9/4 grouped 2 2 3 2

[rpjazzguitar]

Last night somebody brought in a big band chart in 9/4. The chart said "grouped 2 2 3 2" right on top.

The bars were not subdivided in any way. No dashed vertical line in the middle of the bar or anything like that. And, the written lines did not obviously correspond with the 2 2 3 2. Frankly, it was hard to tell.

I was reading the piano chart because there was no pianist.

It started with 15 bars of rest.

For a new reading-low-point, at first I couldn't even count the rest correctly.

Ordinarily, I can play a rest as well as the next guitarist. I back off the volume pedal and my gear doesn't even hum.

There's an argument, in my head at least, that the chart would have been better written in alternating bars of 4/4 and 5/4.

But, I'm not asking how it should have been written.

Rather, I'm asking if anyone has any tips for how to cope with this sort of chart. How do you tap your foot, if at all? How do you quickly start to feel the subdivisions? I can say with reasonable certainty that converting it mentally into 3 bars of 3/4 did not work at all.

Last night, the only saving grace was that the drummer played a pattern where he hit 8 and 9 every bar in a distinctive way.

Complicating the problem was that the horns were struggling too, although they stumbled through it - to their credit. I wouldn't call it locked in. Maybe if the horns were tighter it would have been easier?

Any thoughts?

[mr. beaumont]

My thought is bringing a chart in 9/4 to a jam session sounds kind of obnoxious

[rpjazzguitar]

My thought is bringing a chart in 9/4 to a jam session sounds kind of obnoxious

It's a big band that been in existence for years and does maybe a dozen gigs a year. Plays 2x/month. So, not exactly a jam. The leader didn't bring in this chart. One of the horn players heard it and bought it, and brought it in. I'm an occasional sub (when they can't find a pianist within 100 miles).

I don't know if that horn player was a regular or not. A sub probably shouldn't show up with any charts, much less one in 9/4.

Just generally speaking, when musicians get together to workshop things, rather than just jam, I find that it's important to have some challenging things to play. If it's too easy, they get bored. If some of the tunes are a struggle they're likely to find more value in the session.

EDIT: Another thought. Every mostly-rehearsal big band I've played in (four in the last few years) has the same sort of approach. The book is somewhere between sizeable and massive, numbers get called seemingly at random, the tune is counted off at full speed and, when it's done, it's rare for anything to be repeated. If anything is repeated, it's very likely to be some horn lines, often then tried without the rhythm section.

I haven't seen any distinction drawn between, say, Sammy Nestico and Gordon Goodwin, although, on average, Goodwin's charts are much harder to read, at least in the guitar chair.

[Mick-7]

Last night somebody brought in a big band chart in 9/4. The chart said "grouped 2 2 3 2" right on top.

I would count it like that....

| 1/2 note (Two 1/4 notes) ~ 1/2 note (Two 1/4 notes) ~ Dotted 1/2 note (Three 1/4 notes) ~ 1/2 note (Two 1/4 notes) |

[supersoul]

Rather, I'm asking if anyone has any tips for how to cope with this sort of chart. How do you tap your foot, if at all? How do you quickly start to feel the subdivisions? I can say with reasonable certainty that converting it mentally into 3 bars of 3/4 did not work at all.

Last night, the only saving grace was that the drummer played a pattern where he hit 8 and 9 every bar in a distinctive way.

Complicating the problem was that the horns were struggling too, although they stumbled through it - to their credit. I wouldn't call it locked in. Maybe if the horns were tighter it would have been easier?

Any thoughts?

It sounds like a beast of a chart!
What is the role of the guitar? You said you were reading the piano part; is it chording or melody. For chording I would start off just playing that 2 + 2 + 3 + 2 very simply and trying to figure out how to lock in with the rest of the rhythm section.
Maybe the horns were struggling because the rhythm section sounded unsure of how the rhythm. Which is why I'd play as simply as possible, maybe almost Freddie Green quarter notes emphasizing ONE two ONE two ONE two three ONE two.
I haven't played in a big band in a long time, but for me it was always about making the rhythm section sound like one entity. Hence starting off caveman style until the rhythm section starts working together.
Once that starts happening, the horn parts might fall into place over top.

[Bob_Ross]

The chart said "grouped 2 2 3 2" right on top. ...[snip]...
How do you tap your foot, if at all? How do you quickly start to feel the subdivisions?

Well, presuming it really was "grouped 2 2 3 2" that's how I'd tap my foot, those are the subdivisions I'd try to feel. In fact, for any/every odd meter, I'm tapping/subdividing/thinking in groups of two or three...period.

The thing about longer numerators (e.g., 5 or greater) in time signatures is that there's always a subdivision, either implicit or explicit. If it's always consistent from measure to measure -- if your 9/4 example was always 2-2-3-2 -- then the value of knowing that it's 9/4 is actually less than the value of knowing it's 2-2-3-2, because 2-2-3-2 is what's going to inform nearly anything you do (especially if you're a rhythm section member). It's pointless to try to count the whole measure when it's simpler and more connected to the internal structure of the music to just think 2-2-3-2. (Another way to think of it is short-short-long-short.)

I've encountered a number of charts where the subdivisions were indicated above every measure as rhythm slashes or headless non-pitched note stems... either | or |. to indicate 2 or 3. Your 9/4 example would be | | |. |
The advantage of this method is that if the internal subdivisions aren't uniformly consistent, you can notate every measure. E.g., maybe measure 1 in the 9/4 example is
| | |. |
but measure 2 is | |. | |
and measure 3 is |. |. |.
and measure 4 is | | | |.
before the whole pattern repeats. So you're looking at | | |. | | |. | | |. |. |. | | | |.
which may seem like Morse Code (and in a sense, it is!) but is very easy to tap your foot to and feel those subdivisions while playing. Depending on your role in the band, it may not even be necessary to feel where the bar lines are if you're feeling all the subdivisions.

[rpjazzguitar]

Well, presuming it really was "grouped 2 2 3 2" that's how I'd tap my foot, those are the subdivisions I'd try to feel. In fact, for any/every odd meter, I'm tapping/subdividing/thinking in groups of two or three...period.

The thing about longer numerators (e.g., 5 or greater) in time signatures is that there's always a subdivision, either implicit or explicit. If it's always consistent from measure to measure -- if your 9/4 example was always 2-2-3-2 -- then the value of knowing that it's 9/4 is actually less than the value of knowing it's 2-2-3-2, because 2-2-3-2 is what's going to inform nearly anything you do (especially if you're a rhythm section member). It's pointless to try to count the whole measure when it's simpler and more connected to the internal structure of the music to just think 2-2-3-2. (Another way to think of it is short-short-long-short.)

I've encountered a number of charts where the subdivisions were indicated above every measure as rhythm slashes or headless non-pitched note stems... either | or |. to indicate 2 or 3. Your 9/4 example would be | | |. |
The advantage of this method is that if the internal subdivisions aren't uniformly consistent, you can notate every measure. E.g., maybe measure 1 in the 9/4 example is
| | |. |
but measure 2 is | |. | |
and measure 3 is |. |. |.
and measure 4 is | | | |.
before the whole pattern repeats. So you're looking at | | |. | | |. | | |. |. |. | | | |.
which may seem like Morse Code (and in a sense, it is!) but is very easy to tap your foot to and feel those subdivisions while playing. Depending on your role in the band, it may not even be necessary to feel where the bar lines are if you're feeling all the subdivisions.

Thanks for the replies. I think the advice makes sense.

I was unable to count that pattern while trying to read lines in long bars with no subdivisions and/or trying to make comp chord changes in a rhythm I couldn't yet feel. Basically, too much to do at once.

Reminds me of when I learned to play 7/4. Eventually foot tapping 1 3 5 71 3 5 71 3 5 71 etc. becomes unconscious. But, it took quite a while to internalize. And still can be fragile. 5/4 can also be challenging if the pattern isn't Take Five or Mission Impossible.