Do you have to have a bass player for a rock band?

Question

Is a bass player required for a rock band? How much are they needed? Is it really that important to have one?

Answer 1

Yes. You're probably asking this question because you really want to get a band together, and would rather just leave it without. However, the bass and the drums, are the foundation of the band. Most of the time people don't recognize the bass in a song due to poor mixing, or poor headphones. If you listen to such bands as Red Hot Chili Peppers, or the Beatles, Flea and Paul McCartney's bass rhythms really make the song. The bass guitar is also good for creating opening rhythms, which makes it quite versatile. If there is nobody in your area who can play bass well, then go without a bass player if you're doing a talent show or something small. But if you are starting a band that you plan to do a lot with, then get a bass player. They help the performance of the band, and sound great if you have good audio. If you have good headphones or speakers with bass, listen to this video and you'll see what I mean. But the point still stands that a bass guitar is best to have.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvjGrWERM1U

Answer 2

Most bands have them, and they help, but I don't think you _need_ a bass player. Most bands have a bass, a drummer, and at least one guitarist, plus a vocalist. I think you can probably take away the bass player or even the drummer and have a decent cover band.



Some will say the bass player is integral to the sound and playing of the band, but plenty of bands have bass players that aren't even audible in the mix. There are plenty of records out there where the bass guitar just doesn't seem audible, and I don't think anyone complains (minus enthusiasts).



If you have two guitarists, a drummer, and a singer, I think you are covered. It really depends on the kind of music you are playing, and what the bass player would do. If the bass player would just be playing the root notes of every chord, it contributes to the low end, but not really to the over all sound; it just adds to the melody that the guitar(s) have already established and that the singer is singing over / harmonizing. That said, some records and bands do have decent bass players that stand out in the mix, but they are a rarity.



Thus, I think, a bass player is desirable, but not necessary, for a rock band.

Answer 3

I disagree with MJ on a lot of points. Take the bass player out of almost any modern rock band, and the music falls flat. I say it falls flat because that's what it sounds like - you no longer have this huge wall of sound, but instead you have mosquito guitars and booming kick drum and nothing in between. And don't underestimate the importance of bass to the nightclub-dancing masses; those people will NOT enjoy a track devoid of bass.



HOWEVER, some acts have indeed managed to make awesome music sans bass. The White Stripes (RIP!), Yeah Yeah Yeahs, and Blood Red Shoes all make killer rock music with only guitar and drums.



The important thing to remember is that those bands all deliberately play in ways so as to minimise the effect of the absence of bass. For instance, Jack White from White Stripes often uses effects pedals to make his guitar sound an octave lower and hence more like a bass. I even remember from some years back there was a guitar-and-drums band where the guitarist had her guitar simultaneously running through a guitar amp, and an octave-down pedal hooked up to a bass amp.



All I'm trying to say is: it can be done, but don't expect to write and play EXACTLY the way you would if there were a bass.