Metronomes and Time/Rhythm Awareness

[jallenbass]

With all of the Talkbass metronome threads going on in I wasn't sure where I should put this so I started yet another one.

[Content deleted due to my lack of forethought]. I also agree that without knowing your instrument and/or the music that you're playing accurate time is nearly impossible.

However, using a metronome will identify your tendencies. All or most of us have tendencies when it comes to time. Some are aware of theirs and some are not.

From using a metronome I know that I have a propensity to rush especially when there are rests and syncopation. I know that I will always have this inclination but I'm able to hear it and keep it under control. I also know that I will never be as accurate as a metronome but that isn't the goal. Awareness is the goal.

 

[mambo4]

People argue over metronome application because they have unclear and clashing definitions of what "time" and "good time" actually means.

I prefer to say "accurate tempo" because that is more precise, and it is precisely what metronomes are useful for measuring and teaching.

 

[ZenG]

 

[MalcolmAmos]

Played with a new band last week. The music had the recommended bpm shown and the drummer did set his metronome, but, the lead vocalist, who also plays rhythm guitar was always faster at the ending.... more time together perhaps...

 

[ZenG]

 

[EarnestTBass]

I've been playing music for 50 years. I think I can keep pretty steady time without a metronome.
That also means that I am not annoyed to have a click going in the background for reference.

I play with a "never use a click" drummer who, at every gig, and every rehearsal, randomly plays some songs too fast, something too slow and always unsteady with tempo.

Me thinks he won't use a metronome- simply because he can't.
Maybe, he can't use a metronome- because he won't.

 

[saabfender]

Let me preface by saying that I agree with those who say that working with a metronome will not improve your internal time.

I really can't get on board with that. You internalize the "tune" of the metronome like any other song.

I've done a fair amount of playing drums to a click. That has improved my internal sense of time immeasurably. You learn the song of the click and play along with it.

 

[IamGroot]

Accurate time is what you are after, like Mambo 4 said. Let me add that sometimes illness or medication can affect your internal sense of time. Years ago, band members were questioning why I called tunes so slow. I was also cold in the middle of July in Texas. Turns out my thyroid crapped out.
A thyroid supplement pill a day, and I was as good as new.

The other part of time is how much swing you put into it. Classical and salsa have "zero swing", and jazz has moderate to heavy. I played jazz, but took a part in a 4hurch XMAS show with 4 upright basses in tuxes. First rehearsal, the guy next to me hissed "Don't swing those dotted notes, and this was on bowing. I am glad he told me.

When in doubt, metronome it out.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

Let me preface by saying that I agree with those who say that working with a metronome will not improve your internal time.

From using a metronome I know that I have a propensity to rush especially when there are rests and syncopation. I know that I will always have this inclination but I'm able to hear it and keep it under control.

Forgive me if I'm missing something, but it sounds to me like the second statement contradicts the first. If the nome helped you identify and rectify a propensity to move out of an established time stream, doesn't that mean it did help you "improve your internal time"?

 

[jallenbass]

Forgive me if I'm missing something, but it sounds to me like the second statement contradicts the first. If the nome helped you identify and rectify a propensity to move out of an established time stream, doesn't that mean it did help you "improve your internal time"?

My internal time is imperfect and most likely always will be. Awareness compensates for this and makes it so that it sounds as if my internal time has improved.

Maybe it actually improved. I don't know.

 

[lfmn16]

I've been playing music for 50 years. I think I can keep pretty steady time without a metronome.
That also means that I am not annoyed to have a click going in the background for reference.

I play with a "never use a click" drummer who, at every gig, and every rehearsal, randomly plays some songs too fast, something too slow and always unsteady with tempo.

Me thinks he won't use a metronome- simply because he can't.
Maybe, he can't use a metronome- because he won't.

Maybe he thinks he can keep pretty steady time without one.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

Awareness compensates for this and makes it so that it sounds as if my internal time has improved.

Well, like they say, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, in all likelihood it's a duck."...

 

[jallenbass]

Well, like they say, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, in all likelihood it's a duck."...

Good point.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

If the nome helped you identify and rectify a propensity to move out of an established time stream, doesn't that mean it did help you "improve your internal time"?

My internal time is imperfect and most likely always will be. Awareness compensates for this and makes it so that it sounds as if my internal time has improved.

Maybe it actually improved.

I think both statements are true.

I get so tired of hearing statements like "playing with a metronome wont give you better time". It always reads to me like someone saying "doing bench presses won't give you stronger pecs" or "Using a Phillips head screw driver will not tighten a Phillips head screw for you". While it's possible to conceive of a situation in which each of these things, done very poorly, will not produce the desired result, it's also possible that each of these tools, used properly and with care, can function exactly as they're supposed to for the desired ends.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

One other thing that gets bandied about a lot is people advising others to "practice out of time before you try to practice in time". I disagree with this. Better to play in time, but very slowly. Notes exist in relation to each other in time. Obviously, we can't just pick up any piece of music and play it perfectly at tempo. But if we allow that we could practice it "out of time", why not practice it in really, really slow time? That way we still have time to think and process but we are also learning and programming the relationship of the lengths of the notes in the line.

I recently worked with a student on a funk line passage she couldn't execute from the music. She had been working on it "out of time" for a few days, and it sounded like nonsense. We slowed it down to 16th note=80. In about 5 minutes, she was hearing it and feeling it as it was supposed to sound, and had a map of how to get it up to speed. Like my old teacher used to say when her students complained that their metronomes only went down to 40, "Really? Show me where it says 'quarter notes' on the dial."

 

[Turn Em Loose]

One other thing that gets bandied about a lot is people advising others to "practice out of time before you try to practice in time". I disagree with this. Better to play in time, but very slowly. Notes exist in relation to each other in time. Obviously, we can't just pick up any piece of music and play it perfectly at tempo. But if we allow that we could practice it "out of time", why not practice it in really, really slow time? That way we still have time to think and process but we are also learning and programming the relationship of the lengths of the notes in the line.

I recently worked with a student on a funk line passage she couldn't execute from the music. She had been working on it "out of time" for a few days, and it sounded like nonsense. We slowed it down to 16th note=80. In about 5 minutes, she was hearing it and feeling it as it was supposed to sound, and had a map of how to get it up to speed. Like my old teacher used to say when her students complained that their metronomes only went down to 40, "Really? Show me where it says 'quarter notes' on the dial."

I think I love you.

 

[JRA]

Me thinks he won't use a metronome- simply because he can't.
Maybe, he can't use a metronome- because he won't.

it's almost always this!

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

@The Diaper Geni - thanks for getting a Partridge family tune stuck in my head

 

[Turn Em Loose]

@The Diaper Geni - thanks for getting a Partridge family tune stuck in my head

You're welcome! But I wasn't referring to that song. I really think I love you. That's the best thing I've read online in about 3 1/2 months.

And did they use a click track to record that song?? That's the question we should be asking…

 

[jallenbass]

One other thing that gets bandied about a lot is people advising others to "practice out of time before you try to practice in time". I disagree with this. Better to play in time, but very slowly. Notes exist in relation to each other in time. Obviously, we can't just pick up any piece of music and play it perfectly at tempo. But if we allow that we could practice it "out of time", why not practice it in really, really slow time? That way we still have time to think and process but we are also learning and programming the relationship of the lengths of the notes in the line.

I recently worked with a student on a funk line passage she couldn't execute from the music. She had been working on it "out of time" for a few days, and it sounded like nonsense. We slowed it down to 16th note=80. In about 5 minutes, she was hearing it and feeling it as it was supposed to sound, and had a map of how to get it up to speed. Like my old teacher used to say when her students complained that their metronomes only went down to 40, "Really? Show me where it says 'quarter notes' on the dial."

Playing slowly in time benefits the multitasking skills needed to truly sight read.