......there's a million little things like this that, while they can be decomposed meticuluously, don't ultimately sound very good without an intuition.
FWIW - Timing should be exact - for learning purposes. Only After that is achieved should one add their own 'interpretive' nuance - as mentioned by Ted.
I get the feeling that's not quite what Ted meant...
I probably expressed myself badly as usual. Metronomic rhythms and rhythms which can be precisely written are a tiny speck in the universe of rhythm in general. Even if a regular pulse is present or implied it is next to impossible to guarantee transmission of intention in written form alone without weighing the score down with instructions. Any improviser who has attempted to transcribe his own free rhythm will know this. To take a relatively simple example, consider learning the transcription of a Waller solo. A transcriber such as John Farrell was superbly accurate but a player who has not heard the original or who is inexperienced in stride will produce an effect similar to that obtained by keying the score into a computer program. It will have precision of metre and lack just about all else.
This (im) poster - 'bunify' has had many responses - . They posted 10 days ago. Has not responded. I won't respond again to those w a single post.
I have had the same experience with trying to notate some of my improvisations (I gave up eventually) -- often I realize that I have to use polyrhythms or 15-tuplets etc. in order to actually notate some of the rhythms, especially with irregular runs, while it sounds perfectly natural.
You can check for yourself whether you are sloppy or not: find a score you have neither played nor heard with a combination of different rhythmic patterns. Do not listen yo it. Can you pencil a line to show which notes are played simultaneously with a note in the other clef, or between two notes in the other clef? If you can work this out without hearing it, you understand. The OP is learning it.
Can you pencil a line to show which notes are played simultaneously with a note in the other clef, or between two notes in the other clef? If you can work this out without hearing it, you understand. The OP is learning it.
One should be able to understand fractions and count rhythms like that. And yet, at tempo it's frequently impossible, even when the rhythms are in strict time. I sometimes play with a group of professionals that have played jazz and big band standards since before I was born (and I'm pretty old) and they don't play what's on the sheet. I have to listen hard and pay attention. And I can't count any of that at speed. It's learned by rote.
But here's the devil's advocate: I have never had a studio job where I had headphones on with a click and had to punch in. And yet, having that awareness of rhythm makes me think (i) I would hate it but also (ii) could probably do it, albeit not my best playing in that condition.
I had to sing at the pitch and tempo of an Army band so that it could be assembled as part of a virtual choir. Somebody's good idea. I think I have it on youtube if anybody's interested. I found that it was easy to sing along but very hard to do a good job of it, too much to concentrate on. It's not my best vocal effort by any means, not that I'm that good anyway.
Yeah, I'd be interested. No, I wouldn't give any critique or anything, but I think a lot of the players at this forum would be enlightened a bit by seeing a bit of the "behind the scenes" work that professionals do.
The back story: the Army changed the name of that piece in 1956 and the older one is still in my brain, so I wasn't going to do this, but my group couldn't time it correctly or sing on pitch, so I did it myself, and that's why I added a little snark.