How to Notate Swung 16ths

Dear YC,

I'm writing a chamber piece that uses swung 16ths a fair bit. My original plan was to write 16th notes and say, Swung, or Straight, above them. My teacher would like it written exactly as I liked to sound.

Thus, I have two options. I can write out the triplet and tie the first two eighths (a standard swing)

http://www.box.net/shared/mh5xh1ln24

Or, I can write the swing as dotted eighths and sixteenths.

http://www.box.net/shared/p6ded07qn6

Now, I can do this fine in eighths note, but 16ths note swing confuses me. Should it be written like this:

http://www.box.net/shared/l3vl2rpypf

Which is similar to my first example.

Or with tied sixteenths written as an 8th note beamed to a sixteenth.

http://www.box.net/shared/vjc8mfsuzo

Or, should I write like dotted sixteenth and 32nd.

http://www.box.net/shared/a70ugxs026

Help me, YC, you're my only hope.

:jedi:

Peace on Earth,

-John

I would write in compound time, unless there are also not-swinging instruments involved.

Failing that I would do you first suggestion. But you can simplify it by writing a crotchet followed by a quaver, with a square bracket and a 3 over both. Like this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Music-triplet.png but with crotchet + quaver, rather than 3 crotchets.

Your 2nd picture is definitely wrong (it at least, it means something that I don't think you're after). The first note is 3 times as long as the second, rather than 2 times.

Again, the 3rd picture is 'correct' rhythm-wise, but could be simplified by using a horizontal bracket above, rather than tying. The 5th picture is wrong, like the 2nd.

For the 4th pic. I think that is right, but check since I'm not sure.

You can't write swing. You can write out triplets and you can indicate "swing" or something, but you can't actually notate it.

You can approximate swing.

Yes, you can approximate swing. Swings has so many different degrees that writing out the standard 2:1 rhythm will you get a decent swung sound. You can swing harder to the point of a 3:1 ratio. Or, if you're playing really fast, less swing is usually better and eighth notes/quavers start sounding straight and even.

What you were already writing was an approximation, just a more idiomatic one.

Approximating swing with triplets or dots is no better. At least, it shouldn't be from your teacher's point of view.

I don't fully understand why your teacher is so hell bent on you writing it out as it sounds, but if I were you, I would just write it like one of these examples: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v122/internut45/Screenshot2009-12-12at24026PM.png

But I think it would be much easier to read and write to either take one the examples I gave you and make it into double time or just put an indication like the one in this piece of music: http://www.freehandmusic.com/search.aspx?all=&artistid=62051&prodid=308723

Hope this helps.

In my opinion swing should never be approximated to the point of 3:1 ratio.... waay too square. It should never even go past a 2:1

He's so hell bent because he's concerned about the ensemble staying together if they're not all entirely sure where they're swinging and where they're not. If it was up to me, I'd just write swung and straight over the appropriate places.

BGal510, I agree that swing shouldn't go past 2:1. But I've heard some composer's use 3:1 ratio to sorta have a twisted classical swing sound. Stravinsky did this for his piece Ragtime.

I think I like the look of the first example, BGal510 where it's the eighth beamed to a sixteenth but the triplets are separated by pairs. That looks neater.

@Daniel: What do you mean about your last line, approximating swing with triplets or dots is no better?

Thanks for the help guys.

You rock!

I mean: approximating swing by using triplets is no better than just writing 'swing', at least in terms of how your teacher seems to see things...

And writing in 12/16 would be a nightmare.

You're right; writing swing using triplets is not better than just writing swing. When I triplets, however, the players will stay together.

Who will your performers be, though? Classical musicians? Jazz musicians?

The appropriate way to notate 16th note swing is with straight 16th notes and an indication at the beginning of the swung material indicating the swing pattern itself... where two 16th notes equal an 8th-16th triplet. This should also be accompanied by a tempo marking every time, regardless of whether the pulse changes or not. Whatever your professor might be asking you to do seems categorically wrong on many levels in my opinion. You don't use complex notation like this for sections where swing traditionally or generally applies.

If, for example, your swing was unique or shifting from one measure to the next, it might make sense to notate more accurately what you intend for the performer to play. Otherwise, swung 16th notes are no differently notated than swung 8th notes. If you want the long-short subdivision of the beat, notate it with two 8ths or two 16ths and indicate "swing" at the beginning of the section along with the tempo. If you want to subdivide the beat by three notes, you indicate this with a triplet.

If you're in the middle of a swing passage and want two evenly divided notes for the beat, the way to indicate this is with a traditional bracket with a "2" indicating a straight two beats in an otherwise division of three notes. This is quite common in Jazz music when a composer wants two straight 8th notes.

It's good to read up on John Phillip Sousa where it concerns the use of swing and triplets in modern notation. He was a major contributor to how "swing" became standardized in notation. Most books that talk about swing today often argue for simplicity, not more complexity.

That's very compelling, Antiatonality. I had to do a double-take on your name; I get it now.

My performers will be classical musicians.

I think I will notate the swing rhythm as long-short triplets when I swing in isolated spots (i.e. for two beats in a section). I'll use your suggestion of writing in straight 16ths with an indication for swing above when I have larger sections being swung (say, two measures or so).

That makes the most sense to be. I wouldn't want to have a swing indication written every few beats if I was switching the rhythm that often between straight and swung.

Thanks for your all help, guys. I am now as confident about this piece as my smiley is cool :cool:

Peace on Earth,

-John

Your picture number 8 is what a typical 16th-swing would look like notated. The other pictures look way too confusing. 8th-note swing looks normal written in triplets, and indicating that the 3rd triplet is accented.

No you cannot write out swing how it sounds, but then again, you can't write out 8th-notes the way they sound. We're talking about nano-seconds, and no musician can play exact 8th-note figures. So don't worry about the anal guys saying swing can't be notated, and notate it the way that make the musicians play it swing!

Your picture number 8 is what a typical 16th-swing would look like notated. The other pictures look way too confusing. 8th-note swing looks normal written in triplets, and indicating that the 3rd triplet is accented.

The third triplet isn't, by default, accented (unless I missed something). For example, indicating swing doesn't automatically mean the third triplet of the beat is always accented in swing. You actually have to notate accented upbeats with accents.

No you cannot write out swing how it sounds, but then again, you can't write out 8th-notes the way they sound. We're talking about nano-seconds, and no musician can play exact 8th-note figures. So don't worry about the anal guys saying swing can't be notated, and notate it the way that make the musicians play it swing!

You can write out how swing sounds (with triplets). That's all swing does is delay the upbeat by unequally distributing the notes of each beat across an asymmetrical division of the pulse as opposed to a symmetrical duple division (the typical 1&2&3&4&, etc.). You can easily notate eight 8th notes in a 4/4 swing pattern as four Quarter/8th triplet pairings to produce the exact same metric pattern. This would be a 3:1 variant of the swing subdivision (three divisions of the full beat, 1 division indicates the "swing" of the beat).

It's simply a matter of how far you want to take the asymmetric division. In a 'fusion' jazz swing or something more contemporary, you could produce a pattern of eight 8th notes as four dotted 8th/16th note pairings to produce a 4:1 variant of the beat subdivision. Here, the beat is divided by four but still remains asymmetric with the first beat getting three of the four subdivided value with the second only getting the very last value.

Swing isn't really that difficult to master once you understand how the beat subdivision is indicated. This is why the simplest way to indicate the type of swing you want is actually at the same time you indicate the tempo. You can notate out anything that doesn't "fit" the standard swing groove you indicated without having to vary the tempo and even reinforce this with brackets around the specific notes (in much the same way you use "brackets" for triplet divisions in a duple meter).

Antitonality, I'm gonna hold myself back here and not dissect everything you just said to show you just how wrong your statement is, but let me just say this: Don't lecture people on something you don't truly too much about yourself.

Antitonality, I'm gonna hold myself back here and not dissect everything you just said to show you just how wrong your statement is, but let me just say this: Don't lecture people on something you don't truly too much about yourself.

What do you mean BGal? I thought Antiatonality expressed his thoughts very clearly with good support.

What's wrong with his statement?

Allow me to clarify - because it's been said before, swing isn't actually notated. The BEST way to do it, is to write it straight, and tell the musicians to "swing" ... how hard they roll it will depend on their experience. (The better they feel, the less they'll roll)

NOW, as far as notating for in-experienced swingers ( :shifty: ) ...

The ONLY way to write it will be with triplits.

The "dotted" method ends up sounding HOKEY and RICKEYTICKEY. You can do it, but it will sound lame.

See below:

In the following two examples we see two seemingly different ride cymbal patterns. The first is the way we usually see the ride cymbal pattern written.....for swing music, of course. The second is the way we jazz drummers actually play the cymbal pattern. The space between the notes of the triplet feel gives the rhythm more of a swing feeling.....the sixteenth note pattern is too stiff for purposes of today's swing.

from: http://www.chuckzeuren.com/diddy2.html

I suppose the excessive triplits makes for cumbersome reading, and can falsely imply a 12/8 feel. BUT, if you have to be explicit in your notation, use the triplits, and it won't sound too weird.

It would be very helpful if I could actually see your scores...

Danny might be right though :P

Oh heck... I just wrote a long post and my internet threw me of. I'll try to rewrite:

Antiatonality: As a professional jazz musician I can assure you that upbeats are all accented in jazz. Both the 2 and 4 but also all upbeats within the beats (all the 'and's').

In my carreer I've seen a great many scores, and I agree that the easiest way to READ it is by seeing straight 8th-notes and an indication of 'Swing'. The OP's teacher however asks him to notate it the way he will want it to sound. The closest way to notate triplets with accent on the third triplet. If you don't accent it (which beginners will have trouble with) it will just sound shuffled and not swung. Triplets are not accurate, but are the closest we come to notate it in moderate tempo. In a bebop tempo you will be much closer to straight 8th-notes but STILL accents on the and's.

I would encourage you to download Transcribe! from Seven Strings (something...) and input a bebop tune (From Charlie Parker for example) and a moderate piece (from Kind of Blue) and slow it down, clap the subdivisions and accents, and you'll have a MUCH better idea of what is going on, and you'll probably find the best way for you to notate it. Also try with a tune, that resembles the feeling you're going for.

Antiatonality: It may be easy to master how to write swing, but trust me it is hard to master to play it - I say this as a professional and a long time teacher. It takes many years to get the proper grasp on swing, and once you get it, you have to practice it :)

...I can assure you that upbeats are all accented in jazz. Both the 2 and 4 but also all upbeats within the beats (all the 'and's').

:blink: ... All of them? ...careful there ;)

...I agree that the easiest way to READ it is by seeing straight 8th-notes and an indication of 'Swing'. The OP's teacher however asks him to notate it the way he will want it to sound. The closest way to notate triplets with accent on the third triplet. If you don't accent it (which beginners will have trouble with) it will just sound shuffled and not swung. Triplets are not accurate, but are the closest we come to notate it in moderate tempo.

That's what I said!!!

;)

I don't see the need for antagonism, gang. BGal, especially... why so serious?

Bryla: Beats 2 and 4 are not actually off-beats like I was referring to in my previous post, and you do not ALWAYS accent both beats 2 and 4 OR off-beats all the time, either. It's hardly universal to all swung music.

Particularly, percussion players may not accent ANY of these beats in performing a Jazz tune. I know. Why? I'm learning Jazz drumset and vibe performance from a professional performer myself. I am actually working up a jazz vibe piece on an upcoming recital in a year that doesn't accent every -up- or -off- beat. Maybe traditional players would, maybe they wouldn't. Maybe I'll accent every up beat and maybe I won't. It's all taste at that level and, again, hardly universal.

Jessome: Has anyone actually tried to notate a real 'swing' rhythm to the highest degree of accuracy? And if so, what was the result? I learned years ago that it's almost like the triplet pattern but 'rushes' the off-beat as though it would fall on a grace note instead of the actual off-beat. Is that as close as anyone can get, or have you even read that much into it? Just curious.

Well I was the only one being antagonistic and for that I apologize, but I was just getting a little frustrated about how even after Doovongeman's question was answered, people still kept reiterating what had already been said in their own words, without actually contributing any new information. I guess I just exploded on you.

I reread what you said and it is knowledgeable, but what made me say what I said is that there were a few minor errors in it. For instance, you said 3:1 ratio when you were referring to triplets and 4:1 when your were referring to a dotted eigth-sixteeneth. Trivial math error, I know, but this next thing is what really made me lash out. You said for a more contemporary sound try the dotted eigth-sixteeneth sound. This is quite the opposite. You will find that not only has swing evolved to be more asymmetric, but that this variation of subdivision in swing is mostly judged by the tempo of the piece. The faster, the straighter.

Let me say though, this is all variable of the composer's (or most often times' director's) opinion, which you addressed in your statement. So, again, you were knowledgeable. I'm sorry for saying you don't know what you're talking about.

On another note, I mostly agree with bryla on this one. Adding accents will greatly improve the sound.

And look. I got sucked into this unnecessary debate about swing.. :(

Maybe I'm old fashioned but shouldn't your teacher be teaching this, rather than causing you to go online to ask :cool:

Has anyone actually tried to notate a real 'swing' rhythm to the highest degree of accuracy? And if so, what was the result? I learned years ago that it's almost like the triplet pattern but 'rushes' the off-beat as though it would fall on a grace note instead of the actual off-beat...

Nah, you can't write it out - it changes as the phrase goes by. Most guys develop their own sense of time within the swing - I tend to straighten my 8ths as the phrase gets longer, other guys will start out straight but roll them more as they go by. There's a lot of push/pull within time

It's subtle, and to write it out you'd have to be double-dotting 32nds within triplets and other excruciatingly nitpicky notation (try hyperscribing in Finale and see how specific it gets with even 8ths! Now imagine getting precise with a Coleman Hawkins transcription)...

In the end, I prefer a slightly less rolled swing, (maybe, 30-35% "swing" in Finale playback) ... the more you roll it, the more "vanilla" and lame it sounds to me.