Jazz swing notation

Sometimes a well-meaning composer or arranger will try to approximate a jazz swing style notationally in this way:

dotted-eighth, sixteenth rhythmThis is wrong.

Sometimes he or she will take this approach:

12/8 rhythmAlso wrong. So is this one:

eighth notes with indication to tripletizeThe idea of “tripletizing” eighth-note rhythms is especially pervasive, and misleading if taught without nuance. Composers are sometimes guilty of this; so are conductors, arrangers, and educators.

The issue with each of these bad notational approaches is that they try to approximate characteristic jazz rhythms with symbols that are rooted in the rather different rhythms of classical music. But real jazz swing rhythms aren’t necessarily dotted or 12/8 or triplets. This leads to problems both for composers and performers.

For composers, using a 12/8 time signature or eighth-note triplets in 4/4 too easily drags the work into a compound-meter feel. And jazz swing is decidedly not in a compound meter: the rhythms are very much duple in nature. Authentic swing almost always has an underlying feel of two notes per beat, even though those notes are not equal in length. Extended or frequent passages with a compound-meter feel (three notes per beat) are dead giveaways of a failure to really absorb swing style.

For jazz-untrained performers, seeing dotted or compound-type rhythms on a page simply doesn’t provide fine enough information to accurately reproduce authentic swing style. It’s perhaps a bit like baking a cake from a recipe with each ingredient rounded off to the nearest tablespoon; the result will approximate a cake but likely won’t be especially successful. And even for the jazz-trained performer, sometimes the dotted or triplety notation can obscure the intended sound, something like typing a sentence into Google Translate, translating it into some other language, and then translating it back into English. (The result definitely loses fidelity.) Or, the poor notation can simply dull or distract from the jazz musician’s more authentic approach.

All of this, of course, begs the question of what precisely is the correct downbeat-upbeat length ratio for a true swing style, if not the 2:1 ratio of the triplety approach or the 3:1 ratio of the dotted approach. That question is larger in scope than I intend to fully tackle here, but I think it suffices to summarize with a few brief points:

  • Firstly, there’s no reason for it to be a mystery or a matter of “opinion;” using very simple technology we can measure exactly what jazz musicians are doing.
  • The ratios, if we measure them, are very, very far from consistent, even taken independently of factors like tempo. (There’s a popular but not-uniformly-supportable idea that the notes swing “harder” [greater ratio] at slower tempi and less hard [ratio nearer to 1:1] at faster tempi.) The precise ratios are an expressive, interpretive matter, and ultimately up to the performers.
  • The rhythms themselves are not the only factors that make swing sound like swing; articulation, phrasing, and other elements are also important, and also beyond the scope of my intended topic here.

What, then, is the best way to notate swing rhythms? I sort of like this one, though it’s not the one I ultimately recommend:

grace notesWhat I do like about the weird grace note approach is that it makes fairly clear the idea that the exact “downbeat” (quarter note) to “upbeat” (grace note) ratio is an interpretive matter. It also evokes what I find to be the most successful method of executing swing rhythms: think in quarter note pulses, and let the upbeats lead to the following downbeats. What I don’t like about this method is that it’s a hassle to write and to read.

My best recommendation is this:

eighth notes with "Swing" indicationNote the absence of the “two eighths equal triplet quarter-eighth” indication. This way is simple to read and write, reinforces the duple nature of swing rhythm, and doesn’t prescribe a specific ratio. One might hope that a jazz-untrained musician encountering this would seek out some good training or at least listen to some good swing recordings.

Happy swinging.

Similar Posts

  • MS Word music hack: Automatic sharps, flats, and naturals (Updated 2019)

    Ten years ago in 2009 I wrote a blog post about how to set up auto-complete sharp, flat, and natural symbols in Microsoft Word 2007 running on Windows Vista. Here’s an update for Word 2016 on Windows 10.

    Thanks to Ariel Detwiler for calling my attention to the need for an update.

    How it will work

    Type this (plus space bar)Get this
    F-sharpF♯
    B-flatBā™­
    C-naturalCā™®

    Will it work on Office 365?

    No, the web version of Office doesn’t currently (2019) support this feature.

    How to set it up

    1. Open up a new Microsoft Word 2016 document.
    2. Type the following:
      266d
      Then press Alt-X. The ā€œ266dā€ should turn into a flat symbol.
    3. Highlight the flat. Click the ā€œFileā€ tab, then “Options.ā€ A dialog box appears; click ā€œProofingā€ at its left-hand side. Click the ā€œAutoCorrect Optionsā€¦ā€ button. On the ā€œAutoCorrectā€ tab, make sure ā€œReplace text as you typeā€ is checked. In the ā€œReplace:ā€ box, type:
      -flat
      Next to ā€œWith:,ā€ make sure ā€œPlain textā€ is selected. Your flat should be in the ā€œWith:ā€ box. Click ā€œAdd,ā€ then click ā€œOKā€ twice.
    4. Repeat steps 2-3 for the sharp and natural signs. In step 2, use ā€œ266fā€ for sharp and ā€œ266eā€ for natural, and in step 4 use ā€œ-sharpā€ and ā€œ-natural.ā€

    If you are in the habit of using the pound sign (#) and lowercase b for sharp and flat signs, shame on you for your unprofessional documents. You might be tempted to set up your AutoCorrect to correct those. The problem with doing it that way is that you will have to create a separate AutoCorrect entry for each note (Ab, Bb, Cb, etc.). Plus, it’s a good idea to just get in the habit of typing “F-sharp” so if you’re using a system that doesn’t have your special AutoCorrect set up, you will be left with that more correct version instead of a pound sign or letter b.

    If you have set up the AutoCorrect but you actually want to type ā€œ-flat,ā€ ā€œ-sharp,ā€ or ā€œ-naturalā€ and override the automatic change, type what you want and then press Ctrl-Z (Undo) to change the symbol back into text.

  • Sidney Bechet’s ā€œSummertimeā€

    View the transcription

    Sidney Bechet may be jazz’s most unfairly forgotten genius.

    Once the favorite son of his native New Orleans, as well as his many adopted European hometowns, Bechet’s recordings are now too often overlooked. Bechet, born in 1897, was a true virtuoso of the clarinet, and played a major part in establishing the instrument’s role in Dixieland and early jazz. His pioneering use of the soprano saxophone set a precedent that would come to fruition in a later generation of saxophonists. Bechet’s penchant for unusual instruments is documented in a few surviving recordings on the bass saxophone and the sarrusophone, instruments as nearly obsolete in Bechet’s day as in our own.

    But Bechet’s genius transcended his choice of instrument. His abilities may even have rivaled his contemporary, and sometime bandmate, Louis Armstrong. The eminent Swiss conductor Ernest Ansermet upheld Bechet as “the highway the whole world will swing along tomorrow.” Ansermet would no doubt be disappointed to find his prediction has been disproved. Read More “Sidney Bechet’s ā€œSummertimeā€”

  • Using a pencil like a pro

    pencil
    Photo, rutty

    I know that my students (or I) are practicing badly when their sheet music remains in mint condition week after week. A good practice session involves lots of small successes and breakthroughs, many or most of which will be forgotten by the next practice session. Using a pencil is the obvious but somehow frequently-overlooked way to make sure tomorrow’s practicing builds on today’s successes, instead of repeating or rehashing.

    It’s a mistake to think that pencil marks are amateurish or a crutch. Musicians in professional situations often have to learn music with little lead time or rehearsal, and a pencil is a professional-grade tool for making music with accuracy and poise. The most effective pencil usage depends on a couple of prerequisites:

    1. Have one. It’s embarrassing, unprofessional, and time-wasting to be caught without a pencil. Buy yourself a bulk package of cheap mechanical pencils, and stash them everywhere: Pockets, purse, instrument case, sheet music folder, gig bag, desk, reedmaking table, teaching studio. Tie one to the music stand in your practice space. Every so often, restock each space, since, if you’re like me, pencils seem to have a way of wandering off to be discovered later in the laundry.
    2. Read. If you’re the kind of player that tends to ignore markings printed in the part, then you probably won’t pay much attention to pencil marks either. Become a meticulous follower of written instructions. (If you don’t like the printed instructions, use your pencil and your well-informed artistic judgment to change them, then obey your pencil marks.)

    Good pencil markings are clear, concise, efficient, and preferably easily understood by someone else at a glance. I find circles, stars, and highlighting to be so vague as to be pointless; don’t bother making a mark unless it’s adding information to the page. Most common woodwind fingerings can be readily identified with a letter or two (such as “S” for a side fingering or “L” for a left-hand fingering). Develop a vocabulary of markings and use them consistently, so that ultimately you can read them as quickly and accurately as you can read notes. If your sheet music is looking a little too pristine, ask yourself if your playing might benefit from having any of the following information right there on the page: Read More “Using a pencil like a pro”

  • Classical musicians and jazz music

    Photo, Andrei Z

    I try to be both a classical musician and a jazz musician. This dual pursuit is sometimes detrimental to both sides, but often beneficial, and I enjoy it. I’ve put in serious study, listening, and practice hours with both kinds of music.

    Jazz has influenced classical composers enough that classical musicians can’t ignore it—if you’re an orchestral clarinetist, it’s only a matter of time before you have to face Rhapsody in Blue. So it’s not unusual to hear classical musicians, especially in academic situations, address aspects of jazz playing.

    It’s disappointing to me to hear classical musicians use pejorative language when describing jazz style, but frequently terms like “sloppy,” “lazy,” “harsh,” or “piercing” are used to characterize its techniques and sounds. In the last few months, some egregious and ill-informed examples of this have appeared in the blogosphere, and I can think of several examples during that same period when I have heard that kind of talk in masterclasses and workshops.

    I don’t think that the examples I’ve seen lately were intentionally belittling or snobbish. And, in fact, in some cases the intent seemed to be to express appreciation for jazz music and jazz musicians, but the choice of words betrays some underlying attitudes about the relationship between classical and jazz.

    If you’re a classical musician, these are the kinds of things I want you to know about jazz playing: Read More “Classical musicians and jazz music”

  • Vinny Golia review

    Clarinetist David Thomas quoted from the article below on his excellent blog The Buzzing Reed earlier today, and I thought it was worth passing along. There is some fun description of amazing woodwind doubler Vinny Golia doing his thing.

    Spring Reverb: Golia/Turetzy; Dana Reason Trio

    by Christian Hertzog, sandiego.com

    The first set was devoted to Vinny Golia and Bertram Turetzky, both of whom have played together in San Diego many times, giving them, as Turetzky announced in one of the generous introductions that preceded each of their 5 selections, a kind of ESP. Unlike Dana Reason, who brought plenty of written music to use (or ignore, as the case may have been) for her set, Golia and Turetzky played freely improvised music.

    Golia had so many clarinets, flutes, and saxophones propped up next to him or in a travel bag that Turetzky joked that the real Museum was the one next to Golia. Each work began with Golia pondering which wind to play, making a selection, and then soloing, to be joined shortly afterward by Turetzky. The description of their music making as ā€œESPā€ was not far off the mark, given the duo’s uncanny ability to complement each other while spontaneously creating melodies and textures.

    Golia has a penchant for playingĀ multiphonics, alternating the highest and lowest registers of his chosen instruments (clarinet, contrabass clarinet, contrabass flute, or piccolo). At other times, he pulled out different varieties of ethnic flutes, from which issued trills, microtones, and spastic twittering melodies.

    Read the whole thing.

    More about woodwind wizard Vinny Golia at his website.

  • Wind controllers as “practice” woodwinds

    Can you use a wind controller, like the Akai EWI, the Yamaha WX, or the Roland Aerophone, as a convenient and/or quiet way to practice a “real” woodwind instrument, like the saxophone or the flute?

    No, not really.

    You can practice some very limited aspects of woodwind playing. For example, each of those wind controllers has fingering patterns that resemble (but are not identical to) the fingerings of standard woodwinds. If you are in the very early stages of playing a woodwind instrument and still trying to memorize fingerings, I suppose you could use a wind controller to help you with that specific task, to the extent that the fingerings do match.

    The Akai instruments have saxophone, flute, and oboe modes, plus the more flexible “EWI” mode that is quite saxophone-like, and even a couple of variations of a valved-brass-inspired mode. The Yamaha WX5 has several saxophone modes and a flute mode. The Roland instruments are set up to map fairly directly to saxophone fingerings, even going so far as to include some of the saxophone’s more problematic features like “palm” keys. However, with that exception, none even have all the keys needed to learn proper saxophone, flute, or oboe technique.

    (None of the instruments currently has a clarinet mode, presumably because the real-clarinet phenomenon of overblowing to odd-numbered partials raises some complications for an electronic instrument capable of many octaves of range. And none of the instruments has the physical keys to reasonably approximate bassoon technique.)

    Plus, in all cases, including the Rolands, none of them can fully imitate the “feel” of a standard woodwind. Beyond the very basic stage of learning fingering patterns, much of the fingering work that woodwind players practice has to do with nuances of the fingers’ interactions with the keys. Even switching from one flute to a slightly different model of flute can mean having to re-adapt to the keys’ precise locations, spring tensions, etc. Switching between a flute and a wind controller is a much larger leap.

    And, of course, no major wind controller currently provides a realistic approach to tone production. None has a reed that functions as such, and none has a flute-like embouchure hole. There are some superficial similarities like breath pressure being mapped to volume, or a bite-able mouthpiece that allows for something like saxophone-style jaw vibrato (or to the ill-advised reed instrument technique of bending pitch with jaw movement).

    So, can you practice on it? Not really.

    But the good news is that wind controllers (particularly, in my opinion, the Akai EWIs) have lots of potential as instruments in their own right. (If you aren’t familiar, look no farther than Michael Brecker’s playing for an eye-opener.)

    Rather than looking at wind controllers as a “practice” instrument or a low-budget stand-in, consider a wind controller to be an additional avenue for expression. Playing it well requires just as much hard work, but also brings worthwhile creative rewards.

15 Comments

  1. Great comments Bret! I use this approach as well, and it seems to help beginners think about swing in the right way. It frees them up in regards to the mathematical rigidity of notation, allowing the interpretive characteristic of grace notes (along with listening and transcribing) to be a guide for the swing style, rather than attempting an exact notation system.

  2. I teach swing rhythms to my students largely through example. Typically the only verbal description I give is that swing has a long-short pattern of eighths, as opposed to the even eighths found in other styles. To that end, I definitely prefer that last approach to swing rhythm notation over the others.

  3. I think the best jazz notation has two elements: 1) straight 8ths with no articulation markings, and 2) a player who has listened to enough swing music that he/she has internalized the feel.

    With those two elements, you’ll get perfect jazz swing. I’ve played big-band charts that were written this way, and everyone in the sax section knew how to play them instinctively.

    No matter how formal a piece of written music is, it is always an approximation of what the composer intended to be played. A player’s interpretation is always going to be a factor. Swing is one of those rhythms that can’t be written down, and thus is at the mercy of the player—who either can swing or can’t.

  4. I’m glad I bumped into this web page because I feel the same way about the notation. No triplets, no dotted notes, but just ‘Swing’. (Using the ‘swing’ option of my computer software proves that it is the right thing to do, it performs it very well.)
    But now I have this problem transcribing this piece:
    https://youtu.be/LVkgvYY-TTM
    The pianist switches constantly between ‘Swing’ and ‘No Swing’.
    Is something like this the only option?
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/vic7of169pzc4k3/Example.png?dl=0

      1. Thank you for the ‘even 8ths’ option. I’ll use that one.

      2. Working on this piece, http://annemievanriel.be/site/LessonPriv/LessonMoonWaltzNeet.htm I would like to know your opinion.
        The waltz definitely is 3/4 as waltzes are, with a swing in the eights.

        But from measure 44 I didn’t feel comfortable anymore using all those triplets and swing switching. To me a triplet is not supposed to be used all the time, in that case another time signature is preferable.
        So I restart using the 9/8, which, I agree, is wrong for a swing. What do you think?

  5. Is the ratio of the golden mean not the key to jazz rhythms? It falls between 1/4-1/8 and dotted 1/4-1/8—a little closer to the 1/4-1/8. The implications for understanding jazz rhythms within a broader scientific spectrum are mind-stimulating, no?

  6. Bret, thank you for posting this about swing notation, my nemesis for about six years. I had a good training up through high school in standard music notation, then started reading swing when I was 61. It still throws me for a loop, and no matter how much I keep trying to sight read it, I don’t hear it in my head the way it’s intended. Hearing it done right several times seems to help, but kills the sight reading. Any ideas?

  7. Thank goodness I’ve been doing it the way you recommend! But I have a specific question. The piece I’m writing out parts for (an original) has the swing feel, except for one bar, where I want that phrase to be played in tight staccato eighth notes with no swing, and I’m not sure how to notate that. My gut instinct is to put a doublet over each pair of eighth notes, but I want to make sure that’s correct before handing out the parts.

    1. Many jazz players will see the staccato markings and interpret those notes not to swing. Rather than tuplet markings, I suggest just using words: use the words “straight”/”straight 8ths” or “swing” as needed.

  8. Hello Bret,
    Classical musician trying to understand swing here. Your post is incredibly helpful.
    Two questions:
    In your recommended notation method for swing, you’ve got two sixteenth grace notes at the end of a bar. Would these two grace notes usually be equal to each other in length/duration when played?
    Why have you chosen to keep the sixteenth notes as grace notes but not the preceding off-beat quavers? Is this a convention?
    Also, to clarify, swung rhythms should never be tripletized because the ratio of swung rhythms is variable and song dependent in Jazz, is this correct? I have fallen into the tripletizing trap and need to change how I teach and think about swung rhythms. How does one feel uneven duplets musically without thinking of them as a triplet?
    Thanks,
    Emily

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments that take a negative or confrontational tone are subject to email and name verification before being approved. In other words: no anonymous trolls allowed—take responsibility for your words.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.