Throughout western history, the traditional role of the double bass has been to provide the foundation for the other instruments. The bass was rarely featured as a solo instrument. This continued to be the primary function of the bass until the 20th century, when the musical phenomenon identified as jazz was born in the United States. The tuba was the initial bottom end instrument, but due to players such as Pops Foster, the bass viol soon took over.

The accepted image of the bass as a time keeper was challenged in the 1930’s and 40's by bassists like Jimmy Blanton, Slam Stewart and Oscar Pettiford who expanded the potential of the bass by proving that it could be a suitable voice for melodic statements and soloing. In their wake, players such as Charles Mingus, Paul Chambers, and Scott LaFaro, Charlie Haden, and Richard Davis led bands, wrote songs and played incredible solos. The primary job of the bass was still to establish the time-feel and harmony of the tunes, but virtuosity became a prerequisite.

The increasing use and gradual acceptance of the electric bass guitar during the 50's and 60's opened the front line further for bassists. James Jamerson supplied the Motown groove and Monk Montgomery and John Entwistle played pyrotechnical solos. They and many other talented players proved that the electric bass could be a vital and valuable accompaniment and feature instrument. This was expanded upon in the 1970s by talents like Jaco Pastorius, Stanley Clarke and Chris Squire.

The only problem with all of this is that young players who are starting up get a diffuse concept of the bass's function. They have so many examples of multi-noted, high speed solos that the fact that somebody has to supply the foundation becomes obscured. Who wants to play low, slow notes when you can solo in the spotlight?

The 1980's saw the advent of a formidable development, digital sampling and sequencing technology. Absolutely accurate--and cheap, a producer with a little time and a tight budget could cut corners by using machines. In fact, many of the most popular dance albums of the late 80's were made without bassists.

The major fault with that trend is that a groove laid down by a computer lacks humanity. Accuracy is nice, but where's the soul? All of the bassists mentioned so far have had at least one thing in common: their music is organic. Their lines have an identifiable human element to their sound…I think that the future bassist's role will be to come to terms with the fact that in order to maintain an identity they will have to be able to play foundation in addition to all the fun attention-grabbing soloing. Also, it might be in their best interest to gain a thorough mastery of digital sequencing technology; who can fight what they don't understand? If called upon to do so, who could program a better bass line: a producer or a bassist?

However, I feel that in addition to being able to lay down an accurate groove, the most important element that bassists can bring into the 1990's is the fact that they are human beings with hearts and minds. Even the most repetitive bass line can be made interesting if played with feeling. All of the innovative bass players of the past infused their souls with their music in order to make it live. The bassists of the future will need to also.