mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON) (06/05/85)
> Swing isn't JUST rhythm. Swing is undefinable. Try defining it some time. > (Maybe Ellington's taste has the same musical emphasis that yours has. And > maybe that's why you like him.) And where did I say that the essence of jazz > is improvisation? > Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr Do you make such statements just to provoke discussion? I hope so. Do you mean swing as a musical quality or as the jazz sub-genre that reached its peak in the period between the rise of Louis Armstrong and that of Charlie Parker? The latter has best been defined by Count Basie who said "Give me four hard beats, and no cheating", clearly rhythmic attributes. The former, as you correctly point out, is undefinable. Or rather, there is no comprehensive, precise, written definition. The lack of precision is understandable. If you try to explain rhythm using the tools of harmonic analysis, you will fail because harmony, as I stated in an other posting, puts music in an arbitrary set of steps that will of necessity have some quantizing noise. A comprehensive definition might agree with Martin Williams, who said (I paraphrase) "Swing is the characteristic of music that carries the listener forward in Time, from measure to measure" Although vague, this statement captures the essentially rhythmic nature of swing. Maybe swing is undefinable, but its component parts are clearly rhythmic: phrasing behind or ahead of the beat; accenting dominant vs weak beats; the contrasting of 3 vs 4 beats, the most clearly identifiable component of swing (the sub-genre) drumming.... I would be proud to have Ellington's taste agree with mine (or more accurately, have my taste agree with his.) He is only the greatest composer America has ever produced. His words carry far more weight than your pronouncements. Marcel Simon
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (06/06/85)
>>Swing isn't JUST rhythm. Swing is undefinable. Try defining it some time. >>(Maybe Ellington's taste has the same musical emphasis that yours has. And >>maybe that's why you like him.) And where did I say that the essence of jazz >>is improvisation? >> Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr > Do you make such statements just to provoke discussion? I hope so. Me? Make statements on the net just to provoke discussion? Surely you jest. :-) > Do you > mean swing as a musical quality or as the jazz sub-genre that reached its peak > in the period between the rise of Louis Armstrong and that of Charlie Parker? > The latter has best been defined by Count Basie who said "Give me four hard > beats, and no cheating", clearly rhythmic attributes. The definition itself is hardly "definitive", in that it applies to marches as much as swing. The fact that people resort to definitions like that tells me that it is infact undefineable. > I would be proud to have Ellington's taste agree with mine (or more > accurately, have my taste agree with his.) He is only the greatest composer > America has ever produced. His words carry far more weight than your > pronouncements. Everyone is always "proud" to have something in common with those they admire. Your calling Ellington the greatest composer America has ever produced is as much a "fact" as your saying rhythm is THE most important element of music. That's what your taste tells you. But that doesn't make it absolute fact. Your personal tastes tell you that to you rhythm is the most important component of music and Ellington is the greatest ever American composer. -- Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr