quarter note 'duple' pairs in 3/4 swing (ie jazz waltzes and similar)

[visitor]

k so I have seen this enough and it is tripping me up often such that I really need some guidance to get this right.
when in swing (i.e. eighth-eighth =  triplet (eight + eighth-eighth).

when there is a written out 'feel' of the measure broadening (quarter - quarter + quarter -quarter).

how exactly do I perceive the larger pulse. it is 4 equal parts of the 3 beat measure? super tricky , how do I feel this? is there a better way to think about it?
Any jazz exercises, drills, or realized score that reinforces this? I need to get this down, it's been a bugger on my plate for some time know.

example from something I am learning attached. thanks.

[falala]

Wow that's really interesting. I looked and looked at it and couldn't work it out.

The problem is that the notation seems to suggest the bar is divided into 2, and then each of those two haves divided into 2 again. Normally in a 3/4 bar each half would be a dotted crotchet long - ie the second half would begin halfway through the second beat of the bar. But the application of swing means the division of the second beat of the bar is shifted later, so the two parts of the bar (beat 1 + first part of beat 2, and second part of beat 2 + beat 3) are of DIFFERENT lengths!

My best guess would be to play them all equal, as you say, and forget about the swing for that bar. These things occur in improvised jazz, when particular groups of notes divide the beat evenly and just cut across the swing, so I suppose the transcriber is just trying to get some of that freedom.

Actually I think the notation is wrong, isn't it? The normal way of dividing a dotted crotchet into duplet (eg in 6/8) would be to use quaver duplets, not crotchet ones. Since this is dividing a dotted crotchet length (albeit within a different meter) it should do so as well.

[visitor]

Wow that's really interesting. I looked and looked at it and couldn't work it out.

The problem is that the notation seems to suggest the bar is divided into 2, and then each of those two haves divided into 2 again. Normally in a 3/4 bar each half would be a dotted crotchet long - ie the second half would begin halfway through the second beat of the bar. But the application of swing means the division of the second beat of the bar is shifted later, so the two parts of the bar (beat 1 + first part of beat 2, and second part of beat 2 + beat 3) are of DIFFERENT lengths!

My best guess would be to play them all equal, as you say, and forget about the swing for that bar. These things occur in improvised jazz, when particular groups of notes divide the beat evenly and just cut across the swing, so I suppose the transcriber is just trying to get some of that freedom.

Actually I think the notation is wrong, isn't it? The normal way of dividing a dotted crotchet into duplet (eg in 6/8) would be to use quaver duplets, not crotchet ones. Since this is dividing a dotted crotchet length (albeit within a different meter) it should do so as well.

hi falala, thank you so much for taking time to read, interpret and offer feedback and comment.

I have to think these are an 'actual thing' similar to (but more rare ) than a super triplet (i.e. 3 quarter note triple that occupies two beats in 4/4 time for example). I would venture to call these SUPER DUPLES or SUPER DUPLETS.

At first glance I too thought they were a mistake, however in a different piece, I encounter them more frequently and in even more difficult to 'pull off' contexts, per attached below.

I get the 'effect' of the intention but I bugger it up everytime I try it. and in jazz (both improved and realized score) rhythmic integrity is key, even when 'free er, as the 'free' sections are moments of expressive emphasis against the backdrop of stricter rhythms).

hopefully as we get more visibility on these, we'll both get some more feedback, thanks for looking (and for taking a gander at the other examples, ).

[goldentone]

I have to think these are an 'actual thing' similar to (but more rare ) than a super triplet (i.e. 3 quarter note triple that occupies two beats in 4/4 time for example). I would venture to call these SUPER DUPLES or SUPER DUPLETS.

I would interpose a more divine solution.  I would rest in your knowledge of the heart of music, and countenance that, until revelation and light show this issue to be nothing.  Or it may be an error of notation.  If such duples were the norm of the consciousness of music, they would have appeared in the past before these duples appeared out of nowhere.

Perhaps I misinterpret the overtones, but music does have a parallel soul.

[falala]

Are you sure the pieces are meant to be swung? These kinds of rhythms seem to belong more to a 3-against-2 straight latin jazz feel, to me.

What are the titles and composers of the pieces? Are there directions at the top that they should be swung, or are you just assuming that?

[j_menz]

I'm assuming you can play them correctly straight (ie unswung).  Do that, then apply the swing feel. Does it sound right?

My guess would be that for the dupletted bars, the swing feel is pulled right back and they're to be played almost straight. But use your ears.

Swing isn't something rigid or mathematical, it's a feel and is very flexible - you can apply more or less of it (and should vary it for effect).

Caveat: I make no claims to be a jazz musician, but have played quite a bit of the notated variety.

[bobert]

Typically, when a performer is instructed to swing something in this meter, it is the upbeats and only the upbeats that are swung, which would include all upbeat 8ths, and any upbeat quarters or dotted quarters.  Everything else either lands on the beat or is played as is.  So, I would play the duples in this example straight, as a contrast to the swing feel.

If this momentary departure from the underlying meter were intended to be swung, the composer/arranger really needs to write it in such a way that it is unambiguous.  The common way to make this happen as two against three, where the two's are meant to be swung would be to simply write the full 3/4 measure as quarter, eighth, quarter, eighth, i.e., each pulse of two now consists of a quarter + eighth or three eighths total, and this, if strictly adhered to, would indeed swing, more or less, depending on the tempo > dah-do-dah-do....

As written, the duples are notated correctly, i.e., two bracketed quarters in the space of one dotted quarter, similar to the way three bracketed quarters replace two quarters.  Another way to write this would be as four dotted eighths in a row and no bracket.

[falala]

Typically, when a performer is instructed to swing something in this meter, it is the upbeats and only the upbeats that are swung, which would include all upbeat 8ths, and any upbeat quarters or dotted quarters.  Everything else either lands on the beat or is played as is.

That's not true at all. Swing applies generally to the division of every beat. I can't remember ever hearing a piece of jazz that constantly alternated between straight first beats of each bar and swung upbeats! That would be an odd effect indeed.

Although as I said, it is normal to depart from the swing feel from time to time, and people transcribing it sometime use rhythms like this to capture a sense of how that happens.

[visitor]

thanks all! very much!

1. yes it is secifically instructed to swing (actually in one of them, the A section is straight, then moves into jazz waltz w/ clear notation of eight note - eight note = triplet (eight-tied eight + eighth))

2. i believe the notation is calling for a written out 'straight feel' sound, the more and more i play w/ it.  due to how it divides the 3 beat bear evenly, the second super duplet should still sound syncopoated since it enters on a weak part of another beat subdivision.

3. yes, the swing instruction is called for in my scores for full treatment, as it applies to the the eight vs. triplet type feel of each beat.

----------
will keep messing w/ this and if i record something will post and see what it sounds like.

 

[dcstudio]

I agree with Bobert... 

[falala]

Sorry - on reflection, I think there may have been some confusion of terminology.

What do you mean by "upbeat"? Do you mean the second eighth of every beat (ie, that which leads "up" to the beginning of each beat)?

I understand the word "upbeat" to mean the last beat of the bar - that which leads "up" to the strong first beat of the following bar.

[bobert]

What do you mean by "upbeat"? Do you mean the second eighth of every beat (ie, that which leads "up" to the beginning of each beat)?

Yes, upbeat = 2nd half of each beat.  I realize it is difficult to discuss interpretation issues without demonstration.