In the last post you saw a video that displayed metric modulations, polyrhythms and polymeters. Some cool hats were also featured!!!
For this post I will be explaining some of the most interesting rhythmic things that happened during the video. You can download the score as a PDF file at the end of this post. The video has also been embedded at the end for your convenience.
For this post I will be explaining some of the most interesting rhythmic things that happened during the video. You can download the score as a PDF file at the end of this post. The video has also been embedded at the end for your convenience.
Thanks go to Ray Rojo (drums) for taking the time to transcribe his playing note for note!!!
Here are some of the things to look out for:
Bar 8: There is a 4:3 polyrhythm.
Here are some of the things to look out for:
Bar 8: There is a 4:3 polyrhythm.
Bars 45-52:
Every four quarter notes inside of the 3:5’s form a phrase:
You can also see the phrase when you look closely at the chords being played by the guitar, as well as the notes being played by the bass on bars 49-52. The beginning of each phrase has been circled in red:
(In case you're wondering, the (Q1) is what I personally use to describe a quartal/stacked fourths voicing. The number 1 indicates that it is built from the 1st degree. Something else that you might have noticed is that rhythmic displacement has also been formed...)
This four quarter note inside of a 3:5 phrase is a polymeter that, among others, could be seen in the following ways:
Option #1:
An explicit polymeter lasting 6 bars where the second meter is a 4/4 that looks like this:
This option would sound the same, and not affect instrument charts. However, I see it as having a big impact on the score. Writing it this way would not display the 3:5's which are at the core of the idea. Let's take another look at Guitar #2 and the Bass on bars 49-52...
The drums also highlight the 3:5 during these bars. Let's look at the attacks that do so. For the most part, they happen on the cymbals...
Another con of notating it as Option #1, would be that if you wrote this out for every single instrument, a metric modulation would have taken place that completely eliminates the 5/4 time signature.
I do not consider this as the best option for my example because the drums emphasize the 5/4, which in this particular case, I used as the "foundation meter"; referring to the meter over which the second meter is superimposed. (You can find more on why I chose the 5/4 as the "foundation meter" under Option #2.)
Take a second to look at the following attacks happening from bars 45-47. Ray's cymbal work is highlighting the 5/4 meter. Can you see it?
Another con of notating it as Option #1, would be that if you wrote this out for every single instrument, a metric modulation would have taken place that completely eliminates the 5/4 time signature.
I do not consider this as the best option for my example because the drums emphasize the 5/4, which in this particular case, I used as the "foundation meter"; referring to the meter over which the second meter is superimposed. (You can find more on why I chose the 5/4 as the "foundation meter" under Option #2.)
Take a second to look at the following attacks happening from bars 45-47. Ray's cymbal work is highlighting the 5/4 meter. Can you see it?
The 5/4 time signature would also be eliminated if we took Option 1 and:
- Equaled the 1st note to an eighth note and changed the meter to a 5/8. (Let's call this Option 1A.)
- Equaled the 1st note to a sixteenth note and changed the meter to a 5/16. (Let's call this Option 1B.)
Another problem with Options 1A and 1B, is the fact that we are looking for a 1 bar phrase and all of these turn our 4 quarter note phrase into a 4 bar phrase. (The 1 bar phrase problem is explained in more detail under Option #3.)
Couldn't you express the polymeter as an explicit one?
Yes.
Why didn't you?
The majority of musicians I've talked to prefer playing implicit polymetric notation over explicit polymetric notation. The top reason being that they can constantly track their position in relation to the "foundation meter". I've even seen some musicians go as far as ignoring the second meter altogether, performing it as a syncopated "foundation meter" instead.
I just noticed the accents on the phrase. Don't they suggest a second meter with a numerator of five? Something like a 5/8 or a 5/16 meter?
They could...
In this case however, they are the divisions of each one of the four groupings found within one bar of the second meter I selected. As a matter of fact, my choice of accents had the intention of creating ambiguity.
Couldn't you express the polymeter as an explicit one?
Yes.
Why didn't you?
The majority of musicians I've talked to prefer playing implicit polymetric notation over explicit polymetric notation. The top reason being that they can constantly track their position in relation to the "foundation meter". I've even seen some musicians go as far as ignoring the second meter altogether, performing it as a syncopated "foundation meter" instead.
I just noticed the accents on the phrase. Don't they suggest a second meter with a numerator of five? Something like a 5/8 or a 5/16 meter?
They could...
In this case however, they are the divisions of each one of the four groupings found within one bar of the second meter I selected. As a matter of fact, my choice of accents had the intention of creating ambiguity.
Option #2:
An explicit polymeter where the second meter is comprised of a mixed meter 6/4 + 2/3 | 4 (lasting 6 bars). I say explicit because it would be difficult to identify as an implicit polymeter in comparison to some of the other choices presented, perhaps even a bit impractical.
(Mixed meters can be found in the work of Elliot Carter, Edgar Varèse, and Pierre Boulez among others.)
An explicit polymeter where the second meter is comprised of a mixed meter 6/4 + 2/3 | 4 (lasting 6 bars). I say explicit because it would be difficult to identify as an implicit polymeter in comparison to some of the other choices presented, perhaps even a bit impractical.
(Mixed meters can be found in the work of Elliot Carter, Edgar Varèse, and Pierre Boulez among others.)
(The second meter of the mixed meters is a fractional meter. This type of notation can be seen in the work of Pierre Boulez and Roman Haubenstock-Ramati among others.)
Wait... Couldn't you write the mixed meter as the time signature and write the 5/4 as an implicit polymeter?
You could do that with every single option presented here...
Why didn't you do it like that? How do you choose which meter to write as the time signature?
When I'm thinking of ideas, I tend to use my left foot to perform the "foundation meter" over which everything else is superimposed upon. In my particular case, that was the 5/4.
Choosing the mixed meter (6/4 + 2/3 |4 ) as a foundation meter could be an option, but my personal goal when notating something is to capture/describe/translate the idea as best as possible. After all, notation is a means of creating a record for future reproduction. If you use it accurately, you will create a picture of your present thoughts and ideas for your future self to study/introspect/reminisce.
Option #3:
An implicit polymeter with a first meter of 5/4 (lasting 8 bars), and a superimposed fractional meter of
5 [3 eighth note (lasting 24 bars). Each bracket below the staff is identifying the duration of one bar of the fractional meter.
(Notation of fractional meters such as the one below the staff can be found in the work of Charles Wuorinen.)
Something I don't like about this option is that it does not cover the entire phrase. My "one"/downbeat is steadily showing up after the 4th group of notes. If you remember, this is why we considered Option 1 in the first place.
We are getting closer though, we just need a fractional meter that covers the entire phrase...
We are getting closer though, we just need a fractional meter that covers the entire phrase...
Option #4:
An implicit polymeter with a first meter of 5/4 (lasting 8 bars), and a superimposed fractional meter of
20 [3 eighth note. (lasting 6 bars). The bracket below the staff is identifying the duration of one bar of the
fractional meter.
(Notation of fractional meters such as the one below the image can be found in the work of Charles Wuorinen.)
This last choice is how I view it personally, and what I was thinking at the time. It is easier to notate as an implicit polymeter, and the entire phrase is captured under this second meter.
How do the drums come into play?
Below is a picture of all the drum attacks consolidated into the 20 [3 eighth note fractional meter. I have kept the attacks in groupings of 5 notes as shown on the quintuplets under the 3:5 polyrhythm to make it easier to visualize. No note brackets are shown for the same reason.
Do you see any patterns being formed? The left page features the bars 45-48, (where the drums highlight the 5/4), and the right page features bars 49-52 (where the drums highlight the the 3:5 polyrhythm).
Everything circled in red is identical...
How do the drums come into play?
Below is a picture of all the drum attacks consolidated into the 20 [3 eighth note fractional meter. I have kept the attacks in groupings of 5 notes as shown on the quintuplets under the 3:5 polyrhythm to make it easier to visualize. No note brackets are shown for the same reason.
Do you see any patterns being formed? The left page features the bars 45-48, (where the drums highlight the 5/4), and the right page features bars 49-52 (where the drums highlight the the 3:5 polyrhythm).
Everything circled in red is identical...
Here are some things to look for in the picture above:
- There is a one bar pattern happening in each of the 6 bars.
- Each bar on "section one", (where the cymbals highlight the 5/4 on bars 45-48 of the score), is almost identical.
- There is an exception on the third bar, as it acts as a transitional bar into "section two" (where the cymbals highlight the 3:5 on bars 49-52).
- Each bar on "section two" is almost identical. The only exception is a stop after the last attack , which is due to the end of a section.
Before we move on, couldn't you just have notated everything as a "normal" implicit polymeter for the
20 [3 eighth note fractional meter? Why did you decide to notate the implicit polymeter as subdivisions of the 3:5 quarter notes?
You could...
I personally chose not to because it would not display the 3:5. Again, 3:5 is the figure from where this entire idea is derived from. Let's not forget that our phrase lasts 4 quarter notes inside of a 3:5.
Even though those 4 quarter notes last the same amount of time as a bar of the 20 [3 eighth note fractional meter, I see both notations as being equally important.
The fractional meter:
- Accounts for the length of duration of the entire phrase.
The 3:5 subdivisions:
- Work as an indicator of what the ensemble is doing as a whole.
- In my opinion, make it easier to see the 4 quarter note phrase/fractional meter.
- Point towards the fact that this figure is at the center of how this idea was conceived.
Personally, I think that the most practical way for me two show both functions was to display the fractional meter as subdivisions of the polyrhythm.
Other things that might interest you:
There are rhythmic displacements happening in the following bars:
Bars 47-49: In regards to the 5/4, Tenor Sax 1 & Guitar 1 perform a rhythmic displacement that begins on the 1st quarter note of 3:5 then moves to the 2nd quarter note of 3:5 and finally moves to the 3rd quarter note of 3:5.
Here's how it looks on the score. I've eliminated all other instruments so that it is easier to see:
This same displacement is performed by the bass during bars 46-48.
During this section, the soprano sax only plays on bars 49, 51 and 52. When looked at continuously you can also see some rhythmic displacement happening.
Well, I hope that this post has given you some choices to consider when writing your own music.
At the very least you should have enjoyed the hats...
Best,
Jan
This same displacement is performed by the bass during bars 46-48.
During this section, the soprano sax only plays on bars 49, 51 and 52. When looked at continuously you can also see some rhythmic displacement happening.
Well, I hope that this post has given you some choices to consider when writing your own music.
At the very least you should have enjoyed the hats...
Best,
Jan
| medley_score.pdf |
RSS Feed
