And we repeat: If the basic feel is two beats of three 8ths, you write it 6/8. You may subdivide it with three beats of two 8ths in some measures ("/I wanna live in A/merica/"), but if the basic feel is three beats of two 8ths, you write 3/4.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass Tuplets
- Thread starter IamGroot
- Start date
In some African styles (Afro blue is a perfect example actually), this is very common, but the basic rhythm is still understood as two groups of three 8ths. You may say "play three over two (in 6/8)", but you wouldn't say "play two over three in 6/8".
I agree. Most people that I know would say afro blue is in 6/8
https://s3.amazonaws.com/halleonard-pagepreviews/HL_DDS_0000000000221433.png
I listened to it a couple of times before I saw your sample sheet music. It sounded to me like you show it notated, in 3/4. Two dotted quarters in a few bars of 3/4 don't make the whole thing in 6/8.
You can point to a lamp and tell us you've decided to call it a book. Ok, then. The point of notation is to communicate in a language we all speak. You're speaking your own dialect here, friend.
Steve out.
-S-
the reason that i linked that sheet is because even though i, and most of the salsa guys i play with (particularly dummers), would call it 6/8, there are others obviously who would not...
but back to the op, a sextuplet would generally be considered one group of 6. but we aware, some fingerings you choose can make it sound like you're grouping in 2, depending on where you put the shifts and bow direction changes. this can be done accidentally or purposefully depending on interpretation
My samples will be from my sax transcriptions. No bow markings or accents. 10 and 12 tuplets abound.
very often these are just approximations of some crazy sax flourish that the transcriber notated as best as possible but really kind of impossible to notate. your best bet here is to get the recording.
It could be that brecker actually practiced those specific rhythms, or it could be the transcribers interpretation of what he was playing. The recording is your best bet here. Brecker was known for being a monster practicer so who knows what type of crazy rhythm stuff he was working on?
You need to hear a recording of a performance. The start and end (rhythmically on the next bard first note) might be the only thing that is exact.
Find out if the sixth note that falls on the second beat us exactly on the second beat. If so you can reduce that bar rhythmically to eighth rest, eight note quarter note. Then you know where the notes with more importance are. If it is not exact, then it is just a run fro one note in time to the final note in time via the notated pitches.
Think more of how would you have gone over these pitches over time than trying to mimic exactly what is notated there.
It might be that Michael did play exactly as notated, he was always very precise, but these transcriptions are more to learn what and how it could be done, maybe also to try practicing them to the point of understanding, but not to play exactly as notated without understanding.
Find out if the sixth note that falls on the second beat us exactly on the second beat. If so you can reduce that bar rhythmically to eighth rest, eight note quarter note. Then you know where the notes with more importance are. If it is not exact, then it is just a run fro one note in time to the final note in time via the notated pitches.
Think more of how would you have gone over these pitches over time than trying to mimic exactly what is notated there.
It might be that Michael did play exactly as notated, he was always very precise, but these transcriptions are more to learn what and how it could be done, maybe also to try practicing them to the point of understanding, but not to play exactly as notated without understanding.
Just to add to was @shwashwa said:
Not everything from Michael Brecker was played live from beginning to end in the studio. There is a disc called “Don’t try that at home” where a lot of manipulation was used after the recordings to process/assemble what he played because he was not to do that himself in one take at tempo.
Well, a lot youngsters tried to play that anyway. (They might not like good advice...)
Don’t get into that trap...
Musical quality does not depend on the maximum number of notes per second.
That’s musical sports, sometimes called virtuosity.
I don't know if I have enough years left to play passable Brecker, but thats my goal. I love his note choice and his rhythmic style, as well as his chops. Bach, Bird, Brecker.. the progress of a deluded bass player who has fallen from his duty to uphold the Low end.
Btw, thanks for the warning about "Dont try this". Msybe cross "Chime" off my list.
Duplicating the repeated note , alternate fingering technique is a hurdle.
