Why does swing sound so "good" ?

[Toxikator]

Two very different sounds and styles, since in the former the swing is very metrically close to the 2:1 ratio, whereas (and in fact I only say this because you argued so hard to prove it to me a while back) the faster note shuffle is closer to a 1.5:1 ratio and is not necessarily well thought-of in triplets.

Yes. That's what everybody except Ubiety and possibly BosseJo (who knows?) has been saying all through the thread. Loudly and very clearly. The swing ratio is not fixed.
This doesn't make it rock swing or jazz swing or for that matter French swing, German swing or Swahili swing. It's just swing.

Okay, fair enough. Forget the whole "rock v jazz" thing as being absolute... I'm just saying that depending on the kind of music you write you'll think of swing in stylistically different ways.

This little audio example explains it a bit: the first one is a straight 2:1 swing on the 8th notes, the kind that you would expect to find in a blues or rock song. The second is a speedier 1.5:1 swing on the 16th notes, the kind you would expect to find in an up-tempo Jazz song. Of course either beat could easily appear in either genre... it's just depending on the kind of music you make and listen to, you might be thinking of either one when someone says "swing" straight away, and which association you make will reflect on your idea of "swung" playing.

Swing Example

I'm only trying to be reconciliatory here, since I'm imagining that the reason for the disagreement is that Ubiety writes music that uses a much looser swing typically and so he might find the definition that makes more sense to you to be a bit strange.

[herodotus]

How would one write that using only eighth notes?

Of course you wouldn't. You'd write it as triplets. But you'd only use triplets for that very quarter beat. And your score will defenitely look quite a lot cleaner.
Seriously, swing written out as triplets makes no sense in almost all styles. All it does is messing up your score layout royally.
Of course, for editing, it's quite a different thing, but I think some score editors know about swing...

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. If I saw a line of eighth notes and then a triplet, I would assume it was a line of eighth notes and a triplet, not a bunch of broken triplets written as eighth notes followed by a triplet written as a triplet.

But to be honest, I usually don't write such things as triplets, but as eighth notes in some form of compound time, where the beat is a dotted quarter note. But I didn't want to complicate the discussion any more than it already was.

Notated triplets are indeed a pain in the arse

[Sascha Franck]

I said this 6 months ago and you fought me tooth and nail about it!

Eh?

Just listen to the examples. When blues/rock musicians talk about swing they're typically talking about the shifting of 8th notes. They're less likely than Jazz musicians to be thinking of the shifting of 16th notes.

EH???

When was the last time you heard blues/rock musicians do some "typical" talk vs. jazz musicians talking "typically"? I mean, it must've been on some strange planet or so. When I talk about swing/shuffle, the musicians I talk to know what's meant. Completely regardless of style. And when I talk about halftime shuffle, it's just the same.

However, I would even say that 16th note swing is rarely happening in "standard" jazz music. It's *the* normal thing for, say, hiphop, RnB, funk and whatever grooves, though.

Sorry, but where do you get all your wisdom from? Certainly not from making music with reallife musicians, it seems. I do that almost every day (ok, roughly just around 100-150 days a year...), so please believe me that the last paragraph you wrote is nothing but nonsense it its purest form.

[Sascha Franck]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

And I'm afraid there's not much room for disagreement here.

If I saw a line of eighth notes and then a triplet, I would assume it was a line of eighth notes and a triplet, not a bunch of broken triplets written as eighth notes followed by a triplet written as a triplet.

Well, if the score was indexed with a "swing" or "shuffle", you wouldn't assume it were even 8ths (unless you want to be fired, that is ).

But to be honest, I usually don't write such things as triplets, but as eighth notes in some form of compound time, where the beat is a dotted quarter note.

Seriously, this would in no way represent what swing is about.
I already said so, swing is meant to be varied - some sort of agreement between the musicians. Heck, it has happened countless times to me that we were playing a typical jazz standard as a bossa or so (really common practise). With things being notated as triplets (or in whatever sort of compound meter), the score all of a sudden wouldn't fit anymore. With a "swing" index that you just leave out, everything will still be fine.

In addition, as said sometimes before, swing isn't always exact triplet values. As soon as you speed things up, there might not be much swing left. Another situation when your triplet/compound score wouldn't fit the bill at all, as any such notation has to be read literally (at least that's the common practise).

Really, if you think about it, notating even 8ths with a "swing" index is a brilliant way of dealing with the issue, as it's up to the musicians to interprete the amount of swing (which is defenitely what is expected) and as it makes scores pretty easy to read.

[Sascha Franck]

This little audio example explains it a bit: the first one is a straight 2:1 swing on the 8th notes, the kind that you would expect to find in a blues or rock song. The second is a speedier 1.5:1 swing on the 16th notes, the kind you would expect to find in an up-tempo Jazz song. Of course either beat could easily appear in either genre... it's just depending on the kind of music you make and listen to, you might be thinking of either one when someone says "swing" straight away, and which association you make will reflect on your idea of "swung" playing.

Swing Example

First off: Both examples are halftime shuffles. There's no swung 8ths in the first half but swung 16ths (unless you really like notating or working with 16ths written as 8ths, aka "alla breve", something no musician I know likes)
And I don't get the point either. The second half seems to be way too much shuffled to my ears to still be smooth. And fwiw, I can't for the life of me associate the second half with anything I "would expect to find in an up-tempo Jazz song". In fact, I would almost take a bet that this kind of beat has never been used in any sort of up-tempo jazz.

[Ubiety]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

Really, if you think about it, notating even 8ths with a "swing" index is a brilliant way of dealing with the issue, as it's up to the musicians to interprete the amount of swing (which is defenitely what is expected) and as it makes scores pretty easy to read.

This is how I learned to write swing lead sheets and sections of scores where I needed a swing feel. Typically the less information provided to musicians on lead sheets and scores, the better it is for them to handle the material. Even when one sees an incredibly detailed score the comparison between it and the recorded performance reveals that not everything that was performed and intended was notated on the score or lead sheets. The musicians had to know what was expected and appropriate to play. But I guess I'm getting off topic here.

[Ubiety]

How would one write that using only eighth notes?

Of course you wouldn't. You'd write it as triplets. But you'd only use triplets for that very quarter beat. And your score will defenitely look quite a lot cleaner.
Seriously, swing written out as triplets makes no sense in almost all styles. All it does is messing up your score layout royally.
Of course, for editing, it's quite a different thing, but I think some score editors know about swing...

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. If I saw a line of eighth notes and then a triplet, I would assume it was a line of eighth notes and a triplet, not a bunch of broken triplets written as eighth notes followed by a triplet written as a triplet.

But to be honest, I usually don't write such things as triplets, but as eighth notes in some form of compound time, where the beat is a dotted quarter note. But I didn't want to complicate the discussion any more than it already was.

Notated triplets are indeed a pain in the arse

Spot on with the dotted quarter note beat explanation, herodotus. Also, as a stylistic consideration the middle note of the last triplet in the score would most likely be ghosted rather than played to sound out in full, but no one is going to tell the musician to do that unless, of course, he wrecks the performance of the phrasing.

[Toxikator]

I said this 6 months ago and you fought me tooth and nail about it!

Eh?

6 months ago (I remember, it was around christmas), RIGHT before the formation of the Music Theory board, was a thread about swing. And I remained adamant that swing was triplets with the middle note missing, and that even though performers may fudge this time to taste the fundamental metric concept was triplets.

I was told by you, Nuffink, and others that that "wasn't even close on a good day" and that you "sometimes teach it to kids that way to make it easy to understand but it's really different".

Just listen to the examples. When blues/rock musicians talk about swing they're typically talking about the shifting of 8th notes. They're less likely than Jazz musicians to be thinking of the shifting of 16th notes.

EH???

When was the last time you heard blues/rock musicians do some "typical" talk vs. jazz musicians talking "typically"? I mean, it must've been on some strange planet or so. When I talk about swing/shuffle, the musicians I talk to know what's meant. Completely regardless of style. And when I talk about halftime shuffle, it's just the same.

However, I would even say that 16th note swing is rarely happening in "standard" jazz music. It's *the* normal thing for, say, hiphop, RnB, funk and whatever grooves, though.

Sorry, but where do you get all your wisdom from? Certainly not from making music with real life musicians, it seems. I do that almost every day (ok, roughly just around 100-150 days a year...), so please believe me that the last paragraph you wrote is nothing but nonsense it its purest form.

I'm feeling more and more like I should just abandon that whole bit.

The whole point of all of this was to try to say that the kind of music you write and appreciate will affect how you think of swing since it varies from artist to artist and style to style... in the sense that people who are used to hearing a faster swing will tend to avoid the triplets classification, people who play music where the artists all swing rather freely will avoid the strict metric classification, etc.

Instead it's become an argument about what constitutes "typical rock" vs "typical jazz" which was never the point and which I regret having started.

[Sascha Franck]

I was told by you, Nuffink, and others that that "wasn't even close on a good day" and that you "sometimes teach it to kids that way to make it easy to understand but it's really different".

I would like to see what you are refering to. Any links to some of my posts?
I am almost 100% sure that I didn't say anything contradicting to what I was saying in this thread.

[Toxikator]

I don't know what happened to the thread, since it was in Everything Else... I'll try to track it down.

[maxhodges1]

That's one of the reasons I HATE tarnce - it is mind-crushingly tedious, hideous and cheezy.

I always assumed that was the whole point of trance - to have simple, quantized and predictable beats to send you into an, erm, trance.

Problem then occurs when people think that just 'cos the beat is easy to make, then the rest is too - hence all the shite.

Great read to stimulate your Western minds on the possibilities for Trance:
http://www.afropop.org/explore/album_re ... +Travels+2

excerpts:
"Morrocan jajouka, along with trance music from India is found predominantly in the five/four or five/eight time signature creating mesmerizing rhythm and melodies. The Middle and Far East's interpretation of trance pushes the human mind and forces it to rationalize the likes of awkward and strange time signatures. This type of music becomes a type of spiritual expression, creating a much more enlightened version of trance music."

"Various Eastern drums and percussion create a sea of rhythm in the background of hypnotic melodies, dazzling the listener. Keeping with a four/four, yet hypnotic swaying rhythm, the track registers easily with the western perspective as a subtly different and distinctively Eastern song structure moves in a constant forward motion."

"Generally speaking, world-music influenced dance music of the West (including hip hop) has for the most part merely sampled sonic textures of Arabic and Indian music, cutting and looping intervals of time to fit evenly within the context of four/four rhythm. This monotonously repetitive rhythm fades easily into the background of a club in Western culture and has unconsciously become an instinctive way for the West to dance. Western trance music, for example has tended to stick to a four/four hypnotic rhythm that exhausts the mind of the listener into a trance while the East takes the concept of mixing spirituality and music a step further."

[maxhodges1]

It's simple: tension/release. Oldest trick in the book. It's not about the early or late beat, it's about the hit that's right on that makes it all OK.

that's about the biggest oversimplification I've ever read

For those interested in trance, here's a good start:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trance_music

[herodotus]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

And I'm afraid there's not much room for disagreement here.

Sure there is.

If I saw a line of eighth notes and then a triplet, I would assume it was a line of eighth notes and a triplet, not a bunch of broken triplets written as eighth notes followed by a triplet written as a triplet.

Well, if the score was indexed with a "swing" or "shuffle", you wouldn't assume it were even 8ths (unless you want to be fired, that is ).

The fact that some professionals use these shortcuts doesn't make them reasonable. Journalists are the most common professional users of language and they are destroying it, or at least making it ugly, at an alarming rate.

But to be honest, I usually don't write such things as triplets, but as eighth notes in some form of compound time, where the beat is a dotted quarter note.

Seriously, this would in no way represent what swing is about.
I already said so, swing is meant to be varied - some sort of agreement between the musicians. Heck, it has happened countless times to me that we were playing a typical jazz standard as a bossa or so (really common practise). With things being notated as triplets (or in whatever sort of compound meter), the score all of a sudden wouldn't fit anymore. With a "swing" index that you just leave out, everything will still be fine.

Excuse me? I was talking about the music that I write. My music. Please don't tell me what I really mean when I write it.

I come from a background where what is written is an exact description of what is played, not a rough guide. I realize that when 'jobbing' one will do the sorts of things you described when playing standards. Why not? But if one is playing something written by Bartok or Nancarrow or Bach or Birtwistle or Mozart or Penderecki or Webern or Walton or Stravinsky or whoever, one is expected to play EXACTLY what is written. (unless you want to get fired ). There is interpretation involved, but within much smaller confines than the ones you are describing.

It's a different tradition. A composer centered tradition. Admittedly it is dying off rather rapidly. The few composers of this sort that are still around tend to use sequencers and electronic media, rather than live musicians. The former have the advantage of playing exactly what you write at any speed you desire, without ever telling you what you really mean.

Really, if you think about it, notating even 8ths with a "swing" index is a brilliant way of dealing with the issue, as it's up to the musicians to interprete the amount of swing (which is defenitely what is expected) and as it makes scores pretty easy to read.

Again the cultural difference. I never want musicians to 'interpret' the amount of swing in something I have written. If I did, I would want to know their playing habits really well.

And what of scores with not just one 'filled in' broken triplet/swung duplet, but many? What if there are rapid time signature changes going on? The easy to read score would soon become a nightmare. At least to me.

But in the end I don't really care. Perhaps the music I write that I consider to 'swing' isn't really 'swing'. Despite the fact that swing era jazz has been a part of my life since I could listen to music, I am perfectly willing to admit that I have never been very close to more recent jazz. I have never been able to hear any swing whatever in 250 bpm bebop songs. Though I have put little effort into trying to do so.

So I will bow out of this conversation that I never would have really gotten into in the first place, had nuffink not accused me in a veiled fashion of being a 'bitter old muso unwilling or incapable of passing on whatever small amount of knowledge they've gleaned over the years'.

I really must learn to stop letting him draw me out.

[nuffink]

Interested in trance? Wrong thread.

[nuffink]

So I will bow out of this conversation that I never would have really gotten into in the first place, had nuffink not accused me in a veiled fashion of being a 'bitter old muso unwilling or incapable of passing on whatever small amount of knowledge they've gleaned over the years'.

I really must learn to stop letting him draw me out.

That's both a bit disingenuous (you were already active in the thread) and a bit sensitive. The barb wasn't veiled or aimed at you. You weren't the one getting all mystic meg over the magic of Tony Williams.