Why does swing sound so "good" ?

[Toxikator]

I think that swing sounds good (this is back onto the original topic and skirting this page altogether) because you're not used to hearing it. So much of modern popular music is 4/4 to the floor and the swing provides some variety; the same reason, IMO, that 6/8 sounds so good. Whereas if you write a lot of music in 6/8 I'm sure the emphasis of a 4/4 time would be a welcome and "good-sounding" bit of variety.

[basic channel]

Oh, and fwiw, to make things even more complexed, in a lot of music, swing factors will vary between the individual instruments. James Browns stuff is a perfect example how there's some players swinging quite a lot whereas others almost don't swing at all. Yet, the overall groove is sounding absolutely "in the pocket"

That's why I want(ed) swing per pattern for the swing slider in FLS.

[Ubiety]

Nope. It's not delayed triplets, it's delayed eighths.

This is not etched in stone. And it is misleading. Swing, without defining it, refers to a player's ability to massage notes and phrases into a unique interpretation that highlight's the player's unique, personal voice. Jazz Drummer Tony Williams does not sound like his colleague Art Blakey, yet both swing. You will find sixteenth and thirty-second notes swinging all over the place when listening to Tony Williams, whereas Art Blakey's message will be more eighth note and quarter note oriented.

You have to pay attention to subdivisions. An eighth note triplet represents a quarter note, so if one can swing a quarter note, then it is possible to swing any subdivision of a quarter note. The feel that a player communicates can be early or it can be late relative to the beat. Both Tony Williams and Art Blakey were masters at pushing and pulling beats while swinging and keeping perfect time.

And if you don't think that whole notes can be swung, then just listen to Charles Mingus or Paul Chambers.

Also, check out Billie Holiday if you really want to see what can be done with time in the sense of swing. Your ears and your mind will stretch for miles and miles.

[herodotus]

Why does swing sound so "good" ?

'Swing' is one of those popular but really vague words that become so rich with meaning and importance to people that they don't realize that no one ever really defined it very well.

I thought it was basically defined as delayed triplets, giving that lovely languid, laidback funky rhythm..?

Nope. It's not delayed triplets, it's delayed eighths. And while I'd agree that many of the rhythmic "feels" (groove, pocket, shuffle etc) are nebulous and ill defined, swing is well understood, well defined and has been for a long time.

Plus, the "you just got to feel it man" attitude is ok for a seasoned pro to use if he doesn't wish to or can't pass on his knowledge. It's worse than useless for a forum dedicated to theory.

OK, first: 'swing is delayed eighths' is an oversimplification.

Try an experiment: take a song that obviously swings, like 'Take the A Train' and try to capture it by using only a notation editor and eighth notes.

Now try it with a notation editor using some form of 'compound time' (i.e. a metrical framework where the beat is split into threes instead of twos) and try to capture the same song.

You will find that, while both sound sort of 'dead' that it is much easier to sound kind of like whatever song you choose using compound, rather than straight time.

Now obviously if your sequencer can use groove templates and whatnot you can get much closer to 'authentic' sounding swing than if you just use a notation editor. But that isn't the point. The point is that someone could get very frustrated trying to figure out how something like the the last 16 bars of the Benny Goodman bands version of 'Sing, sing, sing' can possibly be construed as eighth notes.

And so, you can see why one might feel that the term 'swing' is ill-defined when to one person it quite obviously denotes delayed eighths while to another it obviously means broken triplets. Plus people always pull other musical styles/ideas/genres like funk into the discussion, as if there were a basic connection between them (perhaps because they are both afro-american in origin?) which just confuses matters.

And this brings us to the second point, which is that no one was really saying 'you just have to feel it man'. That is vague. What was said was one should 'relax while playing enthusiastically'. This is quite specific.

The vast majority of people tighten up when they start getting into what they are playing. On the other hand, just relaxing while playing doesn't cut it either. Many a dead boring performance has been delivered by relaxed people.

While swing bands don't really have a monopoly on the 'relaxed but enthusiastic' approach to performance, Duke Ellington, Fletcher Henderson, Benny Goodman and especially Count Basie did bring it to a level of excellence that has never been surpassed, which is why their music is so hard to quantify

[nuffink]

Stuff

Similar stuff

You're both talking about groove or feel or playing in the pocket or any number of terms used by musicians.

Swing is different. It has a very specific definition which can be found in any jazz primer on the web or in print.

Timing differences, playing ahead or behind the beat, pushing and pulling notes are the currency of the good musician. They aint necessarily swing.

[Ubiety]

Stuff

Similar stuff

You're both talking about groove or feel or playing in the pocket or any number of terms used by musicians.

Swing is different. It has a very specific definition which can be found in any jazz primer on the web or in print.

Timing differences, playing ahead or behind the beat, pushing and pulling notes are the currency of the good musician. They aint necessarily swing.

Well, you're speaking pure bullshit right there. Where I studied Jazz composition a definition for swing was never offered by any of my professors or instructors because they knew better. And it certainly wasn't offered by any musicians on the stand. Many times in different classes, we wouldn't do anything except listen to music, and then the instructor would ask someone to identify the swing in what they heard. It never could be done to the satisfaction of anybody.

If you want to talk about some algorithm that's predefined and defined by it's very nature, such as what's offered by an MPC, fine, go right ahead, but make sure that you are being clear about the difference between that and swing as it is understood by people who profess in playing it and teaching music that feature it.

Placing a lead sheet before a musician and labeling it "SWING" as a style of communication that the player has to convey does not reduce to the definition that you propose, and that's what's important here. The example that I gave comparing Tony Williams and Art Blakey do more than enough to render what you are talking about as inconsequential in the context of swing being employed by those who understand what they are communicating. What exactly does "delayed eighth notes" mean? That statement is neither informative nor instructive. Yet if someone wants to truly gain an understanding of swing all they have to do is listen to the masters, practice, imitate, and then innovate, as the saying goes.

The bottom line is that if you do happen to find a definition of swing in a primer on the "Internet or in print", you have to understand that what you are reading is a definition that came after the fact the musicians, of which swing was most familiar, found a word or phrase that articulated an aspect of what they preferred or liked in what they heard or created. They did not go around telling each other that swing is "delayed eighth notes", but they understood very well what swing meant in the context of their art, and they knew how to communicate that understanding.

[nuffink]

So swing is something undefineable that you can only learn from professors except that they can't define it either?

Or was that just your professors?

[Ubiety]

So swing is something undefineable that you can only learn from professors except that they can't define it either?

Or was that just your professors?

The point is that any definition of swing is not definitive. The obvious thing, however, is that it can be understood. Those who know better leave it at that, and they refer to sources where examples of swing can be found, but they will not point out those examples because they understand that their perspective is unique and that it may not correspond to the perspectives other listeners or performers.

I admit that "teaching music that feature it" is not the best way to say what I meant. "Educating people about the music of swing" is a better way to put it.

[nuffink]

So swing is something undefineable that you can only learn from professors except that they can't define it either?

Or was that just your professors?

The point is that any definition of swing is not definitive. The obvious thing, however, is that it can be understood. Those who know better leave it at that, and they refer to sources where examples of swing can be found, but they will not point out those examples because they understand that their perspective is unique and that it may not correspond to the perspective of another listener.

That sounds to me like a variation on a theme of don't learn theory just do it. Fair enough, but a bit daft on a forum devoted to theory. Should we give up talking about harmonic theory because "Jimi/Wolfgang Amadeus/blah blah broke all the rules dooood" or it just swing you have a problem with?

[Ubiety]

So swing is something undefineable that you can only learn from professors except that they can't define it either?

Or was that just your professors?

The point is that any definition of swing is not definitive. The obvious thing, however, is that it can be understood. Those who know better leave it at that, and they refer to sources where examples of swing can be found, but they will not point out those examples because they understand that their perspective is unique and that it may not correspond to the perspective of another listener.

That sounds to me like a variation on a theme of don't learn theory just do it. Fair enough, but a bit daft on a forum devoted to theory. Should we give up talking about harmonic theory because "Jimi/Wolfgang Amadeus/blah blah broke all the rules dooood" or it just swing you have a problem with?

If you are going to notate the exact articulations that a person must play then you have classical music, or music in the classical European tradition. Duke Ellington is a great example of someone who notated as per his players abilities. The way he wrote for Johnny Hodges was very specific to Hodges's style and abilities; Duke would never hand another alto sax player Hodges's lead sheets. But the overriding understanding of his orchestras was that they were playing Swing and not classical music. Knowing that meant that phrasings and articulations had to be done in a certain way, a way that was understood prior to taking the bandstand. Big Band leaders and BeBop leaders often scouted other bands for talent, they did not audition players too much. The way Miles Davis learned to play was by watching and listening to other players, practicing, and by trying to get time sitting in with some of the better players, in addition to spending some time in Billy Eckstine's band. Players also listened to recordings. The thing about swing is that one had to somehow grasp the concept of it without the aid of someone else being specific about what it was or how to achieve it. It's one of the major reasons why all those great players and band leaders have distinctive voices. they each came to their understanding in different ways. The bottom line is that the music came first and that if one thought it was the heroin, booze, lifestyle or whatever, then they were on the wrong track. Swing can no sooner be confined to drugs and attitude than it can to words. It seems to be a concept of a whole rather than a detail, though details are important.

Theory is very important, of course. At the encouragement of Dizzy Gillespie, Miles learned to play to piano in order to enrich his understanding of music theory and the way the piano functions in the rhythm section. Alan Dawson, renowned jazz drummer, taught his students, Tony Williams, Terri Lynn-Carrington, etc. the importance of learning theory and structure so that they could function as complete musicians in context of performances rather than just as backup. So, no, I am not advocating passing on music theory. What I am advocating is that one beware of any definition of swing with the idea that that is going to tell them all they need to know.

[JumpingJackFlash]

If you are going to notate the exact articulations that a person must play then you have classical music, or music in the classical European tradition. Duke Ellington is a great example of someone who notated as per his players abilities. The way he wrote for Johnny Hodges was very specific to Hodges's style and abilities; Duke would never hand another alto sax player Hodges's lead sheets.

Just to point out (hopefully without starting another argument) that none of this is specific to Swing/Jazz. - Mozart for example usually wrote his operas for specific performers, and when an aria was sung by a different vocalist, he adapted the part accordingly.

Also, classical music is not always necessarily played exactly as written (and only as written) either; the Concerto Cadenza for example was usually improvised by the performer. To say nothing of Baroque music, where players had to improvise from figured bass, as well as embellish parts with ornamentation. (One such phenomenon, notes inégales was very similar to Swing).

[Ubiety]

If you are going to notate the exact articulations that a person must play then you have classical music, or music in the classical European tradition. Duke Ellington is a great example of someone who notated as per his players abilities. The way he wrote for Johnny Hodges was very specific to Hodges's style and abilities; Duke would never hand another alto sax player Hodges's lead sheets.

Just to point out (hopefully without starting another argument) that none of this is specific to Swing/Jazz. - Mozart for example usually wrote his operas for specific performers, and when an aria was sung by a different vocalist, he adapted the part accordingly.

Also, classical music is not always necessarily played exactly as written (and only as written) either; the Concerto Cadenza for example was usually improvised by the performer. To say nothing of Baroque music, where players had to improvise from figured bass, as well as embellish parts with ornamentation. (One such phenomenon, notes inégales was very similar to Swing).

I know this. You're right. Note that I said "or in the classical European tradition." What I was pointing out were similarities between the two genres as well as differences.

[jens]

the Kompakt label

*EEK*

[BosseJo]

The point is that any definition of swing is not definitive.

The thing about swing is that one had to somehow grasp the concept of it without the aid of someone else being specific about what it was or how to achieve it. It's one of the major reasons why all those great players and band leaders have distinctive voices. they each came to their understanding in different ways.

And the best swing happened in real time, not according to wiccihehpqeqdia or a "jazz primer" web page.

[Ubiety]

The thing is that musicians who know how to swing laugh when they see a button on a machine that says "Swing Function". They laugh even harder when they see that the button can also control how much swing the user wants to use. You know, all the years of sacrifice learning to understand swing in its many, virtually unlimited, contexts when all they had to do was press a button on a machine that featured a swing function. It really is absurd. It is a classic example of the dumbing down of music education, and education in general. You don't see mathematicians recognizing other people as mathematicians simply because those people know how to use a calculator.

It's true that the MPC and other machines or programs that feature a swing function add a desirable quality to sequences when that feature is used. But whatever that function does it is NOT swing. And I love me some old school Hip Hop. Maybe the swing function on MPC's and other machines should be called the "flow" function. That might work.