Lesson 6 Endings

[DixiJohnson]

This is in regards to Lesson 6, Examples 6.1 & 6.2. Griff says the last two bars of the examples are exactly the same rhythm-wise, just different notes. The note values of the first bar are notated differently though in each example. Is one way better than the other when you are writing music down? I guess it's six of one; half a dozen of the other? Sorry if this seems like a silly question.....
Thanks for your help....I'm LOVING this course!!

 

[WindInTrees]

There are no silly questions whey you are trying to learn. My version of BGU is several years old, so the examples in my book may be different than yours. I believe the point there is that if you count them out loud, both examples count the same and play the same pick strokes, just with different notes.

It is good to hear that you are enjoying the BGU course, i did too

 

[Paleo]

Interesting question. I never would have noticed.

I think the dotted quarter in 6.1 would be more common.

6.2 looks a bit odd to me, having a longer note tied to a shorter note. Seems you would tie a shorter note to a longer note, i.e. the other way around.

Maybe it's easier for some people to combine things when counting: 8th rest+8th note as 1 beat then 3 quarters for the next 3 beats.

Maybe there's some slight nuance I'm not aware of. Seems there must be some reason for Griff to write them differently. I'll have to revisit the lesson.

But they are equivalent any way you look at it.

It's a beat and a half.

I prefer the dotted quarter.

 

[Paleo]

Just looked at it again.

6.1 the dotted quarter is on an upbeat and counted as: and 2 and

6.2 the quarter note is on a downbeat counted as 2 and

I think the purpose was to keep all the quarter notes on downbeats?

 

[Paleo]

I think I may have solved the "mystery".

EX 6.1 from the original BGU manual (2008):



EX 6.1 from BGU 2.0 (2015):



They are notated exactly the same. (But printed from a different program?)



But the original BGU did not have EX 6.2.

EX 6.2 from BGU 2.0 (2015):



Here it is notated differently. Maybe using a different program?

I think Griff just kept the original 6.1 from 2008 when he updated to BGU 2.0 and maybe notated 6.2 with a different program when he added it to the course in 2015. They were done 7 years apart.

He might not even be aware of the difference? Or did it for one of the reasons I stated previously?

I wonder if you are the only one who ever noticed.

Enjoy the rest of the course.

 

[Jalapeno]

This is in regards to Lesson 6, Examples 6.1 & 6.2. Griff says the last two bars of the examples are exactly the same rhythm-wise, just different notes. The note values of the first bar are notated differently though in each example. Is one way better than the other when you are writing music down? I guess it's six of one; half a dozen of the other? Sorry if this seems like a silly question.....
Thanks for your help....I'm LOVING this course!!

I believe Griff used Sibelius 7 to notate the BGU 2.0 manual. In Sibelius 7 eighth notes are beamed in groups of 4 when the time signature is 4/4. I use Sibelius 7 for composition myself so here is an example of what the program does

If 3 eighth notes are input in succession the first two will be beamed but the third will not because of the rest



when a fourth eighth note is input the program changes the beaming to its default largest group, which is 4 beamed notes






it is done automatically by the program.


If you look at the 6-1 example you can see that the whole song is notated with beam groups of two eighth notes






but if you look at example 6.2 you can see the whole song is notated with beam groups of four eighth notes.





This makes me think that Griff used a different program for example 6.1 and it split the notes on beam groups of two, which caused the half-beat-rest-followed-by-beat-and-a-half-note to be split in the same manner. 6.1 must also be in the original BGU which is older so either Griff changed notation software or an earlier version of Sibelius had a different beaming philosophy.

Is one better than the other? who knows

I hope that helps.

Eric

 

[david moon]

a dotted quarter and an eighth tied to a quarter are the same. In both cases the tabs don't show the rests, which is a deficiency of tabs in general

I don't have the program so i don"t know if they are interpreted as "swing eighths"

 

[Paleo]

a dotted quarter and an eighth tied to a quarter are the same.

But this is the reverse, a quarter tied to an eighth. Doesn't it seem odd to have the 8th note first?

If it had been the other way around I would have just said they were equal and would have been done with it.

But it's not. So I came up with what I thought were some plausible explanations of why Griff would have done it that way.

Then there was the alternative. That's just the way the program he used does it.

So the question in my mind was, "Is this odd or not"?

Is is a common practice to put the shorter note first, with a longer note tied to it?

I don't think I've ever seen that before.

But then again, I'm not all that fluent or experienced in actually reading music.

So at your "suggestion", here's the top of both examples showing the program is using swing 8ths.


Aha!

(But my face is a bit red!!)

 

[Jalapeno]

The exercises are in swing eighths but that really is not relevant to the notation.

The rests are exactly the same in each example for the notation, David, but you're right that this style of tab is inadequate to express the rhythm.

As the OP and Griff and you say the expression is exactly the same. Based on my study and use of notation software the first example is grouped on the quarter of a measure and the second example is grouped on the half measure as I showed in my previous post.

When grouping on the quarter measure (note) the split of an eighth tied to a quarter makes more sense for consistency as each beat is represented completely.

When grouping on the half measure then the eighth rest followed by a dotted quarter note is fine. The principle of a greedy algorithm means that you try to pick the note symbol where you stuff as many time units into a single note as you can. In the second example 3 half beats easily fit into a dotted quarter note without crossing the half measure group. Had it crossed the half measure group it would have been split with a tie there. Here is an example of that:



I've used quarter and half notes but the principle is the same. In the first measure the principle of a greedy algorithm would suggest putting a half note as the second and third beats and I have seen this published a lot. The second measure, applies the principle of greedy algorithm but doesn't want to cross the half measure grouping so it splits the notation into two tied quarter notes. I see this a lot more than the first in printed music, but, both are really common.

It is actually a publishing convention and not a musical convention. Because of this I think Griff either changed software, or, just as likely changed the notation as he put it in, either for teaching purposes or because he wan't looking at what he notated in the previous example.

I hope that makes sense.

Eric

 

[Paleo]

Something I was thinking about last night while I couldn't sleep.

The tune is in swing 8th's but the ending isn't?

I don't know anything about "modern" music writing software. The only programs I ever had were over 20 years ago and you just put
symbols on the staff and the program printed it. So you were totally responsible for the input.

So how does a program make the transition?

If it's been swinging the 8ths all along and it encounters an 8th rest wouldn't the next note have to be an 8th note? The rest gets 2/3 of a beat and the 8th note gets the last 1/3. Held for another beat, a full quarter note, it would then get 1 and 1/3 beats.

But if the last two measures are in straight time (all quarter notes), the 8th rest would get 1/2 a beat and the 8th tied to the next quarter would get 1 and 1/2 beats.

So in this case, a swing 8th tied to a quarter would not be equal to a dotted quarter. The dotted quarter would be 1/6 of a beat longer?

But again, if it's done by a program, how is it to know which way to go when it encounters that 8th rest?

 

[david moon]

Something I was thinking about last night while I couldn't sleep.

The tune is in swing 8th's but the ending isn't?

I don't know anything about "modern" music writing software. The only programs I ever had were over 20 years ago and you just put
symbols on the staff and the program printed it. So you were totally responsible for the input.

So how does a program make the transition?

If it's been swinging the 8ths all along and it encounters an 8th rest wouldn't the next note have to be an 8th note? The rest gets 2/3 of a beat and the 8th note gets the last 1/3. Held for another beat, a full quarter note, it would then get 1 and 1/3 beats.

But if the last two measures are in straight time (all quarter notes), the 8th rest would get 1/2 a beat and the 8th tied to the next quarter would get 1 and 1/2 beats.

So in this case, a swing 8th tied to a quarter would not be equal to a dotted quarter. The dotted quarter would be 1/6 of a beat longer?

But again, if it's done by a program, how is it to know which way to go when it encounters that 8th rest?

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you are referring to, but
The "swing eighths" notation just means that most of the time when we are playing two notes per beat with a swing feel- one (and) uh two (and ) uh, and we are not playing the (and), the notation is still two eighth notes just to make it simpler. ( Instead of writing everything in 12/8) If all three notes of the triplet are played then is is just notated as a triplet.

For me the eighth plus quarter makes it easier to find the beat boundaries, vs. the dotted quarter.

 

[Paleo]

The "swing eighths" notation just means that most of the time when we are playing two notes per beat with a swing feel- one (and) uh two (and ) uh, and we are not playing the (and), the notation is still two eighth notes just to make it simpler.

And the notation also shows that the first 8th has twice the value of the second, i.e. 2/3 (one and) and 1/3 (uh) of a beat, respectively.

The important point is that the beat is divided into 3 parts whether you play on (and) or not.

In this situation, it's all about that first beat in the ending.

A dotted quarter implies that first beat is divided in 2. The rest is 1/2 beat and the second half of the beat is part of the dotted quarter.
We just switched to straight time.

But if we're still swinging the 8ths, that first beat is divided into 3. The 8th rest has to be followed by an 8th note and both are still part of a triplet.

So the question is, "Is that first beat supposed to be divided into 2 or 3?"

If it's 2 we've switched to straight time and the 8th note is combined with a quarter as a dotted quarter, which gets 1 and 1/2 beats.

If it's 3, we're still swinging and the 8th tied to the quarter is 1/3 beat held over for another full beat.

You could also ask how long do you hold the 8th rest on beat 1? Again, it depends how you divide the beat. By 2 or by 3.

 

[david moon]

I think we're still swinging, no indication that we're not. If it's notated as a dotted quarter, the underlying eighths are still "swing". Like I said, the eighth tied to a quarter makes it easier to see the beat boundaries, but the scribe might see the dotted quarter as more economical. The first "eighth" rest is two triplets. In my experience with big band and theater charts, a radical change from a swing feel to a straight feel would be flagged somehow.

 

[Jalapeno]

David I don't think you are talking to me so PB must be in the thread. He blocked me so I can't see any of his posts at all. So... I shouldn't butt in... but...

1. a marking to swing the eighths is a performance direction because of a notation short hand. Other performance directions are things like "p" for soft, "f" for loud and "ff" for very loud, or "< " for crescendo... for examples, and I'm sure you get the point. As a performance direction the only relation swing has to the notes is to clue the performer that the written notes are not played "as written". That is a publishing convention for convenience of both the performer and printer. But you know this already so I think we all can agree here. I find it much harder to read notation for swing feel that isn't written with barred straight eighths.

2. As you said if it is marked swing at the top and something is to be played with straight eighths I have always seen it marked in the score at that point, just as you have. That is necessary for the performer.

3. All publishing conventions were developed to help the performer though things like key signatures and marking to swing were also helpful for the printer. The score contains a lot of detailed information on how to reproduce the original music, which is, of course, the whole point.

4. I agree with you that the eighth rest followed by the eighth note tied to the quarter is easier to keep the beats straight. But musically both notation conventions should be played EXACTLY the same so a performer needs to be able to read them both, in my opinion, but I don't think I'd get an argument . In the case of software one style may take precedence over another depending on the algorithm used. Sibelius is easy to override the default just by explicitly entering what you want.

My understanding is that the "triplet feel" of swing is just a method to explain how it is to be performed even if the notation is in straight eighths.. Much like the boxes are a method to explain how the fretboard can be decoded.

But you already know all of this. I have no idea what is actually being discussed, or questions being put forth, other than your side of it. Maybe some day I'll get unblocked and can join in as a first person discussion

Eric

 

[Norfolk Bill]

lol,,,how childish

 

[david moon]

David I don't think you are talking to me so PB must be in the thread. He blocked me so I can't see any of his posts at all. So... I shouldn't butt in... but...

1. a marking to swing the eighths is a performance direction because of a notation short hand. Other performance directions are things like "p" for soft, "f" for loud and "ff" for very loud, or "< " for crescendo... for examples, and I'm sure you get the point. As a performance direction the only relation swing has to the notes is to clue the performer that the written notes are not played "as written". That is a publishing convention for convenience of both the performer and printer. But you know this already so I think we all can agree here. I find it much harder to read notation for swing feel that isn't written with barred straight eighths.

2. As you said if it is marked swing at the top and something is to be played with straight eighths I have always seen it marked in the score at that point, just as you have. That is necessary for the performer.

3. All publishing conventions were developed to help the performer though things like key signatures and marking to swing were also helpful for the printer. The score contains a lot of detailed information on how to reproduce the original music, which is, of course, the whole point.

4. I agree with you that the eighth rest followed by the eighth note tied to the quarter is easier to keep the beats straight. But musically both notation conventions should be played EXACTLY the same so a performer needs to be able to read them both, in my opinion, but I don't think I'd get an argument . In the case of software one style may take precedence over another depending on the algorithm used. Sibelius is easy to override the default just by explicitly entering what you want.

My understanding is that the "triplet feel" of swing is just a method to explain how it is to be performed even if the notation is in straight eighths.. Much like the boxes are a method to explain how the fretboard can be decoded.

But you already know all of this. I have no idea what is actually being discussed, or questions being put forth, other than your side of it. Maybe some day I'll get unblocked and can join in as a first person discussion

Eric

I pretty much agree with everything you say. If you are blocked by PB I have no idea why. As you said, it's a performance shorthand to not have to notate everything in 12/8.

 

[Paleo]

In my experience with big band and theater charts, a radical change from a swing feel to a straight feel would be flagged somehow.

Let's look at what we're dealing with here.

A blues tune. Not a big band or theater chart or any other king of "standard" song.

Griff is teaching a common rhythm figure. It's a repeating riff played in "swing 8s". He ends the lesson by tacking on what he calls "the Bassie ending". He could just show me the riff, the breaks and the ending and I wouldn't even need tab or standard notation.

But as usual, he shows both. In actuality, the swing notation is there to tell us how to play the riff.

Now the ending. Most of us, myself included, wouldn't even look at the standard notation. But someone did and they noticed it's notated 2 different ways.

One with a dotted quarter, which means the beat is divided in 2, i.e. the ending is in straight time. The dotted quarter "flags" it. It's not some radical change. It's just an ending.

And since the beat is divided in 2, it can be written the other way, as an 8th tied to a quarter. No quarrel there. But that's not what I'm talking about.

The first "eighth" rest is two triplets.

But if the rest and 8th notes are considered a triplet, the rest is 2/3 of the beat, just as you say, and the 8th gets the remaining 1/3 of the beat. So it has to be written as a rest followed by an 8th tied to a quarter. It can't be written the other way because it's not a 1/2 beat.

The 8th note is either 1/2 a beat and in straight time and can be written either way or it's 1/3 of a triplet played as a swing 8 and is 1/3 of a beat and can only be written the one way.

It can't be both.

In my previous replies to the OP I tried to find plausible reasons why Griff would intentionally write it 2 different ways or why maybe 2 different programs might interpret it 2 different ways.

If my instructions were to treat every 8th note as a swing 8th I would consider the rest and the 8th note to be a triplet and write it as an 8th tied to a quarter, 1 and 1/3 beats total.

But if I was instructed to treat the 8th rest as 1/2 beat the 8th would also be 1/2 beat I would have the option of writing it the 2 different ways.

Like I said, I don't know anything about writing programs or how a program would make that decision or transition.

Bottom Line: Either the rest and note are a triplet and written one way or they're straight and can be written 2 ways. You and I have options, but does the software program?

But I'm just repeating myself.......again.

 

[Paleo]

Coincidently, I just bought Steve Araujo's "Blues Bass For Guitar Players" course.

Here's how he notates his ending "in the style of" Tore Down.

 

[david moon]

Coincidently, I just bought Steve Araujo's "Blues Bass For Guitar Players" course.

Here's how he notates his ending "in the style of" Tore Down.

View attachment 3708

That rest on beat two of the last measure just feels weird. Griff's ending is 1 & 2 3 4 1 & 2 &....
Compared to 1 & 2 3 4 1 (rest) 3&...

 

[Paleo]

That rest on beat two of the last measure just feels weird.

I'll see if I can get an audio clip of that.

I was researching the actual "Bassie Ending" yesterday and it's actually just the last 3 chords he plays as an ending and has nothing to do with any kind of chromatic run up to it. At least that's what "that expert" said.

I thought I had this figured out, but I'm only getting more confused.

Griff says he's also heard it called an "Ellington Ending" so I'm off to check that out next.