My post was in response to your comment that low gcea is nearly double bass pitch,
I never said that. Perhaps you misread when I was suggesting the potential of stringing a U-Bass for G1-C2-E2-A2/G,CEA (another octave
below low Gcea or two octaves below gc'e'a')?
I thought it would not be too hard to do (it being just a matter of selecting the correct strings) and, because it uses ukulele tuning and chord fingerings, would satisfy those who question the presence of an upright bass in an all-uke orchestra.
It was really just a novelty instrument idea. While such tuning may be fine for someone who is moving to it from ukulele, that middle interval of a third rather than a fourth would be a pain in the ass to an experienced bass-line player, who is almost certainly more accustomed to the linear fourths on an upright bass or bass guitar.
Compared to the standard tuning of a string bass, such a
double-bass ukulele would lack just three semi-tones of bottom-end range (and the high string would be just one note higher). Thus, it should be capable of sounding nearly identical to a short-scale string bass. And, that being the case, the only thing to be gained by putting it into your uke orchestra as a replacement for the identical-looking and nearly identical-sounding short-scale string bass is merely the novelty of it being technically a slight bit more ukeish.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, bass lines for string basses are best handled by string basses. I don't see much more advantage to replacing them with a more uke-derived instrument than I do with developing a uke to replace a snare-drum. U-Bass and other short-scale basses are fine by me; I just don't consider them to be a type of ukulele.
Okay, enough about
double-bass ukes, and back to the single variety:
By bass i refer to the range played by bass guitars and double basses which play the role of bass in many areas of music. In my opinion, this so called "bass uke" is still too high pitched to play the role of "bass" from a practical perspective.
Obviously. It cannot play string bass parts. Nor is it well suited for accordian solos. For that matter, neither can a soprano ukulele, yet, strangely, I haven't seen any complaint that
they can't handle bass guitar notes.
Heck,
baritone ukes can't handle
baritone guitar notes. So why criticize a bass uke for not being a bass guitar?
The basic capability of a bass guitar in a band or ensemble is to play bass chords as single notes.
Yep. And a timpani and a piccolo flute and a viola all have
their own basic capabilities. But, again, this discussion is about ukuleles, not guitars or other instrument families.
Yes, its low pitched for a uke. But if you see the bigger picture in the strings family, it would be too high pitched to truly pass as an instrument for playing bass.
Again, you are using "bass" as if it was absolute rather than relative. The low-octave C ukulele is IMHO justifiably a bass ukulele relative to the others of its family. It would probably not, however, be placed with the bass section of an orchestra. Nor, for that matter, would the baritone uke likely be considered a baritone instrument relative to the rest of a mixed ensemble.
Attempting to play fundamental bass chords on this thing feels a bit silly because the sound is not deep enough relative to the other parts.
Yeah, I imagine it would. But, y'know. . .if it's what you want to do, go ahead.
Even going by convention, considering that there are ukes that actually tune to low EADG like a bass guitar, they would be considered bass ukes. They're not "double basses disguised as ukes", no.
Guess we'll just have to disagree on that. Maybe "double-", "contra-", or "great-bass ukes", but there being a nearly two-octave jump between that and a baritone ukulele, makes it IMHO too low to be simply a "bass uke".
The Bass guitar borrowed it from the upright Double bass, yet people don't say that a bass guitar is a "Double bass disguised as a guitar".
Uh, yes they did (and some still do). Many a war was waged over the issue. It was designed as a more portable replacement for the cumbersome double-bass. The musical function is that of a double-bass, but the more gig-practical form was borrowed from the electric guitar.
However, the controversy over introducing an electronic instrument into an acoustic ensemble greatly overshadowed the "What is it?" issue. Still, many musicologists classify it as a more direct descendant of the viol than of the guitar.
Have you seen those Lute-uleles? (I think that's the name.) Anyway, they look like bowl-backed lutes, but are actually designed and strung for playing as 6-string tenor (Lili'u 6) ukuleles. One might consider the bass guitar to be an upright bass disguised as an electric guitar in much the way that a Lute-ulele is a uke disguised as a lute. Guitar players don't play bass guitars, double-bassists do, and lute players don't play Lute-uleles, ukists do.
All other aspects, including dimensions, marketed purpose, material of strings, companies that produce them, etc, identify it as a "bass uke".
Regardless of whether builders make money off calling them that, I still consider the term a misnomer. Perhaps "bass/uke", but not "bass uke". (BTW, not even Kala calls the U-Bass a "bass uke"; however, the gentleman from whom they licensed the design did.)
Low gcea technically does not exist in the conventional naming of the uke family,
Nor did linear tuning on a C soprano until maybe 25 years ago. Or the baritone ukulele until sixty or so years ago. Things change. I think you'll find that nothing exists in any conventional naming scheme before being added to it.
nor is there even close to enough popularity to give it its own class.
Maybe not at present. Who's to say it won't catch on? And what should popularity matter as to whether something that fits the naming scheme should have its own class? Sopranissimo ukes have
never been very popular, but they've had their own class for about a hundred years.
Therefore its nothing more than a seldom used alternative tuning of the baritone ukulele.
Thus far, yes. And until an ensemble or consort elects to use it or a luthier starts making larger ukulele bodies and scales to better accommodate that lower tuning, it will probably remain that way.
Just like how you can tune a tenor uke to DGBE baritone tuning, but its still considered a tenor.
Well, that's actually the tuning the Tenor was designed for. And it's origin also helps demonstrate how screwed up ukulele nomenclature already is.
Tenor ukulele was introduced as an additional voicing below Soprano and was pitched at D4/G3/B3/E4 (re-entrant like soprano, but a fourth lower).
The first problem this created with ukulele terminology was that it skipped over the conventional term "alto", mainly because "tenor" was becoming a very hip buzzword at the time. Despite the name choice, it had little, if anything, in common with the then-recently-invented Tenor Guitar (which, itself, was
intentionally not so much a
guitar as a Tenor Banjo disguised as one by mounting a Tenor-Banjo-style neck on a full-size guitar body and using the same fifths tuning of CGDA).
However, an even bigger problem came with the introduction of the baritone uke.
Some felt that the Tenor ukulele body was a bit small to give the sound they wanted at that tuning, so, as the Concert had been for the Soprano, the larger Baritone was introduced as a fuller-sounding version of the Tenor. Why they called it "baritone' instead of, say, "concert tenor", I don't know.
Baritone was pitched D3/G3/B3/E4 (linear progression, non-reentrant), making Tenor in G rather superfluous. So now, Tenors are more commonly set up for C (with or without re-entrance on the G string), which also means that it's now coincident with Soprano (and also with Concert).
The Ubass is a bass uke, because there is a clear physical difference to regular baritone ukes (tuners, string type, pickup, etc)
That is also all true of an Irish lap harp, but I don't see how an instrument's being different from a baritone uke should lead one to conclude that it must, therefore, be a bass uke.
Thanks for making me think!
