the Orchestra Repertoire,” (DMA

diss., University of Southern Mississippi, 2014); Cody Rex, “A Systematic Approach to Double

Bass Fingerings for the Classroom String Teacher,” (D.M.A. diss., The University of North

Carolina, 2015).

34

technical methods which radically reconfigured her left-hand frame and her use of the thumb

had the most profound effect on her ability to execute previously problematic passages,

allowing her to more flexibly attend to what Pressing described as “emergent expressive

control parameters.”19 Kwiatkowska’s findings exemplify the perspectives of Pressing and Leder

by showing how the acquisition of new technical approaches fundamentally changed the

accessibility of certain previously problematic passages, transforming her relationship with the

concertos she had been studying. Also, by highlighting the plethora of contemporary technical

methods published for double bass over the last century, this work illuminates the current

transitory state of technical development in which the double bass resides. Finally, her project

exemplifies how a practice-based approach can be used to elucidate the impacts of technical

intervention on performative outcomes, furthering our understanding of the “interplay of

techniques and technologies” from which “musical knowledge” is derived.20

Turning now specifically to improvised performance practice, James McLean’s A New

Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by Embodied Music Cognition,

explores how a reconfigured perspective on physical processes can be used to “instigate

creative development within the practice of an improvising drummer.”21 Through the adoption

19 Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” 139.

20 Jonathan De Souza, Music at Hand: Instruments, Bodies, and Cognition, (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2017), 2.

21 James McLean, “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by

Embodied Music Cognition,” (PhD Diss., The University of Sydney, 2018), iii.

35

of a specially devised practice-led methodology, McLean’s work offers first-hand practitioner

perspectives on the relationship between his established physical techniques and his creative

process. He writes:

This research examines the role of situated body motion within my own practice as an

improvising drummer. I argue that body movements can be utilised to form both

deliberate generative processes within solo drumset improvisation, and as a set of

parameters through which to understand broader drumset practice.22

McLean reflects that, before embarking on this research project, he held an essentially

dualist view of physical technique in relation to his creative process, and recalls how this

impacted his practice:

Previously, I had considered the physical minutiae of drumset technique to be

categorically distinct from the creative musical considerations. Exercises to develop

aspects of physical technique were a regular part of my instrumental practice routine,

but they were separate from exercises or work with creative intent.23

He further explains that this perceived dualism between the mind’s creative

imagination, or ideas born of the “auditory mode,” and ideas derived from physically embodied

techniques also impacted the ways he valued those ideas:

22 Ibid., 2.

23 Ibid., 36.

36

I realised that I too had valued improvisational ideas born of the auditory mode as being

inherently more musical than those born of the spatio-motor mode.24

McLean discusses how his views on this matter transformed after his introduction to the

work of Vijay Iyer and the field of embodied music cognition.25 This field of research had a

significant impact on McLean’s process and was the catalyst for his shift in perspective. As a

result, this interplay of physical embodied knowledge and creative output became the primary

focus of his research.

In order to explore this relationship McLean developed his own practice-led

methodology “The Practice/Research Cycle,” derived from Hazel Smith and Roger Dean’s

“Iterative Cyclic Web.”26 McLean’s “Practice/research cycle” involves four phases, videlicet

“theorisation, creative development, documentation, and analysis of outputs.”27 McLean

explains that this first phase of theorisation may include “the development of new theory, the

testing of new theoretical models, or the gathering of theory from existing literature.”28 The

creative development phase is then comprised of “any of the multitude of processes

24 Ibid., 50.

25 Ibid., 2.

26 Ibid.; Hazel Smith and Roger Dean, “Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice - Towards

the Iterative Cyclic Web,” in Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative Arts,

edited by Roger Dean and Hazel Smith, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009), 1-38.

27 McLean, “A New Way of Moving,” 2.

28 Ibid., 4.

37

practitioner-researchers use in the development or creation of their works.”29 The

documentation phase involves any means of recording or documenting creative outputs

“producing research data for analysis,” and finally the analysis of outputs which “comprises any

process by which outputs of creative practice are analysed or otherwise reflected upon.”30

The Practice/Research Cycle is a flexible methodology which allows for the influence of

emergent outcomes. Also, McLean emphasisies that his method can be cyclic in structure so

that the final analysis of outputs can be used to inform further stages of theorisation etcetera

(see figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 James McLean’s “Practice/Research Cycle.”31

Utilising this methodology, Mclean identifies the impactful role embodied knowledge

29 Ibid., 5.

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid., 4.

38

plays on his creative process and develops “an original taxonomy for classifying types of

individual and combined movement cycles as applied to the drumset.”32 McLean uses these

categorised physical movements as a creative catalyst, varying, combining and layering them in

a process he calls “somatic parameter layering.”33 This process is used as a generative tool for

new creative work which Mclean retrospectively analyses.

While McLean’s results are distinctively drum focused, his findings support the view that

“musical knowledge is not grounded in bodies alone, but in an interplay of techniques and

technologies,” and illustrates the importance of practitioner perspectives in understanding this

interplay in practice.34 Finally, his development of the Practice/research cycle offers a useful

methodological framework for future research projects in this area.

Here we see a cross section of practice-led research projects exploring the complex

relationship between technique, technology and the construction of musical thought in

pedagogical, classical and improvisational contexts.35 These practice-based projects exemplify a

32 Ibid., iii.

33 Ibid., 72.

34 De Souza, Music at Hand, 2.

35 These three exemplar projects are by no means an exhaustive list of current practice-based

research considering the relationship between technique, technology and the construction of

creative musical thought. There are countless other practice-based research projects probing

various elements of this interplay including Simon Barker’s Korea and the Western Drumset:

Scattering Rhythms (2015) which discusses certain Korean cultural influences and musical

39

number of themes unearthed in the literature review, supporting the view of embodied

technical motor-skills as intrinsically linked with creative performance practice. Ball’s research

provided the historical context for the so-called “technique/creativity dichotomy,” illustrating

the negative impact of this view on pedagogical practices in improvisational study.36

Furthermore, Ball’s research supports Leder’s view on the necessity of applying technical skills

in context if they are to truly impact a performer’s sense of access and their creative practice.

Kwiatkowska’s research exemplifies how the acquisition of differing technical approaches had

unique impacts on several of Pressing’s so-called “emergent expressive control parameters”

including rhythmic feel, phrasing, intonation, string crossing, shifting, quality of sound as well as

practices on Barker’s technical/creative relationship with the drumset, Steven Barry’s Blueprints

and Vignettes: Pitch-class sets, Serialism and Intervallicism and the Integration of Systematic

and Intuitive Music Making (2017) which explores the impacts of employing various 20th

century compositional techniques on his creative practice, Thomas Botting’s Developing a

Personal Vocabulary for Solo Double Bass Through Assimilation of Extended Techniques and

Preparations (2018) which investigates a number of extended techniques and their effect on his

creative process and Phillip Slater’s The Dark Pattern: Towards a constraints-led approach to

jazz trumpet (2020) which unpacks the impact of environment on creative practice. These

works, and many more, explore the interplay between technique and creative process while

further highlighting the usefulness of the practice-based approach in this field.”

36 Ball, “The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method,” 12.

40

speed and agility.37 Moreover, Kwiatkowska’s work highlights the demand for research

exploring contemporary technical methods for double bass. McLean’s thesis traces the journey

of an individual transitioning from a dualist perspective on technique and creativity to one

informed by embodied music cognition. Reminiscent of Sudnow’s view of “melodying” as a

monism of physical and mental processes, McLean harnesses his physical positioning and

“movement cycles,” using them as a catalyst for generating and classifying creative content.38

Overall, these practice-led projects exemplify the different ways that “musical knowledge is not

grounded in bodies alone, but in an interplay of techniques and technologies.”39 Furthermore,

they support Merleau-Ponty, Sudnow, Leder, Iyer and De Souza’s view that “the body, the

brain, and the mind must be understood as one system” suggesting that the scope of an

individual’s creative processes are not only entangled with the physical structure of the body,

but also learnt technical motor skills.40

Using an innovative combination of these practice-led methodologies, this project

focuses on the impacts of technical intervention on improvisational process by observing the

confluence of pre-established techniques, the introduction of new techniques and

transformations in my own creative process. In chapters three and four I set out my bespoke

practice-led methodology before detailing my transition to a new way of playing the bass,

37 Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” 139.

38 Sudnow, Ways of the Hand, 19; McLean, “A New Way of Moving,” iii.

39 De Souza, Music at Hand, 2.

40 Iyer, “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition,” 76.

41

informed by Joel Quarrington’s The Canadian School of Double Bass. Transformations in my

improvisational process and melodic outputs are mapped out through the comparative analysis

of improvised arco solos before and after the period of technical intervention. The before

profile, intervention period and after profile for my experiment are unpacked in detail in

chapters five, six, and seven respectively.

42

Chapter Three: Methodology and Method

The overall structure of my experiment was derived from James McLean’s Practice/Research

Cycle, altered slightly to best meet the specific needs of this project. This updated model has

been broken into the following five stages: Theorisation, Practitioner-State-of-Play,

Intervention, Documentation, and Comparison and Analysis of Outputs.

Theorisation

Much like McLean’s original model, the Theorisation stage of my experiment included

“the development of new theory, the testing of new theoretical models, or the gathering of

theory from existing literature.”1 The preceding literature review was the product of this phase.

During this phase I also considered the method I would explore in my intervention and made

preliminary plans for how I would structure my practice time.

Practitioner-State-of-Play

This additional stage was included as my experiment involved before and after

comparisons. The purpose of this phase was to ascertain the before-profile of my established

physical and mental processes prior to my intervention. This included information detailing my

technical background with the bass, recent examples of my playing and insights into my

experience of engaging with the creation of this work. These experiential insights were gleaned

through spoken and written reflections and commentaries, later coded for emergent themes.

1 James McLean, “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by

Embodied Music Cognition,” (PhD Diss., The University of Sydney, 2018), 4.

43

This autobiographical information, documented examples of creative outputs and coded

experiential observations were combined to form a before-profile, or the Practitioner-State-of-

Play. This profile was later used as a point of comparison in the final Comparison and Analysis of

Outputs.

Intervention

Closely tied to McLean’s original Creative Development, this phase incorporated “any of

the multitude of processes practitioner-researchers use in the development or creation of their

works.”2 My reason for retitling this phase was to further include seemingly un-creative

interventions which may be used for assessing the relationship between a certain phenomenon

or activity and a practitioner’s craft. For example, a performer may wish to explore the impacts

of a change in practice environment, or engage with seemingly unrelated physical activities, or

make adjustments to techniques or technologies influencing their engagement with their

practice. For this reason, I re-titled this stage Intervention as it more flexibly incorporated

activities which may not directly relate to “the development or creation of their works.”3

Documentation

This stage was unchanged from McLean’s original model, outlined as follows:

2 Ibid., 5.

3 Ibid.

44

The documentation phase comprises processes by which creative practice is

documented, producing research data for analysis. In many cases, this will be the point

at which creative ideas are corralled into discrete creative works or texts, however this

is not essential so long as data is produced… Potential research outputs from this phase

are the creative works themselves.4

Comparison and Analysis of Outputs

Similarly, this phase was closely tied to McLean’s original Analysis of Outputs:

The analysis of outputs phase comprises any process by which outputs of creative

practice are analysed or otherwise reflected upon.5

However, my analysis primarily focused on points of difference in the Documentation

phase, in contrast to observations coded in the Practitioner-State-of-Play, with traceable links

to the Intervention. As such it has been retitled Comparison and Analysis of Outputs.

Method (Step-by-Step Process)

My five stage process played out in a linear fashion (see figure 3.1).

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid.

45

Figure 3.1 Revised experiment model (linear structure).

However, these five stages may be cyclically repeated, as in the original

Practice/Research Cycle from which this model was derived (see figure 3.2).

46

Figure 3.2 Revised experiment model (cyclical structure).

My intention in adapting McLean’s methodology in this way was to further contribute a

flexible practice-led model for assessing the influence of varying interventions on artistic

practice. I predict that this model will prove useful for a broad array of interventions and

practices, musical or otherwise.

47

Chapter Four: Experiment Overview

What the Current Experiment Hopes to Achieve

Through a comparative study of performance footage, recorded before and after a

twelve-month practice intervention, I outline noticeable transformations in my physical

technique and illustrate how these developments can be linked to changed melodic outputs

achieved while soloing over a select repertoire of jazz standards.

Phase One: Theorisation

Before this project began I had developed a growing interest in a number of

contemporary technical methods for the double-bass. My initial interest grew out of a

dissatisfaction with my established technique at expressing my creative ideas. Unknown to me

at the time, I possessed a dualist view of technique and creativity. After preliminary

investigations into a number of these methods I realised that much of what I considered my

internal creative process appeared to be a direct byproduct of my technique. I became curious

to know if reforming my technical approach would therefore merely impact my ability to

execute my ideas, or if it may fundamentally change the ideas I had in the first place.

Turning to the literature, I found that I was not alone in my hypothesis. It appeared that

there were a number of researchers who had reached similar conclusions, further encouraging

me in my belief that changes in technique would impact creative process. A number of the

works drawn upon to formulate this renewed perspective have been included in chapter one.

48

My idea then was simple; select a technical method for the double bass advocating a

different technical approach to my pre-established technique, study this technique for a period

of time and assess any changes in improvisational process and/or outputs. The method I

selected for this intervention was Joel Quarrington’s The Canadian School of Double Bass

(CSDB). The rationale for this choice is unpacked in detail in the chapter entitled Intervention.

I spent some months devising the best way to objectively view the impact of my

intervention and realised that a before snapshot would be necessary. It was unclear to me at

this time where and how changes would manifest themselves so I wanted to cast a wide net for

data and devised the multi-stage process outlined below, entitled Practitioner-State-of-Play

(PSOP).

Finally, I devised a plan for my Intervention period. Based on the time constraints of this

project, I planned an approximately 12-month period of technical intervention. My goal was to

physically replicate the approach suggested and demonstrated in Quarrington’s Ebook CSDB

and to integrate this approach into my performance practice. This intervention culminated with

a period of intensive private tuition with Quarrington, galvanizing what I had learnt.

Phase Two: Practitioner-State-of-Play

The PSOP was a newly devised stage of this experiment and involved a unique

combination of traditional, practice-based and phenomenological methodologies. As such, I

have outlined the various stages of this phase below, before unpacking the academic

precedents for each methodological decision.

The PSOP involved the following stages:

49

- I collated a brief autobiographical account of my relationship to the double bass and the

journey of developing my pre-established technical approach.

- I selected a repertoire of jazz standards, covering a thorough cross-section of my

professional practice.

- Solo performances of this repertoire were filmed.

- Immediately following the performance of each individual piece I delivered a

retrospective, verbal self-report in order to gauge initial impressions of the

performance.

- Immediately following this retrospective verbal self-report I then conducted a

commentated review of the footage intended to verify, contradict, exemplify, or

contribute to the observations from the verbal self-report.

- This experiment was repeated over a number of weeks, broadening the sample size.

- Verbal self-reports, commentated reviews and footage were later transcribed and

analysed for thematic content using a general inductive approach.1

- These findings were collated into a brief but rigorous profile of pre-established physical

techniques and improvisational processes.

1 David Thomas, “A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data,”

American Journal of Evaluation 27, no. 2 (2006).

50

Autobiographical Information

Autobiographical information, including the background and history of an artist and

their practice, is a common feature of many practice-based projects.2 Generally speaking,

established artists involved in practice-based research come to the table with complicated and

intricate relationships with their practice, and this autobiographical information is usually

included to provide some context to the reader on the artist and their work. For the experiment

at hand this information was also used as data, in balance with the rest of the stages of the

PSOP, to aid in mapping a before-profile of established technical processes I planned to affect.

Repertoire

I deemed it necessary to select a repertoire that I was already familiar with and covered

a cross section of my professional practice as a performer. My rationale for this decision was

that familiar pieces of music would have been learnt within the context of my pre-established

technical approach. Furthermore, I didn’t want the pieces to be too unfamiliar as I predicted

2 For example, Steven Barry, “Blueprints and Vignettes: Pitch-class sets, Serialism and

Intervallicism, and the Integration of Systematic and Intuitive Music Making,” (Ph.D diss.,

University of Sydney, 2018), 1; Thomas Botting, “Developing a Personal Vocabulary for Solo

Double Bass Through Assimilation of Extended Techniques and Preparations,” (Ph.D diss.,

University of Sydney, 2019), 1; James McLean, “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo

Drumset Practice Informed by Embodied Music Cognition,” (PhD Diss., The University of

Sydney, 2018), 1.

51

potential difficulties linking creative transformations to my technical intervention, versus

creative transformations associated with an increased familiarity with the repertoire. Even

within the context of familiar pieces it proved challenging to draw a distinct relationship

between technique and creative development versus familiarity and creative development.

The range of pieces used in this experiment were selected because they covered a

broad spectrum of tempos, keys and included both traditional and contemporary harmonic

approaches. One original composition was included in this repertoire which was the only piece

which explored so-called “free” playing, or improvisation not based on a harmonic structure.

The use of a consistent repertoire in comparative studies of solo double-bass performances

both before and after periods of technical intervention can be found in Kwiatkowska’s

aforementioned thesis.

Use of Video Footage

The use of video footage in studies such as this has been advocated by a number of

already mentioned research projects, namely Dean and McLean.

Furthermore, videoed self-analysis is a widely recognised process in musical

development and assessment. Ryan Daniel writes in his Self-assessment in Performance that

“videotaping appears to offer considerable advantages in a variety of music education

situations and is used by a number of pedagogues.” 3 Helen Stowasser in Creative students need

creative teachers, has also suggested that musical assessment should be based on a “portfolio”

3 Ryan Daniel, “Self-assessment in performance,” B. J. Music Ed. 18, no. 3 (2001): 215-226.

52

of “recordings on cassette and video”, which also include “reflective comments, both from the

teacher and from the student.”4

Verbal Self-Reporting

Immediately following the performance of an individual piece, I delivered a

retrospective, verbal self-report. These reflections functioned as a “self-report questionnaire”

both flexible and self-mediated to consider emergent phenomenological perspectives.5 It is

important to note that the responses in this “questionnaire” were not prompted by pre-

determined questions but rather focused on emergent categories, varying from performance to

performance. Janet Waters in her Phenomenological research guidelines explains the necessity

of this non-directive structure:

Try to be as non-directive as possible in your instructions. Unlike a survey or

questionnaire, in a phenomenological study you would ask participants to describe their

4 Helen Stowasser, “Creative students need creative teachers,” Aflame with Music: 100 years of

music at the University of Melbourne, (1996), 551, quoted in Ryan, “Self-assessment in

performance,” 215-226.

5 Jeffrey Greene, Victor Deekens, Dana Copeland and Seung Yu, “Capturing and Modeling Self-

Regulated Learning Using Think-Aloud Protocols,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning

and Performance, ed. Patricia Alexander, Dale Schunk and Jeffrey Greene. (Abingdon:

Routledge, 11 Sep 2017), accessed 10 Jun 2019, https://www-routledgehandbooks-

com.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/doi/10.4324/9781315697048.ch21.

53

lived experience of the phenomenon… without in any way directing or suggesting their

description. However, do encourage your participant to give a full description of their

experience, including their thoughts, feelings, images, sensations, memories - their

stream of consciousness - along with a description of the situation in which the

experience occurred.6

This method of verbal self-report asking participants to “reflect upon and summarize

their SRL [Self-Report Methodologies] processing retrospectively,” is acknowledged in

Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance:

The term self-report applies to any assessment in which individuals respond to prompts

that are designed to elicit information regarding the respondents’ own attitudes, beliefs,

perceptions, behaviors, abilities, or knowledge. This broad category includes such varied

methods as verbal interviews, surveys, questionnaires, diaries, think-alouds, and

stimulated recall (Greene, Deekens, Copeland, & Yu, 2018/this volume; Greene,

Robertson, & Costa, 2011; McCardle & Hadwin, 2015; Zimmerman, 2008).7

6 Janet Waters, Phenomenological research guidelines, Capilano University, accessed 09/06/19,

https://www.scribd.com/doc/154494229/Phenomenological-Research-Guidelines.

7 Greene et al., “Capturing and Modeling Self-Regulated Learning Using Think-Aloud Protocols,”

accessed 10 Jun 2019, https://www-routledgehandbooks-

com.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/doi/10.4324/9781315697048.ch21.

54

While the handbook does not offer a specific chapter for retrospective verbal self-report

methodologies, its chapter on “Think-Aloud Protocols” can be used to model the process here:

TAP [Think-Aloud Protocols] data are usually collected via audio or video recording, and

then transcribed. In some cases, these transcriptions are treated as cases amenable to

qualitative analysis, where inferential methods are used to code and thematize the data

for evidence of SRL processing (cf. Butler & Cartier, 2018/this volume).8

Unfortunately, think-aloud protocols proved inappropriate for the task at hand and this

alternative means of verbal self-reporting was developed. In preliminary experiments into the

structure of this experiment it was found that the act of speaking while improvising was too

disruptive to my attention while performing, negatively impacting the results. However, it

proved necessary that these verbal self-reports were conducted as close to the act of

performance as possible in order to reduce the impacts of memory bias.

Commentated Review of the Footage

Immediately following this retrospective verbal self-report I conduct a commentated

review of the footage. These reviews were intended to verify, contradict, exemplify, or

contribute to the observations from the verbal self-report. This process of reviewing footage is

widely supported in music pedagogy research. In his article “Self-Assessment in Performance,”

Daniel offers several examples of this as an effective model in self assessed performance

8 Ibid.

55

analysis citing works by Baker-Jordan (1999), Stowasser (1996), Ross, Radnor, Mitchell &

Bierton (1993), Lynch (1998), Carty (2000), Jay (2000) and Benson (2000).9

The footage was played back on a laptop and the commentaries recorded using the

laptop’s built-in microphone. During playbacks the footage could be paused, rewound and

replayed, with the cursor used as a pointer to reference any specific visible phenomena.

Similarly to verbal self-reports, these commented reviews were conducted immediately to

alleviate the impacts of memory bias.10

Coding and Analysis of Information

Verbal self-reports and commented reviews were transcribed and this data was

analysed for thematic content using a general inductive approach. General Inductive Coding is a

process used to “condense extensive and varied raw text data into a brief, summary format”

gleaned through “multiple readings and interpretations of the raw data.”11 General Inductive

9 Daniel, “Self-assessment in performance,” 215-218.

10 Please note that the immediacy of the “Verbal Self-Reporting” and “Commentated Review of

the Footage,” was necessary for capturing any immediate “thoughts, feelings, images,

sensations, memories” after the performance. (Waters, accessed 09/06/19) While it is possible

that the commentated review of the footage could be conducted at a later date, this may

reduce the reliability of the performer’s recall and increase the impact of memory bias.

11 Thomas, “A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data,” 238; Ibid.,

239.

56

Coding results in a brief list of codes which summarise the large body of raw data into “key

themes and processes.”12

This coded information is presented with a “Category label” or “a word or short phrase

used to refer to the category.”13 This is followed by a “Category description” or “a description of

the meaning of the category, including key characteristics, scope, and limitations.”14 Quoted

examples from the text are provided for each category in order to “illustrate meanings,

associations, and perspectives associated with the category.”15 If need be, “links or

relationships with other categories,” may be defined. Finally, if necessary, “the category system

may be subsequently incorporated in a model, theory, or framework.”16

As mentioned, a very wide net was cast for data resulting in a number of observations

which extend beyond the scope of this project. As a result, only categories considered usable

within the context of this experiment will be included. This was not a matter of cherry picking

data but rather a necessary step in the General Inductive approach, as David Thomas writes in

“A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data,”

12 Ibid., 240.

13 Ibid.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid.

57

Inevitably, the findings are shaped by the assumptions and experiences of the

evaluators conducting the study and carrying out the data analyses. For the findings to

be usable, the evaluator must make decisions about what is more important and less

important in the data.17

These coded categories were presented alongside exemplar excerpts from the footage

illustrating the presence of specific physical phenomenon where necessary. This coded

information, along with the autobiographical background, was collated to form a brief yet

rigorous before-profile, or the Practitioner-State-of Play.

Phase Three: Intervention

The third phase of the experiment was the approximately yearlong practice

intervention, outlined in chapter six. A large portion of this twelve-month period was spent

studying and practicing the technique from Quarrington’s Ebook CSDB, culminating in a period

of private tuition with Quarrington in Ottawa, Canada. This research trip complied with the

Australian National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and was approved by the

University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (Ethics project number: [2019/073]) .

Unfortunately, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, this trip was cut short. However, the tutelage

was moved online with great success.

These daily practice sessions and lesson summaries were diarised and the face-to-face

lessons documented using the built in camera and microphone of a MacBook Air. The use of

17 Ibid.

58

diaries is a widely recognised device in critical self-assessment. Daniel states “the Performance

and Communication Skills department at the Guildhall School of Music and Drama in London

currently promotes critical reflection and self-assessment… this involves the maintenance of a

self-reflective diary.”18 In keeping with CIRT (Centre for Innovation in Research and Teaching)

recommended protocol for Phenomenological Data Analysis each of these entries included a

brief summary of any exterior influences:

The researcher should look at all aspects of the experience as described by the

participants. This includes physical surroundings, objects, other people present, type of

activity, outcome, social and personal interactions, time frame, emotions, belief or value

systems, attitudes.19

These diaries detailed the exercises practiced, including the specific amount of time

spent on each activity, along with italicised comments. The nature of these comments were

guided by emergent themes of the practice session. As further stated in the CIRT module “the

approach should be a fluid one that follows the nature of the data and allows the direction to

18 Ryan Daniel, “Self-assessment in performance,” B. J. Music Ed. 18, no. 3 (2001): 216.

19 CIRT, Phenomenological Data Analysis, accessed 09/06/19,

https://cirt.gcu.edu/research/developmentresources/research_ready/phenomenology/data_a

nal.

59

change through the course of analysis.”20 These comments included any problems I

experienced, such as physical discomfort, confusion with material, or perceived improvements.

Phase Four: Documentation

The original repertoire was re-recorded with piano accompaniment to provide harmonic

context for the listener.21 The categories coded in the PSOP were used to gauge any

transformations in technique which could be linked to CSDB, studied during the Intervention

phase. The omission of verbal self-reporting in the documentation phase was intended to avoid

any “selective perception” biases which may now be present given the now established

categories for analysis.22 In the article “Selective Perception of Events” it was concluded that:

Observers may differ in their initial perception of an event as the result of differences in

prior expectations, and that the resulting biased sample of information they acquire

may limit their retrospective reinterpretation of the event.23

20 Ibid.

21 Monika Kwiatkowska, “Technical Exercises for Double Bass: A Study of Selected Methods and

Their Effect on the Development of Performance Technique,” (Masters Diss., The University of

Gothenburg, 2016), 52.

22 Christopher M. Massad, Michael Hubbard, and Darren Newtson, “Selective Perception of

Events,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 15, no. 6 (November 1979): 513.

23 Ibid.

60

With the coded categories from the PSOP in place, it may not be reliable to give

unbiased accounts of internal processes. As such, the after profile was largely limited to

externally visible transformations in technique which differed from the techniques and

processes categorised in the PSOP.

Phase Five: Comparison and Analysis of Outputs

These recordings were analysed and compared to observations categorised in the PSOP

in order to gauge any transformations in technique. Where possible, exemplar video clips

illustrating certain physical phenomena were compiled.24 In chapter seven, I further suggest

how these technical transformations appear to have impacted my melodic choices while

soloing.25 The final result is an after-profile, with recorded examples, set in contrast to the

PSOP.

24 McLean, “A New Way of Moving,” 77.

25 James Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar

Improvisation,” Jazz Perspectives 8, no. 1 (2014): 45.

61

Chapter Five: Practitioner-State-of-Play

In order to illustrate the Practitioner-State-of-Play (PSOP) it is necessary to give a brief

autobiographical overview of my background with the double-bass, including milestones in my

technical development. This anecdotal account will be exemplified and expanded upon using

observations gleaned from the filmed solo performances, verbal-self-reports, and

commentated reviews in the previously outline experiment. The purpose of the PSOP here is to

paint a before-profile of my pre-established technical processes and suggest how my technical

foundation informed my prior creative process.

Autobiographical Information

I began playing double-bass during my undergraduate degree at the Sydney

Conservatorium. I entered the course on the electric bass and began my transition within my

first six months. I gave my first public performance at the Conservatorium before I had

commenced formal double-bass tuition. Following this performance, a fellow student

approached me with some technical suggestions as he too had transitioned from electric to

double-bass. He noticed that I was using all four fingers on my left-hand stretched out to span a

minor third, as if I were playing electric bass. He suggested that I instead try using my index (1),

middle (2) and pinkie (4), spanning a tone. This was how he had been taught and he suggested

a method book entitled New Method for String Bass by Franz Simandl outlining this approach.

Shortly after, I commenced my double-bass lessons and this left-hand approach was further

62

advocated by my teacher. I found a copy of Simandl’s New Method for String Bass and spent

some time looking through the exercises.

While I cannot claim to be have formally studied this method, what I learnt at this time

formed the foundation of my left-hand technique. Simandl’s method confirmed my peer’s

earlier advice, recommending a 1-2-4 hand-frame encompassing a tone, sometimes referred to

as “Germanic” technique.1 Furthermore, it was suggested that this hand shape should be

maintained at all times, even when shifting. Simandl divided the fingerboard into a number of

positions and presented exercises to work on playing in these positions. Simandl suggested a

different approach in thumb position, which started at the octave harmonic, using the thumb

(T) and ring finger (3), omitting the fourth finger. This T-1-2-3 could span a minor third, with a

semitone between each finger, or a major third by placing a tone between T and 1.

From years of playing the electric bass my 3rd finger was strong and proved

unproblematic in thumb position, however I had never used my thumb in this way. I found it

painful, weak and difficult to tune and, as a result, I used it very little. I preferred to used 1-2-3,

spaced at semi-tones, spanning a tone. Over the years I gradually integrated the thumb but,

until recently it was something I rarely used.

At the time, I was satisfied with this technical approach and my primary focuses became

repertoire, transcription, chord-scale theory, ear training, composition and experimenting with

1 Joel Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths Tuning Edition, Version 1.11

(Travis Woods, 2015), 7.

63

the bow. I was vaguely aware at this time that there were other technical schools however I

never explored these methods, nor had I observed them applied by my peers.

Some years later I sought classical lessons to develop my bow technique. During this I

was inadvertently exposed to a number of different schools of thought surrounding left-hand

technique including the work of Francois Rabbath, Eugene Levinson, Franceso Petracchi, Hal

Robinson and Joel Quarrington. As I delved into these different methods I was confronted by

how limited my left-hand technique seemed. Furthermore, I realised how entrenched my

creative ideas were in my early technical investigations of this 1-2-4 fingering system.

These contemporary technical methods seemed so versatile and flexible and appeared

to have great potential for improvisation. I decided that I wanted to delve deeply into one and

see what the impact would be on my ideas, leading to this research project. The technique I

chose was The Canadian School of Double Bass by Joel Quarrington, which is discussed in detail

in the next chapter.

Documenting My Technical Approach

In January 2019 I performed the recording experiment, outlined in the previous chapter,

four times at weekly intervals. By this time, I had already briefly explored several different

methods, including Quarrington’s and certain aspects of his technique are already present in

this before data-set. These recordings were therefore intended to capture my technical

approach at this time, not necessarily how I played before experimenting with new left-hand

techniques.

64

This large pool of raw data was coded into the following categories; Hand-Frame,

Shifting, Register, Sources, Technical Critiques, Tension and Tempo. These categories were then

used to construct a profile of my overall improvisational approach prior to my forthcoming

technical intervention.

All of the quoted material in the remaining chapter has been lifted from transcriptions

of verbal-self reports and commentated reviews, and the exemplar footage taken from these

recording sessions. Please see the “Practitioner-State-of-Play” section in the preceding

“Experiment” chapter for details on the structure of this process.

Hand-Frame

In parsing the before data set I observed a number of factors relating to the posture and

frame of the left hand or the hand-frame. I observed a tendency to consider notes that fell

within the hand-frame as in-position, and melodic ideas which use these notes were generally

referred to as “cells,” “blocks,” or “positions.”2 I further observed a certain preference for two-

note, binary fingerings of either a tone, fingered 1-4, or a semitone fingered 1-2 or 2-4, as well

as three note “chromatic cells” (see figures 5.1 & 5.2). Occasionally I observed myself utilising 1-

3 for semitones, which is a rare manifestation technique derived from my prior

experimentations with CSDB.

Figure 5.1 (Video) Binary fingerings.

Figure 5.2 (Video) Three-note chromatic cells.

2 NB this does not relate to Simandl’s concept of positions.

65

Exemplar quotes (from verbal self-reports and commentaries):

- “[The] angle of my fingers now; they’re at a big right angle, [the] palm’s very parallel

[and the] fingers are very flat.”

- “As with all of these tunes so far I can’t see any of Joel’s technique present… it’s very

much like how I imagine my left-hand might have looked even before checking out Joel’s

thing.”

- “[I’m] still very much [playing] lots of ones and fours.”

- “The lines are still essentially happening in little tone cells.”

- “I also need to start thinking about breaking out of these little tone cells, with the one

hand position playing three semitones.”

- “There’s that little [chromatic] way of moving.”

Shifting

Based on my review of the data I observed a preference for ideas which fell within these

hand-frames, or “in position,” versus ideas which require a “shift.” Occasionally I articulated a

feeling of being “stuck” in positions (see figure 5.3). Furthermore, this preference for ideas “in

position” appears to extend to the aural imagination. I suggest that these physical preferences

have conditioned “aural habits” leading me to “think” within these positions.

Figure 5.3 (Video) Positional playing or “getting stuck” in positons.

I further observed certain technical problems associated with shifting, particular

intonation, and a certain difficulty playing “through positions.” I also noted certain “tricks” I

66

habitually used to overcome these problems. For example, the use of broken thirds and

progressive scales (see figure 5.4).

Figure 5.4 (Video) “Tricks” for moving through positions.

In general, there appeared to be more “playing through the instrument,” at slower

tempos and more “getting stuck in position,” or “moving around in little blocks,” at faster

tempos (see figures 5.5 & 5.6).

Figure 5.5 (Video) Increased shifting at slow tempos.

Figure 5.6 (Video) “Stuck in positions” at fast tempos.

Exemplar quotes:

- “I’m finding that once I execute an idea I just want stay in one position rather than

playing through the instrument.”

- “I’m really feeling like I am getting very stuck in positions.”

- “I start just following the melodies I’m hearing and they’re so set in a certain way of

playing that it inevitably gets back to this really positional playing.”

- “I find when I’m moving up and down through positions the intonation and a few things

tends to get a bit sloppy.”

- “There are certain ways in which I can move to positions, and they’re sort of like tricks I

guess. Where those little things like [sings examples], broken thirds and stuff like that.”

- At a slow tempo: “That’s quite good. Being able to move through positions more like

that would be good.”

67

- At a fast-tempo: “At this tempo I find [that I’m] very much [stuck in a ] little block [and I]

can’t shift smoothly, can’t shift well.’”

- At a fast tempo: “I really think that’s got a lot to do with the tempos and my inability to

shift at those tempos.”

Based on this data I recognised a preference for melodies which could be played in one

position and did not require extensive shifting and that this preference appeared to be

unconsciously influencing my creative practice at different stages in my soloing. Furthermore,

the notes which I considered “in position” were defined by a 1-2-4 “Germanic” hand-frame,

spanning a tone. While these may appear to be minor details, these aspects of my technique

appeared to be having a significant and pervasive impact on my melodic imagination while

improvising.

Register

Based on observations gleaned from this before data set, I identify specific registers and

regions of the bass that I habitually gravitated towards. In general, these “comfortable areas”

were lower registers, both in terms of pitch and physical position on the finger board (see figure

5.7). I described experiencing problems with intonation and shifting outside these zones.

Figure 5.7 (Video) “Comfortable areas.”

In the lowest positions I play on all four strings, allowing for a more horizontal, or

positional approach. As I travel further up the finger board, I play more on the D and G strings

and eventually just the G string (see figures 5.8 - 5.10).

68

Figure 5.8 (Video) Horizontal approach in lower positions.

Figure 5.9 (Video) Use of D and G strings in middle register.

Figure 5.10 (Video) Use of G string in upper register.

I observe a tendency to consider notes, chords and melodies as specific physical

locations on the fingerboard, generally within these “comfortable areas.” At certain times I

suggest practicing melodies and improvisation in different positions of the instrument to break

these habits. In general, I appear to I resort to these “comfortable areas” more frequently at

faster tempos.

Exemplar quotes:

- “It’s definitely, unsurprisingly, very comfortable in this area [references half position]

and playing quite horizontally or across the strings.”

- “There are certain parts of the bass, I’m thinking the lower register and not shifting so

much, which obviously feels much more comfortable.”

- “Getting more comfortable with those upper registers is a constant problem.”

- “You’ll also notice that I haven’t every really come past about the shoulder of the bass.

There’s still a huge amount of register here that could be used. I feel like about 80% is

happening around here [points to lowest register].”

- “There was quite a lot of mechanical issues. Once again it’s just playing up high.”

- “I do think that I have a particular way of thinking about it that’s related to a particular

physical positioning of certain notes on the neck. So if I can… work on this one by just

restricting the area of the neck that I can work on just to try and open up some options.”

69

- “Practicing this chord progression in and around this section of the neck just to sort of

open up that area and try to break a few physical and mental habits would be good.”

- “The main criticisms is just that I’m very much operating around the same areas of the

bass, doing similar things at similar points in the chorus.”

In parsing the before data set I observe certain preferences for melodies in lower

registers. In general, I play more horizontally in these lower registers and, on the occasions that

I do extend into higher registers, I tend to use the upper two strings, generally the G. This

tendency appears to be influenced by an increase in “mechanical errors” in the higher register,

and these technical issues appear to influence my melodic imagination to gravitate primarily

towards safer or more “comfortable” areas. These preferences appear to be influencing what

regions of the fingerboard I allow myself to audiate melodies, and in this way significantly

impact my creative decision making while improvising.

Sources

I make frequent reference to audiation-generated, motor-generated and strategy-

generated ideas. I observe that while certain sources do occasionally play a more dominant

role, in general there doesn’t appear to be a discrete distinction between these sources. More

regularly, there will be a complex interlay of two or all three sources involved in the generation

of an idea at any given moment.

When ideas are primarily audiated I use terminology such as “aural connectivity” or the

“ear to instrument connection.” When ideas are primarily motor-generated I use phrases like

“thinking with my fingers.” Where ideas are primarily strategy-generated I use the phrases

70

“playing what I know will work” or “just cutting the chords.” In general, the influence of

physical positioning and strategic knowledge play a more primary role at faster tempos.

While I frequently employ “licks,” I state that these can be either “finger habits” or

“aural habits.”

Cross-over points between dominant sources also reveal themselves at points of error

and I refer to this process of recovery as “resetting” or “resituating.” Errors are generally

moments where there is discrepancy between my intentions and outputs. At this moment, the

flow is disrupted and I may use one, or a combination of sources, to get aurally “reset” or

“resituated” on the fingerboard.

Exemplar quotes:

- “This one’s quite a balance between audiated melodies and strategically generated

ideas just because the chords are so unusual that it’s really hard -- the line gets really

blurry with this particular song.”

- “It’s like you’re in that kind of melodic train of thought [and] you’re following the sound

of a melody. And for me, my attention sometimes splits between the chord itself and

what I know will work on it, the position that I find myself on the bass and what I can

see as comfortable next options and then also just the melodies themselves. And then

there’s also other things to consider like where I am in the bow or what’s happening

rhythmically.”

- “While I feel very connected aurally to what I’m doing I do feel like there’s certain

[ideas] -- they’re being quite heavily influenced by fingering patterns.”

71

- “That was a habit of hearing which I think was born of a habit of fingering.”

- “There’s a lot of strategically generated ideas in terms of having a little melodic cell and

thinking how you want it to move around and making that choice, playing that note,

getting reset and then using that as a departure point for the next section of the

improv.”

- “I’m having one of these resets, and I’m still playing, and so I’m letting my fingers

essentially do things that I know will work while I’m refocusing mentally.”

- “I think one of the big things to work on is going to be getting this [aural] connectivity

and fluidity at the faster tempos which, I suppose, seems kind of obvious but I didn’t

realise how big the disparity was you know?”

Based on observations from the before data-set, it appears that many of my ideas were

simultaneously derived from a combination of sources. At different times melodies could be

concurrently audiated, strategised and/or derived from movement or physical positioning.

Moments where isolated sources may be used include the use of licks as well as recovery from

error. However, multiple sources may also be simultaneously drawn upon in these contexts.

Technical Critiques

Throughout these recording I make a number of technical critiques. These include

comments on vibrato, intonation, tone, synchronicity of the right and left-hands, fingering

choices, phrasing, running out of bow or wrong siding bow strokes.

Intonation appears to be a problem when I’m playing outside “safe zones” or where

shifting is involved leading me to avoid large vertical shifts (see figure 5.11).

72

Figure 5.11 (Video) Intonation problems when shifting and outside safe zones.

Issues with synchronicity of the hands and phrasing appear to become more

problematic at fast tempos (see figure 5.12). Running out of bow and wrong siding the bow

appears to become more problematic at slow tempos (see figure 5.13).

Figure 5.12 (Video) Getting tangled at faster tempos.

Figure 5.13 (Video) Running out of bow at slow tempos.

Exemplar quotes:

- “Yeah so, on the whole I think the intonation, sound, vibrato -- a lot of technical issues in

this one.”

- “Yeah so it’s all the usual stuff I think; the integrity of the tempo, the intonation, getting

the vibrato wider and more deliberate.”

- “I might need to check the intonation up and around there, especially when using the

thumb.”

- “Maybe there’s just that much more that needs to be in sync with the left and right

hand which just isn’t linking up [at fast tempos]… the two hands just aren’t linking up

and working together.”

- “I’m getting very tangled.”

- “I think that there’s a few issues with that one and part of that is in the rhythmic feel. I

think it’s just a little bit too bouncy and not really swinging.”

73

- “I still think I need to be quite careful with my bow strokes making sure that I’m not

running out of bow, making sure I haven’t flipped it around and got myself in a tough

position.”

Certain technical aspects were a challenge for me while recording the before data set.

Based on observations in the previous categories, I appeared to unconsciously avoid melodies

or ideas which were higher risk for mechanical error, for example playing in upper registers, use

of large intervals or multiple consecutive shifts. In this way, we can see how technical errors, or

rather an unconscious avoidance of these errors, led to certain patterned responses while

improvising based on my technique, significantly impacting my creative decision making while

soloing.

Tension

I regularly observe physical tension in my right shoulder, arm, wrist, hand and thumb. I

cite various sources for tension including playing too loud, double -stops, playing fast, not being

“warmed up” as well as other external factors, for example muscular fatigue from “last night’s

gig” or playing sport.

I also suggest that mental tension can manifest itself as physical tension and vice versa.

For example, a physical inability to “keep up” with a tempo can result in feeling mentally tense,

however mental challenges associated with “difficult” chord progressions can result in physical

tension.

Exemplar quotes:

74

- “I’m playing quite loud. Which is maybe where some of those tensions in the right hand

came from.”

- “[There is] a lot on tension in here [points to right hand and thumb muscle]. Even

tension down here [references right forearm]. I think that for these double-stops in

particular I’m definitely choking the bow.”

- “I’m finding it very hard to play that song -- I don’t even think that was necessarily a

very fast tempo -- but that song, that tempo, without getting very tense.”

- “The first tune or two generally felt quite nervous and just unfocused and everything

was quite tense and as things gradually settled down then that side of things just

resolved itself.”

- “This arm’s carrying a lot of tension. It might be worth thinking about some stretches. It

could be related to squash. It could be related to the fact that there’s just been a lot of

gigs.”

- “I was feeling tension in my right arm which I think is something that comes from -- it’s

actually I think born of mental tension. If I start worrying about keeping up with it

mentally it’s almost like that translates to tension into the arm and then into the hand

and it all becomes very stiff.”

- “It’s also interesting how much more tension I was feeling physically and I think that’s

partly to do with the fact that [points to head] I’m just like fucking trying to keep up.”

Based on these observations, it appears that certain mental aspects of improvisation can

manifest as physical tension. Once again, this appeared to be related to error, or avoidance of

error, including an inability to “keep up” mentally with fast tempos or challenging chord

75

progression. This two-way street of mental and physical tension illustrates another connection

between physical technique and interior creative processes at play in the before data-set.

Tempo

I frequently articulate the impact of tempo on my improvisational process. Overall,

tempo appeared to have the greatest impact on the interplay of the aforementioned

categories. In general, I adopt a more positional approach at faster tempos, and shift more at

slower tempos. I resort more to “comfortable areas” at faster tempos, while using a more

versatile range at slower tempos. While all three sources are generally present, I tend to resort

more heavily to motor and strategy generated ideas at fast tempos and more clearly audiated

ideas at slower tempos. I tend to experience more overall physical and mental tension at faster

tempos.

Exemplar quotes:

- “If I slow it down to a more medium tempo I tend to be able to construct much more

flowing, cohesive lines. I can hear melodies better.”

- “I just find it easier to think at these [slower] tempos.”

- “That was pretty average… I really think that’s got a lot to do with the tempos and my

inability to shift at those tempos. So I feel like the strongest bits of that piece were when

I could just get more or less in one position [in the] most comfortable area of the bass

[and play my] favourite little lick there.”

- At a slow tempo: “I think some things I really liked about that were just you could

actually see that I was able to play a lot more through a whole lot of different positions

76

on different strings just depending on where I was at and where my imagination wanted

to take it… it’ll be good to try and get some of the other ones, at faster tempos, feeling

more like that.”

- At a fast tempo: “I was thinking a lot with my fingers in that one and it’s just partly

because I find it hard to shift at that speed and I think that, you know, I’m thinking in

these little blocks, not really shifting”

- “So, at a slower tempo there’s probably just a little bit more time to think, and for the

body to catch up, but as the tempo gradually gets faster that becomes more of a

challenge.”

- “It felt quite easy to hear stuff and things were coming out. I think it’s a good tempo.

Right now I think one of the things that’s flooring me most is tempos”

Based on these observations, tempo appeared to be a factor which greatly impacted all

of the aforementioned categories in this chapter. In general, I was more restricted in my

options for shifting, use of register and audiated-generated ideas, including an increased

number of technical critiques. I posit that many of these factors can be related to my limited

technical virtuosity playing at fast tempos and that this appeared to have a significant impact

on my creative process while improvising.

Conclusions

Based on observations gleaned for the before data-set, I have devised the following list

of pre-established technical processes:

- Use of 1-2-4 in neck positions, spanning a tone.

77

- Use or T-1-2-3 in thumb positions, beginning at the octave harmonic, spanning a minor

or major third, with a limited use of thumb.

- A preference for ideas which fall within this hand-frame, such as two-note, binary

fingerings or three note chromaticisms of up to a tone.

- A general aversion to ideas which play through multiple positions, and a preference for

positional, across-the-strings playing.

- Use of certain “tricks,” for example broken thirds, to shift to new areas of the bass.

- A preference for lower registers.

- Melodic ideas generated from a simultaneous variety of sources, with a greater

emphasis on motor-generated and strategy-generated ideas at fast tempos.

- General lack of vibrato.

- Physical tension resulting in the right arm from playing too loud, double-stops, playing

fast, not being “warmed up” as well as other external factors.

- Physical and mental tension as a two-way street.

- Overall, mental and physical challenges impacted by tempo.

Here I have established the various technical aspects which make up my Practitioner-

State-of-Play. These techniques appeared to be playing a significant role in informing my

unconscious, interior creative processes. Following these recordings, I set out to modify a

number of these technical habits, informed by Joel Quarrington’s The Canadian School of

Double Bass. I was excited to see what technical transformations would take place, and

furthermore how these changes would impact my creative process.

78

Chapter Six: Intervention

The next phase of my experiment was my technical intervention and during this stage I

studied The Canadian School of Double Bass (CSDB) by Joel Quarrington. Using Quarrington’s

eBook as my primary learning source, I practiced this method at as close to daily intervals as

possible, diarising my progress. The final weeks of this technical intervention were spent

studying privately with Quarrington where he offered advice and critiques of my interpretation

of his method. This final period with Quarrington was an invaluable stage in galvanising many of

the technical transformations I had developed.

There were several factors motivating my choice of Quarrington’s method. First and

foremost, I was both impressed and inspired when I first heard Quarrington’s playing; his

sound, lyricism and virtuosity were beyond what I thought capable on the bass and I had

certainly never heard an approach like this in a jazz context.

Beyond this, Quarrington was playing a bass tuned in fifths which, to my understanding,

would require a significantly altered approach to left-hand technique.1 I was looking for

something radically different and I believed that a left-hand approach developed for fifths

tuning might offer some fresh perspectives on the bass techniques I had learnt, many of which

1 Joel Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths Tuning Edition, Version 1.11

(Travis Woods, 2015), 2.

79

had been historically developed for fourths tuning.2 While I wasn’t planning on changing to

fifths tuning, preferring to minimize the variables in my experiment, I was encouraged to find

that Quarrington had claimed his method was “just as useful to fourths tuned bassists” and that

he had published a fourths tuned edition of his method.3

In my preliminary investigations I was excited to see that the CSDB aimed to

fundamentally alter the concept of hand-frame and focused heavily on “shifting, pivoting and

rotation” which encouraged a more vertical style of playing.4 I had previously noticed that

hand-frame and shifting were both significant factors that influenced how I conceived my ideas

while improvising, and CSDB’s focus on these areas further spurred my interest.

As I dug deeper I could find little to no research on CSDB nor could I find any examples

of this technique applied in a jazz context. This lack of formal research surrounding CSDB and,

to my knowledge at the time, its unprecedented application to jazz music further influenced my

decision to select Quarrington’s method for this project.

2 Paul Brun, A New History of the Double Bass, (Villeneuve d’Ascq: Paul Brun Productions, 2000),

16.

3 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 2.

4 Joel Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fifths Tuning Edition, Version 1.11

(Travis Woods, 2015), 6; Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 5.

80

The Canadian School of Double Bass

CSDB is an eBook presenting a number of technical exercises for developing the

mechanics of Quarrington’s unique approach. It is divided into three sections; Fundamentals,

Advanced Studies and Scale Routines. Fundamentals outlines six key exercises, with variations,

designed to develop the fundamental mechanics of Quarrington’s technical approach.5

Advanced Studies is a “supplemental section” of strength building exercises which combines

concepts from the Fundamentals chapter. Quarrington suggests that these should only be

worked on “in a varied and very moderate manner.”6 Finally, Scale Routines presents four levels

of bowing variations for practicing scales; The Rosin Lover’s Special (“basic bow strokes for the

beginner over one octave”), The Jobber’s Bowing Exercises (“slightly more advanced and cover

two octaves”), The Professional’s Bowing Exercises (“the most useful and commonly used

strokes that cover three octaves) and The Virtuoso’s Bowing Exercises (“the most extreme and

cover three octaves).7 These exercises are accompanied with written instructions, articulating

the goals of a given exercise and approaches for learning and practice, as well as filmed

demonstrations of certain exercises, performed by Quarrington, all of which provided a

plethora of content to work on. The inclusion of written instructions and footage made CSDB

the perfect resource for my practice intervention as it accommodated my plan for self-guided

learning.

5 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 7.

6 Ibid., 7.

7 Ibid., 35; Ibid., 36.

81

While CSDB radically reconfigures many aspects of performance technique, Quarrington

claims that the origins of this approach “all come from one idea” relating to vibrato.8

Quarrington writes that he had been dissatisfied with his vibrato while using the “Simandl

style” technique that he had been taught “with the left hand basically at a right angle to the

strings and a big space between my 1st and 2nd fingers” (see figure 6.1).9 While using this

approach, he observed “I couldn’t actually hear my vibrato. I know I was wobbling my hand a

lot, but I couldn’t really hear anything come out.”10 Quarrington further adds that when he

could hear his vibrato the oscillations sounded “very thin and too fast.”11

8 Ibid., 2.

9 Ibid., 5; Ibid., 2.

10 Ibid.

11 Ibid.

82

Figure 6.1 “Simandl Style” hand-frame.

Note: The “Simandl Style” or “Germanic” hand-frame (pictured) requires a space be maintained

between the first and second finger while the “Italian” hand-frame maintains a space between

the third and fourth finger.12

After some experimentation Quarrington found himself most satisfied with his vibrato

when the variations in pitch only oscillated flat of a note; as he puts it “all the colour, all the

fluctuation in the frequency, has to be below the pitch.”13 Quarrington argues that this is

because “the ear perceives the highest part of the frequency to identify the pitch, and you need

this ‘horizon’ of the pitch in order to hear that pitch,” an opinion he found to be shared by a

12 Ibid., 7.

13 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 3.

83

number of other performers and string pedagogues.14 Quarrington explains “my entire left

hand technique is based on that one premise,” and all of his subsequent technical alterations

were motivated by this fundamental concept.15

This transformed view on vibrato required that Quarrington’s left hand be in a position

to “roll (or rock) flat of the note” which he believed was not possible when approaching the

string at a right angle.16 He explains that, in order to achieve such a position “I take my hand,

and instead of holding it to the string at a right angle, I rotate my wrist upwards so that my first

finger is at maybe a 45° to the string” (see figures 6.2 & 6.3).17 Through the rotation of the wrist

by the forearm, Quarrington found a comfortable position that allowed him to easily rock flat of

the note (see figure 6.4).

14 Ibid., 2; Ibid., 3.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid., 2.

17 Ibid., 3.

84

Figure 6.2 Hand at 90° angle.

Figure 6.3 Hand at 45° angle.

85

Figure 6.4 (Video) Vibrato oscillating flat of the pitch at 45° angle.

With the wrist at this high angle Quarrington observed that the amount of fingertip

which contacted the string increased (see figures 6.5 - 6.7).18 This was another unexpected

factor which he found increased the width and expressivity of his vibrato:

The part of the finger that closes the string is actually much larger than would normally

be allowed from approaching the string at a 90° angle and a wider and more expressive

vibrato in enabled. The angle and the amount of finger pad that touches the string is

really important! It should really cut through the whole central pad of the finger.19

Figure 6.5 & 6.6 High left wrist and knuckle (angles one and two).

18 Ibid.

19 Ibid.

86

Note the high wrist and knuckle allowing for the longest part of the finger to bisect “the whole

central pad of the finger.”20

Figure 6.7 Ballpoint pen markings on Quarrington’s fingertips highlighting his callouses.21

Quarrington further noticed that these new angles of his wrist impacted his ability to

hang the natural weight of the arm on the neck, resulting in him not having to exert any

“pressure or squeezing to close the notes” (see figure 6.8).22 By balancing the hand in this way

no squeezing or gripping with the thumb was required allowing the left-arm to be “loose and

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid., 21.

22 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 4.

87

free,” which Quarrington believed was essential for vibrato.23 Furthermore, he found that he

could hang on the fingerboard most effectively if, instead of retaining “a space between the

first and second fingers [as] in Germanic fingering,” he kept his hand “small, round and rolly.”24

Quarrington found small hand-frame could be “hung off the fingerboard in every position,

giving great weight to the hand” and rocked from finger to finger using the rotation of the

forearm, further adding to the width and control to his vibrato.25

Figure 6.8 Position of the arm balancing in the hanging position.

23 Ibid., 5.

24 Ibid., 7; Ibid., 30.

25 Ibid., 6.

88

While Quarrington’s technical transformations were initially motivated by vibrato he

found that these changes unexpectedly impacted “everything else.”26 He states that his revised

concepts of hand-frame and rotation led to “seamless, accurate and effortless shifting,”

improved intonation, greater “inherent rhythm of the fingers,” “resistance to string friction,”

and “retained strength in the hand.”27 Furthermore, he found that rotation mobilised his hand-

frame to “encompass a minor third and more” which increased “fingering possibilities for

musical and technical solutions.”28 Most importantly, this flexible and mobile approach to hand-

frame and fingering allowed Quarrington to play a bass tuned in fifths which would otherwise

have required excessive and awkward shifting.29

The first exercise in CSDB entitled “The Move” demonstrates how rotation can be

applied not only to vibrato but also shifting, and presents examples in both in neck and thumb

position (see figures 6.9 - 6.11).30

26 Ibid., 4.

27 Ibid., 6; Ibid., 4; Ibid., 6.

28 Ibid., 6; Ibid., 7.

29 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fifths, 6; Brun, A New History of the

Double Bass, 16.

30 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 11-13.

89

Figure 6.9 (Video) “The Move” in neck position.

“Note that the arm should not be moving above the elbow: this is meant to isolate the forearm,

wrist and fingers”31

Figure 6.10 (Video) “The Move” in thumb position (variation one).

“The hand “shoots” to the open position, and “pulls back” from the thumb to the closed

position.”32

Figure 6.11 (Video) “The Move” in thumb position (variation two).

This motion should be the same as variation, however here the thumb follows the hand and

tucks in one tone below the first finger.33

This rotation is a key mechanic in all of Quarrington’s exercises and is used to create

legato shifting “with no bumps.”34 Rather than breaking the bass into different “positions”

dictated by “static” hand-frames, Quarrington uses rotation to “connect the different hanging

positions” of the hand and he applies a uniform approach to all shifts.35 In his explanation of his

shifting exercises “One Finger Scale,” “Vomit or Sleigh Ride Exercise” and “Flesh Burning

Exercise” he writes “note that the movement in the wrist and hand is the same, regardless of

31 Ibid., 10.

32 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 12.

33 Ibid., 13.

34 Ibid., 16.

35 Ibid., 16; Ibid., 20.

90

the distance of shift or the ‘speed’!”36 Quarrington explains that the same gesture can be

applied to all vertical shifts, “the movement is the same if it is a whole tone or an octave.”37 The

forearm travels towards the desired note and, at the last moment, “the hand “snaps” into

position when it lands on the top note” (see figure 6.12).38 An analogy which I found quite

useful was to consider this final rotation of the wrist “a little like someone sliding into a base in

baseball.”39

Figure 6.12 (Video) Different sized vertical shifts using “the same” movement.

Furthermore, he suggests that this approach allows for the vertical shifting to be guided

by the ear rather than using visual cues or “hunting” for notes, improving intonation.40 In

general, Quarrington performs his shifting exercises with very audible portamento and this is

designed to further connect the ears and hands.41 The hand slides up the string and the ear is

used to stop the glissandi at the right pitch, using this subtle rotation at the end of the shift for

fine tuning (see figure 6.13).42 This is initially practiced very slowly and deliberately and

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid., 7.

38 Ibid., 19.

39 Ibid., 17.

40 Ibid.

41 Ibid., 18-20.

42 Ibid., 17.

91

gradually sped up, reducing the portamenti as desired.43 Quarrington believes that there is “this

little bit of information you get, either in your finger or by ear, but it tells you to stop.”44 This

same approach is used for shifts of all sizes and with any combination of fingers and

Quarrington says “for this reason, switching instruments with little or no adjustment period

becomes the norm.”45

Figure 6.13 (Video) Slow and fast vertical shifts, ending with rotation and guided by the ear.

These rotations are at the centre of all of Quarrington’s exercises, however the size of

this rotation varies dependent on context.46 Quarrington writes that this angle can vary from a

“pronounced inverted hang” all the way to the “almost imperceptible wave” of faster shifting

(see figures 6.14 & 6.15). 47 This pronounced 45° angle on the first finger was therefore not to

be applied as a blanket rule, but varied depending on context.

Figure 6.14 (Video) Shifts resulting in pronounced 45° angle.

Figure 6.15 (Video) Shifts resulting in “almost imperceptible wave.”

43 Joel Quarrington, lesson with author, 03 March 2020.

44 Ibid.

45 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 7.

46 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 6.

47 Ibid.

92

Quarrington found that this idea of rotation further impacted the notes accessible

within a given hand-frame.48 This same rotation which raised the wrist high for vibrato was also

used to roll each finger into the string,

The 2nd finger is rotated down somewhat via the slight wrist rotation, until it meets the

string, same with the 3rd, and by the time the 4th finger meets the string you are finally

at a 90° angle that Herr Simandl might have even appreciated!49 (see figures 6.16 – 6.19)

Figure 6.16 Position of the first finger.

48 Ibid., 7.

49 Ibid., 3.

93

Figure 6.17 Position of the second finger.

Figure 6.18 Position of the third finger.

94

Figure 6.19 Position of the fourth finger.

The fingers not in play were no longer required to be held in an extended hand-frame or

in “position.”50 Quarrington writes that the hand-frame should not be “a stretch that is held in

position,” but rather the hand should be kept “small and focused on each note.”51 The rotation

of the forearm should be used to roll from finger to finger, Quarrington uses the analogy of

“jumping from rock to rock on a beach” to describe how this action should feel.52

As the fingers were no longer required to be held over the top of notes when not in use,

a greater variety of fingerings could be employed, including non-binary fingerings which

50 Ibid., 6.

51 Ibid.

52 Ibid., 7.

95

mobilised the “hand to encompass a minor third and more.”53 Quarrington states “I do use

three notes within the hand when possible by my wrist rotation” and this included a tone

followed by a semitone fingered 1-3-4, a semitone followed by a tone fingered 1-2-4 and even

two tones fingered 1-2-4.54 An exercise I found especially useful for developing the approach

was the “Scale Progressions” exercise, which encourage three note hand frames of up to a

major third (see figure 6.20).55

Figure 6.20 (Video) “Scale Progressions” exercise.

Note: This exercise demonstrates various three note hand-frames greater than a tone.

Quarrington’s overall view on fingerings were flexible and he has borrowed from a

number of different schools of left-hand technique.56 He writes that, in general, the strongest

fingerings for a semitone are 1-3 (“Italian”) or 2-4 (“Germanic”) and he also uses these

fingerings for a major third and a tritone (see figures 6.21- 6.26).57 For three consecutive

semitones he writes “I think that 1-2-4 is still strongest for chromatic fingerings an flexibility of

rotation.”58 Finally, he believes that 1-4 is the strongest fingering for a tone, fifth or minor third

however, unlike traditional techniques, he suggest that the second and third finger remained

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid., 31.

55 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 31.

56Ibid., 7.

57 Ibid.

58 Ibid.

96

relaxed and not in position so that “the semitone in between the two notes [being played] will

actually fall somewhere between the second and third finger” (see figures 6.27 – 6.29).59 These

various fingering take advantage of the natural spacing of the fingers, reducing the use of

extensions which Quarrington believes “should be used rarely.”60

Figure 6.21 Semitone fingered 1-3.

59 Ibid.

60 Ibid.

97

Figure 6.22 Semitone fingered 2-4.

Figure 6.23 Tritone fingered 1-3.

98

Figure 6.24 Tritone fingered 2-4.

Figure 6.25 Major third fingered 3-1.

99

Figure 6.26 Major third fingered 4-2.

Figure 6.27 Tone fingered 1-4.

100

Figure 6.28 Fifth fingered 1-4.

Figure 6.29 Minor third fingered 4-1.

101

Quarrington’s exercise “Slow Shift and Pivot” shows several of these factors at play (see

figures 6.30 – 6.37).61

6.30 (Video) “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position.

Figure 6.31 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position one).

Note: High wrist on first finger creating 45° angle.

61 Ibid., 22.

102

Figure 6.32 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position two).

Note: Forearm rotates 4th finger into the string at about 90°. This tone is fingered 1-4, with

relaxed 2nd and 3rd fingers.

Figure 6.33 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position three).

Note: Ascending tone fingered 4-1 using ‘The Move.’ This movement comes from the wrist and

the arm is stationary.

103

Figure 6.34 & 6.35 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position four and five).

Note: Rotation allows the hand-frame to span a minor third, fingering a semitone followed by a

tone 1-2-4.

Figure 6.36 & 6.37 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in neck-position (position six and seven).

Note: Descending tone fingered 1-4 using ‘The Move.’

104

Figure 6.38 (Video) “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position.

Note: in the ascending rotation the thumb follows (‘The Move: Thumb Position’ variation two),

but descending the thumb extends pre-empting the downward shift.

Figure 6.39 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position one).

Note: The first finger contacts the string at 45°angle.

105

Figure 6.40 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position two).

Note: The wrist rotates the third finger down and into the string.

Figure 6.41 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position three).

Note: Tone fingered 3-1 using ‘The Move.’ For this ascending shift the thumb tucks in behind the

first finger. This movement comes from the wrist and the arm is stationary.

106

Figure 6.42 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position four).

Figure 6.43 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position five).

107

Figure 6.44 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position six).

Note: Rotation allow the hand-frame to span a minor third, fingering a semitone followed by a

tone 1-2-3.

Figure 6.45 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position seven).

Note: The descending tone is fingered 1-3 using ‘The Move.’ For this descending shift the thumb

moves in advance the first finger. This movement comes from the wrist and the arm is

stationary.

108

Figure 6.46 “Slow Shift and Pivot” in thumb-position (position eight).

Note: With the thumb already in position, the first finger should slide in tune with very little

effort.

In thumb position Quarrington uses rotation to achieve a variety of different hand

frames “where a distance of an augmented fourth or even fifth is easily spanned,” including a

number of four note hand frames.62 This flexible approach was learnt by Quarrington while

studying with Francesco Petracchi, and is outlined in detail in Petracchi’s method book

Simplified Higher Technique (see figure 6.47).63 Quarrington found that using rotation for

thumb position in this way resulted in a “callous that extends onto the top edge of your

62 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 8.

63 Joel Quarrington, lesson with author, 03 March 2020.

109

thumb,” further adding “the side edge of the thumb only touches on third finger notes” (see

figure 48).64

Figure 6.47 Excerpt from Francesco Petracchi’s “Simplified Higher Technique,” demonstrating

various four-note hand frames.65

64 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 26.

65Francesco Petracchi, Simplified Higher Technique, (London: Yorke Edition, 1982), 1.

110

Note: Here we can see a variety of four-note hand-frames combining various different

combinations of tone and semitones.

Figure 6.48 Callous on Quarrington’s thumb.66

Quarrington believes that his method will be most effective when sitting, suggesting

that in a standing position “most players will not be able to attain the freedom of the thumb

and the hand that I’m talking about.”67 Furthermore, he encourages a low stool allowing “taller

people to keep both feet on the ground” while sitting “as far back on the stool as possible” and

not letting your back get too “straight” or “upright.”68 Quarrington writes “think instead of how

66 Ibid., 21.

67 Ibid., 4.

68 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 4.

111

a jockey sits on their horse, of that distinctive inclination in their body.”69 On a low stool, with

two feet flat on the ground and a jockey-like inclination of the spine Quarrington believes he

can best “lay my weight on top of the bass,” naturally transmitting weight into the instrument

using gravity.70 Besides decreasing tension for the left arm, Quarrington believes that also

increases the weight in the bow arm allowing him “to use as little rosin as possible” which he

believes achieves the “purest sound” at all dynamics.71

Practice Intervention

Moving into my practice period I had a handful of resources at my disposal. These

included digital copies of both the fourths and fifths additions of CSDB, a number of online

examples of Quarrington’s playing, including 13 minute YouTube lesson where he demonstrates

his approach in the context of Bottesini’s Elegy in D, as well as tuition with a local classical bass

teacher who had previously worked with Quarrington and had some understanding of his

technical approach and teaching style. My practice intervention culminated in seven-week

period of private tuition with Quarrington in Ottawa, Canada. Unfortunately, Covid-19 cut my

time in Ottawa short. Thankfully, we were able to continue our lessons online with great

success. During these final weeks Quarrington made a number of critiques and suggestions on

69 Ibid.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid.

112

what I had been working on, and much of his feedback proved invaluable in solidifying what I

had learnt.

For much of my practice time in Australia I primarily focused on imitating the look of

Joel’s technique, imitating the exemplar videos in CSDB, as well achieving the intended feel as

described by Quarrington in the instructions for each exercise. Before working on an exercise I

would carefully reread the written instructions, re-watch the filmed examples in the eBook and

review past notes and observations documented in my diaries. My practice sessions would

always be seated and in front of a mirror so that my view of myself best reflected the camera

angle in the eBook. On occasion, I would film myself playing these exercises and make notes on

what looked different between my playing and the examples given in the eBook.

My days of practice would oscillate between what I came to think of as micro-focus and

macro-focus sessions. During micro-focus sessions, I would focus on the minutiae of one specific

move or exercise and not continue until I felt that I had perfected as best I could at that time.

Micro-focus sessions could last for minutes, hours, days, or even weeks. In these sessions I felt

that I was laying the foundations for fundamental changes in my technique. I would contrast

these sessions with macro-focus sessions which tended to be more big picture. In general, I

would attempt to play through all I had learnt in one fell swoop; rather than stopping to correct

every issue I would push through, making notes on what I found problematic. When I returned

to my next micro-session I would use these notes from inform my focus. These macro-sessions

were useful for developing stamina, strength and fluency. In general, the more adept I was at a

given exercise, the less problematic they proved in these macro-sessions. As my aptitude and

familiarity with exercises improved I added my own variations, what Eugene Ball terms

113

“primary level adaptations,” by performing certain exercises with different modes, whole-tone,

diminished, bebop and altered scales, which I considered important for jazz improvisation (see

figures 6.49 – 6.52).72

Figure 6.49 “Slow Shift and Pivot” original exercise (excerpt)73.

Figure 6.50 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Dorian/Aeolian mode)

6.51 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Lydian mode).

72 Eugene Ball, “The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for Improvising Trumpet Players,”

(Masters diss., Victorian College of the Arts, 2004), 31.

73 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 22.

114

6.52 “Slow Shift and Pivot” primary level adaptation (Phrygian mode).

I printed a separate copy of the image of Quarrington’s fingertips indicating the

directions and lengths of the strings bisecting the fingertip and would regularly compare the

lines on mine to those in the picture (see figure 6.53). I would often use this image to gauge if I

was doing the exercise “correctly” or not. It took a number of months before I could achieve

what I believed to be the correct angle on the first finger, however even this was later adjusted

in my final weeks with Quarrington.

115

Figure 6.53 Gallery of Quarrington’s fingertips.74

After many months I felt as though my technique was transforming in the practice

room, however it was not having the expected outcomes on my improvisation. On gigs I often

found that my previously established approach to fingering would override any progress I felt

I’d made. Yes, certain things were changing; the angle of my first finger was at more of a 45°

angle and I felt my hand was being rolled by rotation. Furthermore, my intonation and overall

confidence in the higher registers of the instrument seemed to be improving. However, I felt as

though I was still essentially having the same ideas and getting stuck in the same habitual areas

74 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 21.

116

of the bass. At a university jury exam my bass teacher pointed this out to me, commenting that

while the angles appeared to be developing, all of my ideas didn’t require these

transformations in technique. I was still using primarily binary-fingerings and three-note

chromatic cells in a hand frame which covered a tone. Quarrington’s technique at this stage

appeared to be impacting the execution of my ideas, but not so much their fundamental

structure.

I experienced a turning point when I finally decided to try fifths tuning. To my surprise I

found the transition of little technical difficulty as Quarrington’s method had inadvertently

prepared me for many of the challenges associated with fifths tuning. I still found the location

of the notes difficult and struggled to think in fifths, and my practice was mostly focused on

playing scales and pre-composed melodies. Unsurprisingly, none of my habitual approaches

seemed to work. Even playing simple melodies now required pivots, rotations, expanded hand-

frames and a more vertical approach. In this new tuning I found that Quarrington’s techniques

became essential in ways that I had not fully recognised on the fourths tuned instrument. In

fifths, I found myself playing in regions of the fingerboard that certainly existed on the fourths

tuned bass, for example up to the octave harmonic on the lowest two strings, but that I usually

avoided as they seemed awkward or unnecessarily impractical. Many of these regions felt more

commonplace and essential on the fifths tuned instrument as they were now the most common

or convenient areas to play certain pitches and intervals. When I returned to the fourths tuned

bass I brought with me the limited knowledge I had gained from fifths. I found myself using an

increased number of three note hand frames which spanned greater than a tone and I was

playing more vertically on all four strings resulting in access to different regions of the neck. In

117

these different regions I in turn had access to different notes and registers. At this time, when I

returned to improvising on the fourths bass, I felt myself beginning to use a more diverse range

of hand frames as well as a more vertical approach on all four strings, like on the fifths tuned

bass.

The last period of my practice intervention was spent privately studying with

Quarrington. During this period Quarrington discussed his motivations for developing his new

technique and what he believed were the primary differences and benefits of his approach. He

also made observations on my interpretation of his method, including certain critiques and

suggestions. During this time, he made comments relating to my bow grip, the angle and height

of my bass, the height of my stool, the angle of my left knuckle and the position of my thumb in

both neck and thumb position. While these observations were too numerous and detailed to

systematically list and unpack here, I have included a selection of these critiques below.

Bow Grip

Quarrington made some suggestions about my bow grip. He noticed that I was holding

the bow too much in my finger-tips which seemed to be restricting how much of the natural

weight of the arm that I could lay into the string. He suggested that this could be rectified by

moving the bow closer to my palm (see figures 6.54 & 6.55).

118

Figure 6.54 Bow grip (before).

Figure 6.55 Bow Grip (after).

119

The angle of the bass

In general, he observed that I was sitting too much behind the instrument and the bass

was angled too much into my body requiring my left elbow to be bent at an acute angle and

restricting my ability to hang freely. I also tended to sit so that the fingerboard extended behind

my head, requiring backwards force from the shoulder muscles to close the strings (see figures

6.56 – 6.59).

Figure 6.56 Angle of the bass from the front (before).

Note: I am sitting behind the instrument and the angle of the bass requires the elbow to be bent

at an acute angle.

120

Figure 6.57 Angle of the bass from the front (after).

Note: Note that the bass is further to the side and the neck is more upright. In this position, the

elbow can assume a looser and more natural hanging position.

121

Figure 6.58 Angle of the bass from the side (before).

Note: Note that the fingerboard extends behind my head, requiring that I pull backwards to

close the strings.

Figure 6.59 Angle of the bass from the side (after).

Note: In this position the arm can be hung with the weight hanging downwards, not pulling

backwards.

122

The height of the bass and stool

While I had been sitting on what I thought was a low stool, we found that these new

angles worked best for me if the bass and the stool were even lower than before (see figures

6.60 - 6.64).

Figure 6.60 Stool height after (left) and before (right).

123

Figure 6.61 Sitting on stool (before).

Figure 6.62 Sitting on stool (after).

124

Figure 6.63 Height of bass (before).

Figure 6.64 Height of bass (after).

125

The height of the left knuckle

While I had found the ‘correct’ position for the first finger, I tended to drop my knuckle

below the plane of the fingerboard. In this position we found that there was less room for

rotation which could be rectified by raising the knuckle so that it was above the plane of the

fingerboard (see figures 6.65 & 6.66)

Figure 6.65 Left knuckle (before).

Note: Note that the knuckle is beneath the plane of the fingerboard.

Figure 6.66 Left knuckle (after).

126

Note: Raising the knuckle must come from the wrist and it’s important to still keep the left

elbow and shoulder low and relaxed.

Position of the thumb relative to the other fingers in neck positions

In general, I moved my thumb around a lot to fall behind different fingers however

Quarrington recommended I constantly retain the “natural C shape” of my hand, with my

thumb only falling behind my first finger (see figures 6.67 – 6.69).75

Figure 6.67 The natural C shape.

75 Joel Quarrington, lesson with author, 03 March 2020.

127

Figure 6.68 Thumb on the back of the fingerboard (before).

Figure 6.69 Thumb on the back of the fingerboard (after).

128

Position of the thumb on different strings in neck position when playing

I had a tendency to leave my thumb in roughly the same point on the back of the neck

regardless of the string I was playing on. Quarrington recommended that the thumb move

around a lot on the back of the fingerboard to best maintain the natural C shape (see figures

6.70 – 6.77).

Figure 6.70 Position of the thumb when playing on the E string (before).

Note: My thumb remains in a similar position regardless of what string I am playing on.

Figure 6.71 Position of the thumb when playing on the A string (before).

129

Figure 6.72 Position of the thumb when playing on the D string (before).

Figure 6.73 Position of the thumb when playing on the G string (before).

130

Figure 6.74 Position of the thumb when playing on the E string (after).

Note: My thumb moves around on the neck depending on what string I am playing on. This

movement helps maintain the natural C shape.

Figure 6.75 Position of the thumb when playing on the A string (after).

131

Figure 6.76 Position of the thumb when playing on the D string (after)

Figure 6.77 Position of the thumb when playing on the G string (after).

132

Placement of thumb in thumb position

Quarrington suggested that, when in thumb position, the thumb should generally be in

tune one tone below the first finger, even when not in use (see figures 6.78 & 6.79).

Figure 6.78 Position of the thumb when playing in thumb position (before).

Note: the thumb is balanced behind the first finger, however not on any specific pitch

Figure 6.79 Position of the thumb when playing in thumb position (after).

Note: the thumb should be in tune one tone below the first finger.

133

The final weeks of our lessons together were spent discussing how these techniques could be

used to perform the composed sections of my repertoire, including specific fingerings and

bowings. While we discussed approaches to playing certain intervals, arpeggios and scales we

never discussed improvisation per se. Once we had covered as much of the technical work we

could, I began improvising solos for Quarrington and he would make observations on how much

of the technique he could observe in my playing.

The time I spent with Quarrington concluded my technical intervention. In the week

following our final lesson I recorded an after-profile to analyse what had changed, unpacked in

detail in the following chapter. While the end result may not be the archetypal or textbook

demonstration of Quarrington’s method, it appears that this intervention had a significant

impact on my technical approach to playing the double bass. Most importantly, these

transformations not only impacted the ways in which I executed ideas, but also appeared to

have fundamentally altered the ways in which these ideas were constructed, resulting in

changed melodic outputs.

134

Chapter Seven: Documentation and Comparison & Analysis of Outputs

Following my period of tuition with Quarrington I re-recorded the repertoire list used in

establishing the Practitioner-State-of-Play (PSOP). The purpose of this secondary recording was

to highlight any physical transformations in technique compared to the coded categories listed

in the PSOP; Hand-Frame, Shifting, Register, Sources, Technical Critiques, Tension and Tempo.

Spoken reflections where not used in this final stage to avoid “selective perception” bias which

may have now been present given the already established categories for comparison.1 In my

analysis I have included how specific technical transformations may be impacting the melodic

outputs of my solos.

As these recordings were made at the peak of Covid-19 social distancing restrictions in

Australia, the piano accompaniment used for these performances was pre-recorded in isolation

for safety. Please see Appendix A for the complete recordings of these performances.

Hand-Frame

Following my technical intervention, I observed a number of significant transformations

in Hand-Frame. In keeping with Quarrington’s method I was now using all of my fingers in every

position, including third finger in neck position.2 This was in contrast to the PSOP where I could

be observed almost exclusively using 1-2-4 in neck positions. The inclusion of the 3rd finger in

this way allowed for a more diverse range of fingering options which, coupled with rotation,

1 Massad, Hubbard, and Newtson, “Selective Perception of Events,” 513.

2 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 7.

135

included a variety of three-note hand frames spanning up to a major third. For a semitone

followed by a tone I used 1-2-4 and for a tone followed by a semitone 1-3-4. Two tones were

occasionally fingered 1-2-4, however this fingering was used only rarely (see figure 7.1).

Furthermore, binary fingering options were no longer limited to a tone, but now encompassed

anything up to a major third (see figure 7.2).

Figure 7.1 (Video) Three-note hand-frames greater than a tone.

Figure 7.2 (Video) Binary fingerings greater than a tone.

In thumb position, I observed that I was now using what Quarrington calls “open” hand-

frames which could encompass intervals up to fifth.3 This is in contrast to the PSOP which

tended to extend only as far as a fourth (see figure 7.3). These open hand-frames could also

accommodate a versatile range of four-note fingerings, many of which were not present in the

PSOP (see figure 7.4).

Figure 7.3 (Video) Expanded hand-frames in thumb position.

Figure 7.4 (Video) Various four-note hand-frames.

The thumb was now also being utilised as an active and independent digit, moving to

play notes while the rest of the hand remained in position. This was in contrast to the PSOP

where the thumb generally stayed anchored or fixed when in position. This mobile thumb led to

3 Ibid., 8.

136

a wider and more flexible range of notes available to the hand when in thumb-position (see

figure 7.5).

Figure 7.5 (Video) Mobile thumb.

Furthermore, the thumb was now being used in positions lower than the octave

harmonic, extending the overall range of thumb position. In the PSOP it was observed that the

use of thumb position would not extend lower than the octave harmonic. This increased the

overall register where I could apply this open hand-frame with the four-note fingerings and the

mobile thumb described above, expanding my intervallic options over an increased register of

the instrument (see figure 7.6).

Figure 7.6 (Video) Extended register of thumb position.

In this after profile, I observed significant transformations in hand-frame. In the PSOP I

recognised my preference for melodic ideas which utilised the notes available within my hand’s

frame, or in position. These melodic ideas generally consisted of binary fingerings of up to a

tone, as well as three-note chromatic cells. However, following my intervention, the spectrum

of notes falling in position greatly diversified to include a variety of flexible and dynamic three

and four note hand-frames, greater than a tone. Furthermore, the extended range of thumb

position as well as the increased mobility and independence of the thumb appears to have

further diversified the intervallic options available within a given hand-frame in the upper

register of the instrument. The prevalence of melodic material which exploits these newly

developed, flexible hand-frames suggests that the fundamental structure of my melodic ideas

had shifted to fit within the framework of this new technical knowledge.

137

Shifting

Following my technical intervention, I observed an increased tendency for vertical shifts

as well as a greater fluency moving through multiple positions (see figure 7.7). There were

several instances where melodic fragments which may have previously been played in one

position were now being played vertically, or up the string (see figure 7.8). This approach had

the effect of relocating my hand to different areas on the fingerboard, which appeared to

influence how the following ideas would develop (see figure 7.9).

Figure 7.7 (Video) Lines with multiple consecutive shifts.

Figure 7.8 (Video) Lines which could be played in one position, instead played up the string.

Figure 7.9 (Video) Lines played up one string, influencing the next idea to start in a new

position.

Post-intervention I also observed an increased number of large vertical intervals, both

more frequent and larger in size than vertical shifts typically observed in PSOP (see figure 7.10).

This approach appeared to further diversify my options for relocating to a new areas of the

fingerboard, impacting how following ideas would develop (see figure 7.11).

Figure 7.10 (Video) Large vertical shifts.

Figure 7.11 (Video) Large vertical shifts used to relocate to a new area of the bass.

I further observed a greater fluency in vertical playing and shifting. In the PSOP I had

observed a preference for melodic ideas which did not require vertical shifts and suggested that

this preference had conditioned “aural habits” leading me to “think” within these positions.

138

Post-intervention I observed an increase in melodic material requiring multiple vertical shifts,

suggesting that these preferences had now evolved to fit within the framework of my new

technical knowledge. Furthermore, I now observed melodic ideas which may have previously

been executed in one position which were now being played up the string, further illustrating a

shift in my previous preferences for positional playing. I observed an increased number of large

vertical intervals, now both more frequent and greater in size than previously observed in the

PSOP. This improved fluency for shifting and executing large, vertical intervals appears to be a

tool used to relocate me to different areas of the instrument. This, coupled with a diversified

hand-frame, greatly augmented the intervallic options accessible to me at any given point on

the fingerboard, further impacting my melodic choices. The prevalence of melodic material

exploiting this transformed fluency for shifting and vertical playing further suggests that my

melodic ideas had adjusted to fit within the framework of my revised technical approach.

Register

Following my technical intervention, I observed an overall extended use of register.

Where in the PSOP I tended to gravitate towards what I referred to as “comfortable areas,”

generally in lower positions, much of soloing post-intervention recordings was executed in the

middle and upper registers of the instrument, using all four strings (see figures 7.12 & 7.13).

Furthermore, in these post-intervention recordings, I can be observed playing in higher

registers than previously attempted in the PSOP (see figure 7.14).

Figure 7.12 (Video) Middle register.

Figure 7.13 (Video) Upper register.

139

Figure 7.14 (Video) Extreme upper register.

This increased fluency in the upper register of the instrument also enabled me to play a

number of the melodies up the octave, something which I had previously not been confident to

attempt (see figure 7.15). In the PSOP I had noted a tendency to consider certain notes, chords

and melodies as specific locations on the fingerboard. I posit that, by performing these

melodies in different registers, I had diversified my perception of these specific locations on the

fingerboard, further influencing my decision to improvise in these higher registers of the bass.

Figure 7.15 (Video) Melodies played up the octave.

I had previously noted a tendency to resort to the “comfortable” lower registers of the

bass more frequently at faster tempos. However, in these more recent recordings, it appears

that tempo was playing a less significant role in influencing the register of my ideas, indicated

by an increased use of middle, upper and extreme upper registers at fast tempos (see figure

7.16).

Figure 7.16 (Video) Use of upper register at fast tempos.

The increased overall vertical approach described in Shifting appears to have also

impacted the range of notes I now exploited in on all four strings. Post-intervention I observed

myself playing in higher registers on the E and A strings which, in the past, I tended to only

access in horizontally and in lowest positions of the bass. Now I was playing up these strings,

exploring their higher registers and further providing access to new areas of the fingerboard

(see figure 7.17).

140

Figure 7.17 (Video) Extended use of register on the E and A strings.

Following my technical intervention, I observed a greater fluency in the middle, upper

and extreme upper registers of the bass, unlike the PSOP where I describe a preference for

“comfortable areas” generally in the lower register of the instrument. This newfound

proficiency in the higher registers enabled me to play the composed melodies of my repertoire

up the octave, which I posit impacted my tendency to think of notes, chords and melodies as

specific locations on the fingerboard, generally in lower registers. Furthermore, tempo

appeared to be less of an influential factor affecting register and I observed increased fluency

playing in higher registers at fast tempos. Finally, the overall more vertical approach as

described in Shifting increased the accessible register of each string, most notably diversifying

my use of the E and A string. All of these factors, coupled with a more flexible hand frame and

greater fluency shifting appear to have greatly impacted the intervallic potentials accessible to

me while soloing, and can be seen reflected in my melodic choices post-intervention. The

prevalence of melodic material executed in registers which I had previously avoided further

suggests that this new technical approach had fundamentally influenced my melodic ideas.

Sources

As Sources were not externally visible it is somewhat speculative to observe any marked

changes which can be linked to the new technique and the following observations are based on

personal reflection. Following my technical intervention, I did not perceive any dramatic change

in Sources or origins of melodic ideas. Much like the PSOP, it appeared that my ideas were

141

coming from a flux of “Audiation-Generated,” “Strategy-Generated” and “Motor-Generated”

origins.4 I did however experience one minor development in Sources, detailed below.

The most notable development appeared to be a greater confidence in audiating and

executing large, vertical shifts. There are a number of shifting exercises in CSDB, and they

encourage the use of audible portamento finishing with “the move” encouraging a player “use

your ears to stop at the right pitch.”5 Quarrington explained to me that, using this approach,

“[There is] this little bit of information you get, either in your finger or by ear, but it tells you to

stop,”6 which I found caused the audiated pitch and the physical shift to feel more intrinsically

linked (see figure 7.18). This approach may further explain the prevalence of vertical playing,

outlined in Shifting, post-intervention.

Figure 7.18 (Video) Vertical intervals connected using portamento and the ear.

In general, I did not experience any major transformations in Sources and, much like the

PSOP, my ideas appeared to be derived from a melange of “Audiation-Generated,” “Strategy-

Generated” and “Motor-Generated” origins.7 I did however perceive an improvement in aural

4 Wendy Hargreaves, “Generating ideas in jazz improvisation: Where theory meets practice,”

International Journal of Music Education 30, no. 4 (2012): 359; Ibid., 360; Ibid., 362.

5 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 17.

6 Joel Quarrington, lesson with author, 03 March 2020.

7 Hargreaves, “Generating ideas in jazz improvisation” 359; Ibid., 360; Ibid., 362.

142

connectivity when shifting vertically, influenced by exercises from CSDB, which perhaps explains

the overall increase in vertical shifts and larger vertical intervals in my performances.

Technical Critiques

Reviewing this after-profile, I observed significantly improved intonation, particularly in

upper registers and through large shifts. Problems with intonation in the higher register of the

bass and through larger vertical shifts were regularly observed in the PSOP. This improved

intonation seems to have impacted my confidence in playing melodies which involved large

vertical shifts and/or the upper registers of the (see Shifting and Register).

In the PSOP I made a number of references to getting “tongue tied” with the bow at fast

tempos, as well as running out of bow or getting bow strokes reversed. Post-intervention, this

appeared to be happening significantly less, and there were no dramatic examples of this

happening which could be observed.

Somewhat surprisingly I was still using very little vibrato. While this was something that I

felt as though I worked on extensively, it still did not appear to be very present in my playing.

I further observed improved intonation in higher registers and through larger shifts,

which increased my confidence in executing melodic ideas involving these factors.

Furthermore, my technical proficiency with the bow appeared to improve the coordination of

the left and right hands, resulting greater confidence executing ideas at faster tempos. There

still appears to be very little vibrato being used, which is curious as vibrato is the central focus

of Quarrington’s technique. My only explanation for this could be, having seldom played with

143

vibrato for much for my career as a bassist, I still hadn’t intuitively shifted this aspect of my

playing yet.

Tension

Overall I experienced considerably less physical tension which appears to be primarily

related to the changes in sitting and posture. Changes in stool height, the angle of the bass, and

the angles of the left and right arms resulted in less squeezing and tension as well as more

relaxed “hanging” on the instrument in both the left and right hands.8 This reduced tension

appears to also aid in the mobility of the left-hand which may be an additional factor further

impacting the increase in vertical shifting, detailed above.

In the PSOP, double-stops were commonly noted as a cause for tension in both hands

however these changes in posture appear to have also reduced these tensions. In this new

sitting position, I was now using the natural weight of the left arm to sink into the string,

resulting in a more relaxed right wrist and thumb. This decrease physical tension can be

observed in the right-hand, indicated by subtle movement in the wrist illustrates (see figure

7.19). Likewise, in this new position I could hang the left-arm in a relaxed manner, even on the

occasions that I employed double-stops (see figure 7.20). Furthermore, it was noted in the

PSOP that mental and physical tension appeared to be linked, so this overall more relaxed

approach may suggest a decrease in metal tension.

Figure 7.19 (Video) Relaxed right-hand and wrist.

8 Quarrington, The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths, 4.

144

Figure 7.20 (Video) Relaxed double-stops.

I appeared to be experiencing less overall physical tension, resultant from changes in

posture. The result of this appears to have mobilised many of the aforementioned aspects

including observations detailed in Shifting, Register, and Technical Observation. Based on the

connection between mental and physical tension detailed in the PSOP, I suggest that this

relaxed physical state led to a more relaxed mental state which may also impact the conception

of my ideas.

Tempo

Reviewing the after data-set, my proficiency at faster tempos seems to have improved.

In the PSOP, I noted that fast tempos negatively impacted my ability to shift and influenced me

to generally play in lower registers (see Shifting and Register). However, in these post-

intervention recordings the negative impacts of tempo seem to have diminished (see figures

7.16 & 7.21).

Figure 7.21 (Video) Multiple shifts at fast tempos.

In general, I appear to be less negatively impacted by fast tempos, which may be related

to decreased physical and mental tension (see Tension). In the PSOP I frequently commented

on the inability to think at fast tempos, however this appears to have diminished in these post-

intervention recordings, indicated by the lack of “errors” or “resets.” I posit that my more

relaxed physical approach, brought about by the new technique, inadvertently reduced mental

tension, which translated to clearer thinking at fast tempos.

145

Post-intervention I observed improved dexterity playing at faster tempos. I posit that

these improvements may be connected to decreased physical tension resultant form changes in

posture (see Tension), which aided in thinking at fast tempos. This improved dexterity and more

relaxed mental approach appears to have influenced me to play using more shifts and a more

diverse register, factors which were observed to be inhibited in the PSOP. The prevalence of

melodic material harnessing my improved dexterity suggests that my technical developments

had fundamentally impacted the structure of my ideas.

Findings

The prevalence of melodic material executed using techniques descried in CSDB, which

were also inconsistent with the technical approach observed in the PSOP, suggests that these

newly developed physical techniques had a significant impact on the melodic outputs of my

performance. The most significant impacts were related to changes in hand-frame, increased

fluency shifting and an extended use of register, as well as decreased tension and greater

dexterity playing at faster tempos. My transformed technical approach affected what intervallic

options were physically accessible to me on my instrument, and this change in access appears

to have fundamentally impacted the conception and construction of my melodic ideas on a

cognitive level. It is important to add that this new technical approach appears to be an

addition to those observed in the PSOP; post-intervention I can still be observed using three-

note chromatic cells and binary fingering spaning a tone, however my previous approach was

now extended by these new technical developments, augmenting the melodic options

accessible to me on the bass. Likewise, my increased fluency at vertical shifting did not replace

all horizontal playing, rather both of these approaches could be applied contextually with the

146

effect of resituating my hand to different areas on the fingerboard, further influencing the

development of subsequent ideas.

147

Chapter Eight: Conclusions

In this research project I set out to explore the impacts of instrumental technique on creative

process through the development of a new practice-led, auto-ethnographic methodology. By

mapping out my period of technical transition, informed by Joel Quarrington’s The Canadian

School of Double Bass, I observed a number of instances where the confluence of established

and newly introduced techniques resulted in transformations in my creative outputs. This

practice-led approach highlighted specific relationships between technical and creative

processes in my practice, supporting theories of embodiment which suggested “the body, the

brain, and the mind must be understood as one system” and that “musical knowledge is not

grounded in bodies alone, but in an interplay of techniques and technologies.”1

Transformations in hand-frame fundamentally influenced what notes and intervals

could “fall under the hand,” creating a more versatile concept of positional playing, resulting in

changed melodic outputs.2 As suggested by Sudnow one does not “project a sung sound

1 Vijay Iyer, “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition With and Without

Bodies,” in The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, Volume 1, ed. George E.

Lewis and Benjamin Piekut, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 76; Jonathan De Souza,

Music at Hand: Instruments, Bodies, and Cognition, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 2.

2 Rob Van Der Bliek, “Wes Montgomery: A Study of Coherence in Jazz Improvisation,”

Jazzforschung/Jazz Research 23 (1991): 153, quoted in James Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger

Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar Improvisation,” Jazz Perspectives 8, no. 1 (2014),

48.

148

independent of how the hand finds itself situated,” and these developments in hand-frame

augmented the range of notes accessible to the hand, expanding intervallic options from a

given physical location.3

Furthermore, a reformed approached to vertical shifting, impacted the mobility of this

protean hand-frame, lead to increased access to an extended register bass. This greater fluency

at vertical movement allowed more fluid relocations into previously avoided regions of the

bass, further diversifying melodic options while soloing. Ideas conceived and executed in these

regions where the result of a shift in my perception of these locations as now more accessible.

This phenomenon exemplifies Leder’s view that “to see something as reachable... is to implicitly

experience my body’s capacity to reach.”4

Finally, decreases in physical and mental tension resultant from changes in posture,

coupled with increased technical virtuosity, appear to have improved my ability to think and

execute ideas at faster tempos, diversifying my creative outputs at these tempos. Most

importantly, all of these technical transformations fundamentally impacted my perception of

physical access, or Merleau-Ponty’s concept of “I can.”5 My reformed technical approach

appears to have impacted the “field of possibilities” accessible to me in a given physical

3 David Sudnow, Ways of the Hand: The Organization of Improvised Conduct, (Cambridge,

Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978), 73.

4 Drew Leder, The Absent Body, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1990), 23.

5 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception (New York, NY: Routledge, 2012), 139.

149

position, fundamentally influencing the ways in which my musical ideas were conceived and

constructed.6

The results of this project support views of instrumental technique as an embodied

informant to creative process by exemplifying the ways in which studying The Canadian School

of Double Bass fundamentally transformed my embodied sense of access and melodic outputs.

These findings stand as a further reaction to the aforementioned “technique/creativity

dichotomy” previously observed in jazz education, accentuating the necessity for a shift in

values surrounding the role of instrumental technique in improvised creative process.7

Hopefully these results will further inspire pedagogues and practitioners to rethink the function

of technique in jazz education, focusing on physical techniques as a means for generating

creative content.

Moreover, I hope that this unprecedented academic focus on Joel Quarrington’s The

Canadian School of Double Bass, including its application to jazz performance practice, will shed

light on this technique, illustrating its useful applications to improvised performance practice.

While this method was originally developed in order to improve vibrato and playing a fifths

6 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Primacy of Perception, Ed. James Eadie, (IL: Northwestern University

Press, 1964), 162, quoted in Dermot Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology (London:

Routledge, 2000), 428.

7 Eugene Ball, “The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for Improvising Trumpet Players,”

(Masters diss., Victorian College of the Arts, 2004), 12.

150

tuned bass in a classical context, I hope that the results from this project have highlighted other

some unexpected impacts of this method on creative improvisational process.

Finally, this study has provided an innovative new auto-ethnographic methodology for

developing and gauging the impacts of technical intervention on creative process. The structure

of this experiment, based on McLean’s “Practice/Research Cycle,” combines a unique and

previously unexplored combination of methodological approaches including recorded

performative outputs and autobiographical information alongside verbal reflections and

commentaries to create a profile of my unique, personal experience of engaging with my

practice.8 Much like the works of Dean and Bright, this experiment was intended to observe

“the relationship between instrumental technique and improvisation.”9 However, rather than

relying on a speculative third-person perspectives derived from transcription and analysis, this

new method aimed to unearth the first-person, phenomenological experience of the

practitioner engaging with their practice. Hopefully this methodology has provided fresh

insights on the role of technique in creative process, further contributing to literature on

embodiment in music.

Further suggested research may include repurposing my proposed methodology to

explore the impact of other technical methods for any instrument, both in improvised and non-

8 James McLean, “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by

Embodied Music Cognition,” (PhD Diss., The University of Sydney, 2018), 4.

9 James Dean, “Pat Metheny Finger Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar

Improvisation,” Jazz Perspectives 8, no. 1 (2014): 45.

151

improvised contexts. This repurposing could extend beyond the realms of technical methods or

even music, allowing a variety of interventions to be being used in order to explore various

facets of creative practice in visual art, creative writing, dance and/or theatre.

152

Appendix A: Full recordings from ‘Documentation’ phase

Below are the complete recordings used in the Documentation and Comparison & Analysis of

Outputs chapter of this thesis. The composer’s names have been listed in parentheses. All piano

accompaniment was performed by Andrew Scott.

Figure A.1 Blues for Alice (Charlie Parker)

Figure A.2 Along Came Betty (Benny Golson)

Figure A.3 After You’ve Gone (Turner Layton & Henry Creamer)

Figure A.4 Jean De Fleur (Grant Green)

Figure A.5 Monk’s Mood (Thelonious Monk)

Figure A.6 Embraceable You (George Gershwin)

Figure A.7 Cockroach (Samuel Dobson & Peter Farrar)

153

References

Ball, Eugene. “The Fundamentals of a New Practice Method for Improvising Trumpet Players.”

Masters diss., Victorian College of the Arts, 2004.

Barker, Simon. Korea and the Western Drumset: Scattering Rhythms. Surrey, England: Ashgate

Publishing Limited, 2015.

Barry, Steven. “Blueprints and Vignettes: Pitch-class sets, Serialism and Intervallicism, and the

Integration of Systematic and Intuitive Music Making.” Ph.D diss., University of Sydney,

2018.

Bergonzi, Jerry. Inside Improvisation Series. Sunland, CA.: Advanced Music, 1994.

Botting, Thomas. “Developing a Personal Vocabulary for Solo Double Bass Through Assimilation

of Extended Techniques and Preparations.” Ph.D diss., University of Sydney, 2019.

Bright, Stephen. “Red Mitchell: Tuning in Fifths and the Walking Bass Line.” Masters Diss.,

University of Toronto, 2013.

Brown, Ray. Ray Brown’s Bass Method. Milwaukee, U.S.A.: Hal Leonard Corporation, 1999.

Brun, Paul. A New History of the Double Bass. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Paul Brun Productions, 2000.

Bruser, Madeline. The Art of Practicing. New York: Bell Tower, 1997.

Carter, Ron. Ron Carter’s Comprehensive Bass Method. Detroit, MI.: Max M. Fisher Music

Centre, 1998.

Coker, Jerry. Patterns for Jazz. Lebanon, Ind.: Studio Publications/Recordings, 1970.

Crook, Hal. How to Improvise: An Approach to Practicing Improvisation. Rottenberg, N.:

Advance Music, 2015.

Daniel, Ryan. “Self-assessment in performance.” B. J. Music Ed. 18, no. 3 (2001): 215-226.

154

Dean, James. “Pat Metheny Finger Routes: The Role of Muscle Memory in Guitar

Improvisation.” Jazz Perspectives 8, no. 1 (2014): 45-71.

De Souza, Jonathan. Music at Hand: Instruments, Bodies, and Cognition. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2017.

Goldsby, John. The Jazz Bass Book. San Francisco: Backbeat Books, 2002.

Goldsby, John. Jazz Bowing Techniques for the Improvising Bassist. Bass Lion Enterprise, 1990.

Green, Barry. The Inner Game of Music. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1986.

Greene, Jeffrey, Victor Deekens, Dana Copeland and Seung Yu. “Capturing and Modeling Self-

Regulated Learning Using Think-Aloud Protocols.” In Handbook of Self-Regulation of

Learning and Performance, edited by Patricia Alexander, Dale Schunk and Jeffrey

Greene. Abingdon: Routledge, 11 Sep 2017: 323-337. Accessed 10 Jun 2019,

https://www-routledgehandbooks-

com.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/doi/10.4324/9781315697048.ch21.

Hargreaves, Wendy. “Generating ideas in jazz improvisation: Where theory meets practice.”

International Journal of Music Education 30, no. 4 (2012): 354-367.

Hilgenstieler, Eric. “The Application of Contemporary Double Bass Left Hand Techniques

Applied in the Orchestra Repertoire.” D.M.A. diss., University of Southern Mississippi,

2014.

Husserl, Edmund. Logical Investigations. London: Routledge, 2001.

Iyer, Vijay. “Improvisation, Action Understanding and Music Cognition With and Without

Bodies.” In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, Volume 1, edited by

George E. Lewis and Benjamin Piekut. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016: 74-90.

155

Iyer, Vijay. “Improvisation, temporality and embodied experience.” Journal of Consciousness

Studies 11, no. 3-4. (2004): 159-173.

Kwiatkowska, Monika. “Technical Exercises for Double Bass: A Study of Selected Methods and

Their Effect on the Development of Performance Technique.” Masters Diss., The

University of Gothenburg, 2016.

LaTeef, Yusef. Repository of Scales and Melodic Patterns. Amherst, MA.: Fana Publishing

Company, 1981.

Leder, Drew. The Absent Body. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1990.

Levine, Mark. The Jazz Theory Book. Petaluma, CA: Sher Music Co., 1995.

Liebman, Dave. A Chromatic Approach to Jazz Harmony and Melody. Rottenburg, Germany:

Advanced Music, 1991.

Massad, Christopher M., Michael Hubbard, and Darren Newtson. “Selective Perception of

Events.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 15, no. 6 (November 1979): 512-532.

McLean, James. “A New Way of Moving: Developing a Solo Drumset Practice Informed by

Embodied Music Cognition.” PhD Diss., The University of Sydney, 2018.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Primacy of Perception. Edited by James Eadie. IL: Northwestern

University Press, 1964.

Moran, Dermot. Introduction to Phenomenology. London: Routledge, 2000.

Neubert, David. “New Left Hand Techniques of François Rabbath.” American String Teacher 38,

no. 4 (1988): 67-71.

Petracchi, Francesco. Simplified Higher Technique. London: Yorke Edition, 1982.

156

Pressing, Jeff. “Improvisation: methods and models.” In Generative Processes in Music: The

Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition, edited by John Sloboda.

Oxford Scholarship Online, March 2012.

Quarrington, Joel. The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fifths Tuning Edition, Version 1.11.

Travis Woods, 2015.

Quarrington, Joel. The Canadian School of Double Bass: Fourths Tuning Edition, Version 1.11.

Travis Woods, 2015.

Rex, Cody. “A Systematic Approach to Double Bass Fingerings for the Classroom String

Teacher.” D.M.A. diss., The University of North Carolina, 2015.

Rockwell, Joti. “Banjo Transformations and Bluegrass Rhythm.” Journal of Music Theory 53, no.

1 (2009): 137-162.

Reid, Rufus. Evolving Upward: An Aid in Developing Thumb Position Technique for the Double

Bass. Teaneck, N.J.: Myriad Ltd., 1977.

Reid, Rufus. The evolving bassist: an aid in developing a total musical concept for the double

bass and the four and six string electric basses. Teaneck, N.J.: Myriad Ltd., 1974.

Sanchez, Antonio “Good Practice.” Interview by Craig Macfadyen. Good Practice, 3 January

2013. https://itsgoodpractice.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/antonio-sanchez/.

Slater, Phillip. “The Dark Pattern: Towards a constraints-led approach to jazz trumpet.” Ph.D.

Diss., University of Sydney, 2020.

Sloboda, John, J. W. Davidson, M. J. A. Howe, and D. G. Moore. “The Role of Practice in the

Development of Performing Musicians.” British Journal of Psychology 87, no. 2 (1996):

287-309.

157

Smith, Hazel and Roger Dean. “Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice - Towards the

Iterative Cyclic Web.” In Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative Arts,

edited by Roger Dean and Hazel Smith. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009: 1-

38.

Stowasser, Helen. “Creative students need creative teachers.” Aflame with Music: 100 years of

music at the University of Melbourne. Parkville, Victoria: Centre for Studies in Australian

Music, 1996: 545-555.

Sudnow, David. Ways of the Hand: The Organization of Improvised Conduct. Cambridge,

Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978.

Tarr, Christopher. “Practising jazz performance: An investigation into the process that

underpins optimal instrumental practice in the jazz idiom.” Masters diss., Western

Australian Academy of Performing Arts, 2016.

Thomas, David. “A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data.”

American Journal of Evaluation 27, no. 2 (2006): 237-246.

University of Chicago Press, The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th ed. (Chicago: Chicago University

Press, 2017), 70.

Van Der Bliek, Robert. “Wes Montgomery: A Study of Coherence in Jazz Improvisation.” M.F.A.

diss., York University, 1987.

Waters, Janet. Phenomenological research guidelines, Capilano University. Accessed 09/06/19,

https://www.scribd.com/doc/154494229/Phenomenological-Research-Guidelines.

Werner, Kenny. Effortless Mastery: Liberating the Master Musician Within. New Albany, IN:

Jamey Aebersold Jazz, 1996.

158

Zahavi, Dan. Phenomenology: The Basics. New York, NY: Routledge, 2019.