The "Swing Feel" Matrix

[pamosmusic]

I completely agree with everything said here. “Listen and play” can be achieved via a record or with someone in real time showing what swung 8th notes sound like. Either way the learning is on the listener.

I will also say that expressing swing within the context of meter can vary widely. One can literally express swing with just one correctly placed note in the context of the beat. This kind of understanding may take someone years to understand but it doesn’t mean they can’t be made to understand the concept of swung 8th notes.

Play these swung 8th notes along with me, this is the sound of swing.

It’s not as complicated as people want to make it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And when the student tries to repeat what you model and fails?

[PickingMyEars]

Dammit, I didn't want to comment.

I guess I have to say "last time" and go back to the shadows.

Rhythm can be taught. Yes.

We rely on books and bullshitting here on the internet to do what? TALK about improvisation? I think most of us want to PLAY better music. Talk is cheap. We rely on books in the beginning, middle, and end of our musical journeys? What do we have to show for it? A library of books? Who's got a library of jazz instruction books? Me, me, me!

I didn't learn shit unless I was studying with a teacher. That's just me. However, jazz is social music. If we never play FOR people, WITH people, putting it into practice. Doesn't have to be a packed area. Doesn't even have to be a coffee house. Play WITH people or FOR people or both. Those are the LEARNING experiences. My teachers helped me fine tune what I already knew I had to practice.

Books weren't a magic elixir or whatever.

Books gave me a seed of an idea. Something to get curious about. A pathway to a question.

We have books for harmony. We have a way to talk about harmony on the internet. We don't talk about rhythm unless it's about swing feel. Holy crap, stop obsessing about the lives between two eighth notes. By that, I mean that swing is a result of confident INTENTIONAL rhythm. Of being aware of our musical timing. If we just talk eighth notes, we are left with janky time feel. Where's the seed of an idea for rhythm if we don't give it the light of day? Can't play music with knowledge of chords alone. Even the most complex harmony sounds boring without attention to rhythm, doesn't matter the genre. You don't need rhythmic complexity all the time, "simple" rhythms should be intentionally simple. Artistic choice is as much rhythmic as it is harmonic.

The study of rhythm is complex, more so than harmony. We can teach that complexity and engage with students 1-on-1 or in ensembles. Drummers do that. They talk about rhythm, should that be front page news. If drummers can talk rhythm, why can't we?

Until we treat rhythm as a serious facet of musical study, FORGET any bullshit about "how to swing."

This is why I created that "Pedagogy of Music and Rhythm" thread several months back. Rhythm is the act of transforming everything else we practice into actual music. Rhythm is the EXECUTION of music. The more we invest in our rhythm, the better musicians we become.

No more posts from me for a bit, just wanted to clarify. Can't get swept up in this again. Gotta go practice

[pamosmusic]

Books didn't give me the magic bean or whatever.

Books gave me a seed of an idea. Something to get curious about. A pathway to a question.

Brother, I don't know how to break this to you ... but beans are kind of seeds.

[PickingMyEars]

That is funny . I wanted to type elixir instead, but I kept getting typos. I'll blame it on my barking dog in the background.

Fixed! Thanks for the proof read! Now it's good to stay put as I exit, stage left!

[Beats_and_Guitars]

And when the student tries to repeat what you model and fails?

Are you still not a teacher?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

Are you still not a teacher?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depends on what I do next.

[Beats_and_Guitars]

Depends on what I do next.

Well you tell me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

Well you tell me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If I go … well … it’s his job to learn.

Then, no. I’m not really teaching.

[Beats_and_Guitars]

If I go … well … it’s his job to learn.

Then, no. I’m not really teaching.

But isn’t it ultimately their “job” to learn? You can’t learn for them. Who decides whether your teaching is valid? If you say you’re teaching who am I to argue?

Honestly the conversation about teaching is a straightforward matter. We are getting into the weeds at no real benefit to the original topic. So I’ll say it again…can swing (as a concept in music) be taught? Yes it can….swing is not some magical, elusive thing that can’t be explained and demonstrated. When one explains and demonstrates this is teaching. It has nothing to do with the ability to learn on the person receiving the information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

But isn’t it ultimately their “job” to learn?

Honestly this is kind of a disappointing dichotomy that you seem to be stuck on here.

The relationship between a student and a teacher shouldn’t be adversarial or indifferent or whatever.

Yes, it is their job to learn. Yes, it is my job to make the thing something they want to learn. It’s kind of a team effort, and to put it bluntly, a teacher who insists that it’s a students job to learn what they’re teaching and doesn’t meet the student where they are probably isn’t going to be successful.

But also yeah rhythm can be taught. So that’s cool.

[Beats_and_Guitars]

teacher who insists that it’s a students job to learn what they’re teaching and doesn’t meet the student where they are probably isn’t going to be successful.

But also yeah rhythm can be taught. So that’s cool.

There are countless students that do not graduate from high school despite receiving the same teaching as those that do graduate. You can’t put the owness on the teacher for that.

[pamosmusic]

There are countless students that do not graduate from high school despite receiving the same teaching as those that do graduate. You can’t put the owness on the teacher for that.

Onus.

And no, but why are we talking about that?

You're talking about teachers bound by curricula and statewide standards etc, with the added challenge of teaching 20-30 kids at a time four or five times a day. That's a super hard job (as is learning that way) and different than sitting in front of a student as a music teacher and helping them with their time.

[Beats_and_Guitars]

Onus.

And no, but why are we talking about that?

You're talking about teachers bound by curricula and statewide standards etc, with the added challenge of teaching 20-30 kids at a time four or five times a day. That's a super hard job (as is learning that way) and different than sitting in front of a student as a music teacher and helping them with their time.

My apologies for the misspelling and thank you for the correction English is not my first language. The point I’m making is that this conversation has gotten far off in the weeds. My original point was that swing can be taught. I’m having a hard time understanding why there is so much contention around the topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Strat-itis]

Just that modeling is probably the best tool in the tool kit for most things, when it’s done well. But that some things are easier to explain or analyze than others. I think there’s probably more to analyze about time feel than we usually think. But when you try and explain time feel, you usually end up in a quagmire. Just sing and listen and sing and listen is usually the move there. You get a little further thinking about harmony, but still need to sit and listen at the end of the day. So I was just saying that rhythm is taught differently most of the time but it’s not like some foreign mystical concept that is fundamentally different than other musical skills.

Yes, I generally agree. I say the same thing if you read my posts. Figuring out the systems for how aspects of the music work is extremely helpful, it's foolish to disavow them. But ultimately you need to reach a musical understanding, and then execute it successfully. Rhythm is viewed differently than harmony (not if you're a drummer). Etc.

I disagree here, like I originally said.

But when you try and explain time feel, you usually end up in a quagmire. Just sing and listen and sing and listen is usually the move there.

I don't find time feel hard to explain. I've made threads on the subject before. Imo it's foolish to take the approach that you'll grasp a topic better if you don't know what you're doing. :P You absolutely want to be able to conceptualize time feel theoretically for yourself.

[djg]

I’m having a hard time understanding why there is so much contention around the topic.

you mean you have a hard time understanding why folks wont see it your way.

[GuyBoden]

I've seen that exact experiment myself, and yes it works. If you get a bunch of teenagers to learn to play something simple like Perdido by ear from the recording, it does indeed swing much more than if they read it off the page.

I mean, hold the front page, or what? Story of the century!

And yet, it does seem that so often in jazz education we go back to bits of paper. I remember this sort of jazz theory tome that got passed out to the students in the same class when the topic turned to improvisation. I remember thinking - surely it's possible to get a bit more of that ear learning into improvisation at the early stages? Why not work on melodic variation or riffs? Why do we have to start with scales with polysyllabic names?

I don't understand how anyone is expected to swing when you've been taught music in this way. It's amazing that people do at all quite honestly.

Indeed, very true in my experience, over the years I've seen more and more Hobby players using their eyes more than their ears, with a detrimental effect on the music.

[Christian Miller]

Indeed, very true in my experience, over the years I've seen more and more Hobby players using their eyes more than their ears, with a detrimental effect on the music.

For a long time I thought it was the specific fault of Chord Scale Theory.

I’ve now started to see it as a deeper cause. Many people get into jazz because they want to improvise.

But teaching improvisation before the sound, flow and prosody of the music is internalised obviously leads to people not sounding like ‘jazz musicians.’

but many people seem to end up thinking that’s what jazz = improvisation from music theory and then wonder why they don’t sound like ‘proper jazz.’

It’s a cultural split going down through the middle of jazz, so it’s not a small thing. There’s a faction that celebrates improvisation over all, and a faction that focuses on the music and repertoire. The former have had more of a say in the academic side I think, but you see both.

Ultimately I think most of us are looking for a synthesis between the two - but at the early stages I’d say you have to choose jazz or improvisation.

You can’t do both until later. If you aren’t satisfied with your ability to sound like jazz, improvising isn’t going to help you. Learning music by ear will.

(And then you learn so many of the greats didn’t really improvise the way people think.)

Again, hold the front page. But we are easily distracted, and commerce is involved.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[acoustic_archtop]

It’s only a daft example to you because you don’t understand the analogy. Regardless of the retention ability of the student the teacher is still teaching. Whether or not the student is capable of retaining the information the information is still being presented. His question was “is it still being taught” I was addressing that particular question and the answer is of course it’s still being taught. “Teaching” in it of itself has nothing to do with the students ability or desire to learn the material being taught it’s still teaching.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Stupid. So, someone can teach you how to run a 3 minute mile? Does that even make sense? If you say yes, then, you've lost all credibility.

[jazzyfan]

If "swing" can be taught, then how can it be that there are LEGIONS of professional players who can't swing well at all.
They've had all the time in the world to fix their horrible "swing" and yet they don't/can't.
The majority of players can't swing well at all.

[pamosmusic]

If "swing" can be taught, then how can it be that there are LEGIONS of professional players who can't swing well at all.
They've had all the time in the world to fix their horrible "swing" and yet they don't/can't.
The majority of players can't swing well at all.

If math can be taught, then how come there are legions of otherwise smart people who aren’t good at math?

this is a silly formulation which will probably be obvious to anyone who thinks about it for more than three seconds

[Strat-itis]

[Beats_and_Guitars]

Stupid. So, someone can teach you how to run a 3 minute mile? Does that even make sense? If you say yes, then, you've lost all credibility.

This is out of context and you’ve not only made a bad analogy but I sense you’re attempting to move the goalposts. We are discussing teaching swing. We have not talked about mastering swing or masterfully executing swing. We are simply discussing teaching swing.

Just as running has different levels of ability so does swing. Basic running can be demonstrated and taught…for one to achieving high levels of speed one would have to start with the basics. A 3 minute mile takes training, discipline and more than likely years of conditioning. The same principle applies to swing. You can teach someone swing at a very basic level…developing mastery is a different discussion.

[jazzyfan]

If math can be taught, then how come there are legions of otherwise smart people who aren’t good at math?

this is a silly formulation which will probably be obvious to anyone who thinks about it for more than three seconds

It's hardly a "silly formulation"....
It's a serious "problem", especially if you are trying to teach somebody something that they just don't have an ability for. And taking their money for the lessons...
What do you do? Tell them that they should try knitting?
Or keep grinding away and pretending that they will "get" it eventually - essentially lying to the student in order to keep giving lessons.
What do you say to such a student?

[Beats_and_Guitars]

It's hardly a "silly formulation".
It's a serious "problem", especially if you are trying to teach somebody something that they just don't have an ability for.
There's nothing to be done about it.
What do you say to such a student?

Simple swing isn’t really a difficult thing to explain. If someone can play straight 8th notes they are a prime candidate to learn swung 8th notes. It doesn’t have to be a complex lesson on all of the intricacies of swing or how to master those intricacies. That may come with time but swing can be explained and demonstrated in a way that’s easy to feel for someone that can play straight 8th notes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

It's hardly a "silly formulation"....
It's a serious "problem", especially if you are trying to teach somebody something that they just don't have an ability for. And taking their money for the lessons...
What do you do? Tell them that they should try knitting?
Or keep grinding away and pretending that they will "get" it eventually - essentially lying to the student in order to keep giving lessons.
What do you say to such a student?

No it’s an extremely silly formulation.

If writing can be taught then why are there so many bad books? If cooking can be taught then why are so many people bad cooks?

It’s a silly formulation.

But for the sake of argument … what is “it” that they’re trying to get?

Are they trying to have fun and play? I help them get better as long as they’re enjoying themselves and improving.

Are they trying to get ready for a music degree that will cost them money? Then I’m pretty up front with them about where they are and how much time they have.

I don’t understand why this is controversial.