I'm not so sure "groove" comes from timing imperfections...

[ben_allison]

I feel like most of the music people really dance and "get down" to is grid-based...

But why would you bob your head or shake your ass to a grid-based song, when supposedly it's imperfections in timing that create "groove" or "mojo" or whatever? Well, you wouldn't.

I think it's a platitude a lot of people throw around, but I'm not sure if it holds up. This is all with a view to programming drum parts, btw.

I think the most important thing in terms of programming a great drum part, apart from a good arrangement, has more to do with variation in velocity than anything else. Ghost notes, drum hits that are not all identical in tone, but slightly different. This makes the texture more complex, and for me, is what makes a drum part breathe.

Playing in time has always been something, to which, musicians aspire.

I dunno. What do others think?

[Tim Halligan]

I would humbly submit that if you think "groove" comes purely from the drums, you are kidding yourself.

It's the interplay of ALL of the musicians which gives you the groove.


Cheers,
Tim

[ben_allison]

I would humbly submit that if you think "groove" comes purely from the drums, you are kidding yourself.

It's the interplay of ALL of the musicians which gives you the groove.

:Roll eyes:

Yeah yeah. I'm not denying that.

I'm strictly talking about drums and drum programming, and what one can infuse into them so that they're doing their part to contribute to the whole.

[Bob Olhsson]

"Timing imperfections" was pure bullsh!t that was dreamed up by the MIDI developers when people started complaining that their quantization didn't feel right. The beginning of a sample is not the beginning of a note. "Humanization" just smeared Vaseline on the lens so that the inaccuracy of MIDI wasn't as obvious.

[mclights]

...has more to do with variation in velocity than anything else

agree 100%. nothing more aggrivating than hearing the same bloody hit over and over. sounds cheap and uninspired.

but its also what happens in between the hits and ghost notes that makes it 'groove'.

[ben_allison]

"Timing imperfections" was pure bullsh!t that was dreamed up by the MIDI developers when people started complaining that their quantization didn't feel right. The beginning of a sample is not the beginning of a note. "Humanization" just smeared Vaseline on the lens so that the inaccuracy of MIDI wasn't as obvious.

Everytime I read something you write, lightbulbs go off. It's been like this since I started reading forums... like, 7-8 years ago?

Please tell me you're working on a book...

[ben_allison]

agree 100%. nothing more aggrivating than hearing the same bloody hit over and over. sounds cheap and uninspired.

but its also what happens in between the hits and ghost notes that makes it 'groove'.

You mean snare buzz and kick drum squeek?

WUT WUT! My T.Dot Brethren.

[MKZ]

It's definitely not about timing imperfections and definitely not just about the drums. Poor players will say "Well I'm not on..." (or anywhere close) "..to the grid, because I got groove" Fucking bullshit! and they're ahead of the beat and behind the beat with no predictable pattern (probably like some of those MIDI humanizers)

Groove/style is for example: when your "up-stroke" 16ths might be a little "late", almost a 16th shuffle, but not quite, for example. Or if your snare is a little behind the beat but uniform across the song/section/whatever.

Plus all the velocity stuff that people already mentioned.

[otek]

When you program drums, velocity changes are very important. So is placing certain things off the grid.

Problem is, there's just not a whole lot of "random" about it.

Programming drums to sound "real" is kind of lake making a low-resolution facsimile of something a real drummer might play. And a good drummer is NOT "random" about his drags and rushes.

It is VERY educational to study grooves from records. Sampling something from a record and making a groove map out of it is a great way to study what actually goes on. It only gives you a limited part of the puzzle, of course, but it may give you some ideas.


otek

[Bob Olhsson]

My experience based on recording great players using a keyboard having no velocity sensitivity whatsoever has been that it, along with "touch," has absolutely nothing to do with velocity! Just another MIDI head trip.

It's all about where the notes are placed in time relative to the rest of the arrangement. A few samples delay can really screw the groove or feel completely up. Timing inaccuracy is the problem, much less the cure.

[Knastratt]

I come from the composer/arranger/player/tracker/mixer standpoint and my reflection on the matter is that a slightly wobbly song can get perfectly grooving with just another added track. Groove is definitely the sum of all tracks happening.

[eagan]

It's the interplay of ALL of the musicians which gives you the groove.



I think this is about all there really is to say about this subject.


JLE

[seaneldon]

From where I sit, the groove has EVERYTHING to do with those little "imperfections" (this is not the word I'd use, by the way) in timing...but as noted above it's got a lot to do with how the entire group swings in and out of the gridded-pocket.

I've seen bands with extraordinary groove where everyone was just kind of keeping up with/catching up to the drummer. I've seen bands with extraordinary groove where the opposite happens.

I've never seen or heard extraordinary groove happen on a grid.

That's not groove. That's a grid.

[Bob Olhsson]

The grid exists only in the collective minds of the players. The "groove" is tension and release against the mantra-like even time/breathing/heartbeat that the musicians are all conscious of.

[dwoz]

Hats off to the original poster for having the brass danglies to put such a moronic statement up for discussion.

What it indicates, is that you simply haven't spent much time looking at the problem.

First problem with your premise: they are not "timing imperfections". At all.

You have to first realize that there are several different areas of a note: there's a "formative region", or sometimes can be called "attack". There's the perceived point of pulse, which may be sharp and narrow, or wide. There's the body of the note, and finally, but most importantly, there's the release of the note, which has every bit as much importance as the attack of the note.

Second Fail in your post: groove is caused in equal parts by what is played, and BY WHAT IS NOT PLAYED. The release of a note, is, in essence, the attack of the silence.

The entirely arbitrary, albeit convenient, notion that a note in a grid has a start point that is a SINGULARITY, does not have any real meaning in the real world. The only thing that's absolutely precise in a grid is the PERIODICITY. A note in a grid has a START REGION. That start region may be quite wide.

I guess I should further qualify that. The instant of time that is arbitrarily called the precise start point of a note in a grid, is really better considered to be the CENTER POINT of the start region.

In different musics, there are traditions to place the point of perceived attack of a note in varying relationship to the center point of the start of the note. These variations, or ADJUSTMENTS, are very deliberate.

There is, therefore, no relevance to the word "inaccurate". groove is, in fact, about being MUCH MORE ACCURATE.

Often, when you're making sounds lower velocity and higher velocity, what you're doing, is defacto moving the point of perceived pulse around.

[Bob Olhsson]

...groove is, in fact, about being MUCH MORE ACCURATE...Wow, you put a bunch of thought into that post!

I'll add, the same is true of intonation. It's about tension between consonance and dissonance. Equaled tempered notes can be and often are way way out of tune!

Oversimplification of how music actually works has become a huge problem.

[DPower]

Often, when you're making sounds lower velocity and higher velocity, what you're doing, is defacto moving the point of perceived pulse around.

And Bingo was his Name-o...

[dwoz]

So, putting my idea in context of the drum programmer...so-called "humanizing" of the beat by adding some randomization, doesn't make it sound like a person, because it randomizes the PERIODICITY of the notes, which is the very antithesis of groove.

Groove, as Bob has alluded to, is a matter of tension and release. Internal tension, internal release, tension against an external time pulse, and release against an external time pulse.

That's why a drummer that rushes 2 and drags 4 can have such a monster groove.

[DPower]

So, putting my idea in context of the drum programmer...so-called "humanizing" of the beat by adding some randomization, doesn't make it sound like a person, because it randomizes the PERIODICITY of the notes, which is the very antithesis of groove.

Groove, as Bob has alluded to, is a matter of tension and release. Internal tension, internal release, tension against an external time pulse, and release against an external time pulse.

That's why a drummer that rushes 2 and drags 4 can have such a monster groove.

And this is exactly why as the OP remarked people nod their heads to SOME electronic music that may be "grid-locked" in terms of timing. It's because these composers understand what makes groove, whether by feel or by knowledge, it amounts to the same thing. The question really is... Can you repeat it? ;)

[ben_allison]

Wow Dwoz, good thoughts but you sound like you need a lay... ease up a bit bro.

I've heard people – many people – claim that programed drum parts sound better when they're "imperfect," and specifically when the timing of the notes is mildly randomized. This is a common remark many have made... NOT ME. I'm commenting on a perspective I've heard, with some regularity.

MY point was that musicians are always striving to play IN TIME, and many club tracks that COMPEL you to dance are based on drum and bass loops that were programmed on a grid, in a DAW. So clearly, random fluctuations in time aren't what groove, within the context of programmed drums, hangs on.

Whether the "center point" as you call it is "in place," and how that correlates to amplitude/attack/transient information, etc, is important and needs to be intuited...

But in an effort to lay a virtual smack down, you've kind of talked past me.

[Dave Perry]

Can anyone here define "groove"?

[dwoz]

Wow Dwoz, good thoughts but you sound like you need a lay... ease up a bit bro.


so what'd you expect? that I'd just swallow that stinking turd of a post, whole?

I've heard people – many people – claim that programed drum parts sound better when they're "imperfect," and specifically when the timing of the notes is mildly randomized. This is a common remark many have made... NOT ME. I'm commenting on a perspective I've heard, with some regularity.

for the most part, people have absolutely no idea what they're listening to. Randomizing sounds "better" to them because they're expected to like the "less machine-ish" version, they know this. But it doesn't sound BETTER, it sounds "less like a machine".

I am not here, however, to argue about that. I'm sure the algorithm used to randomize the midi events can be quite sophisticated, and not really necessarily be random at all.

But adding randomness to midi programmed grid drums is merely masking *teh suck*, it is NOT adding goodness. There's a difference.




MY point was that musicians are always striving to play IN TIME, and many club tracks that COMPEL you to dance are based on drum and bass loops that were programmed on a grid, in a DAW. So clearly, random fluctuations in time aren't what groove, within the context of programmed drums, hangs on.


there are two different things we can talk about: musician time, and grid time. Occasionally, in some genres of music, (notably programmed club dance in all its flavors) the two intersect. But that's the exception rather than the rule. To draw conclusions based on the correlations you've perceived, would be an error.



Whether the "center point" as you call it is "in place," and how that correlates to amplitude/attack/transient information, etc, is important and needs to be intuited...

and essentially that's the quest of every musician, ever, from Og and his big stick and hollow log, down to britney spears.


But in an effort to lay a virtual smack down, you've kind of talked past me.

Is that my problem?

I knew a midi drum programmer once. he accidentally locked himself in his car in the back of the mall parking lot, and came THIS CLOSE to starving to death, because he couldn't figure out which midi channel the horn was on.

dwoz

[tannoy]

I knew a midi drum programmer once. he accidentally locked himself in his car in the back of the mall parking lot, and came THIS CLOSE to starving to death, because he couldn't figure out which midi channel the horn was on.



:icon_eek::lol::lol::lol:

To me groove is something human, a feeling that is given into a tune. I ususally find hard quantized stuff boring as hell but will prefer it anytime over a fucked up groove (read 'really bad timing'). I never understood the groove extraction tools and the sense in using them and prolly never will....but I believe it's possible to program drums in a groovy way.


Marco

[dwoz]

Yes, Marco, absolutely. I am not a person that says "programmed drums suck". No.

what I'm saying, is that groove is a result of time control that is far more complex and nuanced than simple dumb grid snapping, and so the use of the word "inaccurate" is flat wrong.

That doesn't excuse all the inaccurate drummers, either.

Nor does it imply that strict grid rhythms can't groove.

[seaneldon]

The groove...she was drilled into me at a young age. Full force.

I had a drum teacher when I was about 9 years old named Mr. Gary, who would OBSESS, even with FOURTH GRADERS, about "the groove". The single most important aspect of connecting the listener to the music, he said.

Fourth graders. Kids that are just starting to learn to read and play music...

We were playing "Let's Go Band", fer Christ's sake.

If he saw someone playing stiffly, reading more than feeling, concentrating too much on what's on the chart, he would stop everyone.

"Play what you just played, this time without looking at it. Feel it, and play with your body more than your mind."

I'll tell you what...he made mostly uninterested 4th graders play like it wasn't even a class. It was fun.

It grooved.

We weren't thinking about the music. We weren't trying to make it perfect. We were just playing. Concentrating without overthinking.

It grooved.

And for the record, programmed drums DO suck. Unless you want most of your rhythm section to sound programmed instead of sounding like a drummer.

[tannoy]

Nor does it imply that strict grid rhythms can't groove.

I think it depends on the genre + the tempo of a song...I can't think of a jazz tune snapped to grid with a groovy feeling inherent, for example. Or (and all Green Day fans please have mercy with me) if I listen to '21 guns', I feel like there's absolutely nothing grooving - doesn't touch me in a rhythmically way. Maybe it would if it would be in a higher tempo. But the way it is, it sounds completely 'gridded' and somewhat boring to me. For dance tracks, I believe we got used to it....if I compare Madonna's 'Get into the groove' (no pun intended) to Lady Gaga's 'Pokerface' , the former sounds way groovier to me and makes me bob my head way earlier than the latter. Newer dance tracks groove in a more 'sterile' way, if one can express it that way.

Of course, the more alcohol I consume in a discotheque, the more groovier everything seems...but that's another topic.


Marco

[Slipperman]

I feel like most of the music people really dance and "get down" to is grid-based...


Who are these "people" and how do we kill them without suffering any consequence here on earth...? As I suspect we can safely assume there will be only REWARD for killing them in the afterlife.

Anyhoo.

If someone told me in 1977 that there would come a day I would fondly remember "Disco" I would have pissed myself laughing and then hit them with something you could use to drive a nail.

Who knew?

Ahh me. Whole buncha great stuff posted here already.

Dwoz may have come down a little heavy on ya here Ben... but boy does he sprechen der troof, as people who don't speak German would say.

Then we get to Bob O's corollary to intonation and resolving to absolute pitches, which acts as the proverbial last nail in the "uniformity masquerading as perfection" coffin.

Crash.

I go on a harangue at least weekly about this stuff with the staff.

The grid.

The fucking grid.

OK. I can't summon the energy for this right now.

I will say this:

1.) GREAT drumming is as much about conveying emotion as it is about timekeeping.

2.) The way great, hell, even GOOD drummers accomplish this(even in the most simple musical forms) is the end result of a fairly BAFFLING number of "intent" cues which the intersection of the player, his instrument(s), the music itself, and those very same factors embraced by the ensemble, create.

3.) Groove arrives at its ideal state as a sense of communal musical "trend", but CAN be heard in single instruments as well. It cannot happen without some form of repetition. On the other hand, the "tolerance" of groove isn't necessarily simple math... even in seemingly obvious rhythmic figures.

Best regards,

SM.

[tannoy]

... but boy does he sprechen der troof, as people who don't speak German would say.

:grin:

I'm gonna include that one in my daily vocabulary for shit and giggles...maybe you've just developed some new German saying...


The grid.

The fucking grid.

....can sometimes work as an absolute groove killer, because it doesn't look right. Which has nada to do with what it feels and sounds like. Though I have to admit that I sometimes find it hard to not listen to a track again, because the notes aren't looking close enough on spot. Time to buy a blanket to throw over the screen at specific moments.


Marco

[Bob Olhsson]

Groove is pure spiritual consciousness. It is cause as opposed to effect. People seemingly look endlessly to technology as a means of curing suck. The cure is groove but non-suck must begin first with groove.

Johnny Cash had more groove in his vocals than 99% of drummers. Aretha Franklin and some Gospel singers take it a step beyond that. The finest Indian classical musicians have made a lifetime study of groove. The thing is they just call it music.

[John Eppstein]

Dwoz, that's an excellent post - I'm bookmarking it for future reference.

The follow-ups ain't bad, either.

Bob and Slippy make some great points as well.

The problem with midi gridlocked drums at least in the context of the genres that I'm working in isn't that they're "too precise", really, it's that they force you to conform to their particular imprecision - the granularity of the divisions is not fine enough to allow for realistic syncopation. That's the whole problem with allowing computers to define parameters of music in general - it removes nuance.

BTW, Ben, maybe I'm just old, but I've NEVER heard a midi programmed dance track that was half as compelling as, for example, a good Stevie Ray Vaughn shuffle -a good example would be "Pride and Joy" - which, as far as I know, is virtually impossible to duplicate via midi.

EDIT: Looking ahead to the next post, a drummer is a MUSICIAN, interacting with other HUMAN BEINGS, actively and passively - a programmer is "interacting" only with a machine, which cannot respond at all. There is no emotional interaction in programming. A drummer is not a programmer any more than a pianist is a programmer.

And let's not get into the "preference of kids who have no real experience with non-compressed music "preferring" MP3 compression. Ignorance is not preference.

[ben_allison]

so what'd you expect? that I'd just swallow that stinking turd of a post, whole?

*sigh* I'm assuming since you didn't disagree, you do in fact need a lay. All I can offer is an angry handy j. PM so we can iron out the details.

for the most part, people have absolutely no idea what they're listening to. Randomizing sounds "better" to them because they're expected to like the "less machine-ish" version, they know this. But it doesn't sound BETTER, it sounds "less like a machine".

I'm talking about everyone. I'm talking about people involved in music production, from n00bs to experts to software designers. It's a pervasive notion.

But adding randomness to midi programmed grid drums is merely masking *teh suck*, it is NOT adding goodness. There's a difference.

Obv.

there are two different things we can talk about: musician time, and grid time. Occasionally, in some genres of music, (notably programmed club dance in all its flavors) the two intersect. But that's the exception rather than the rule. To draw conclusions based on the correlations you've perceived, would be an error.

It's not a conclusion, rather an observation... but simple logic says that if grid-based rhythms are counter to human sensibilities, then humans would never be motivated by them... however, this is not always the case so it's worth examining.

Is that my problem?

Of course. Trying to be cool on the Internet is so 2002. Is civility, even in the face of disagreement, too much to ask? Or perhaps pulling out common ground, along with difference? Am I crazy for expecting that on a forum?

what I'm saying, is that groove is a result of time control that is far more complex and nuanced than simple dumb grid snapping, and so the use of the word "inaccurate" is flat wrong.

Look, I get this: I'm a musician first. I understand the somewhat nebulous world of "feel." But are you able to package it up a little more concretely? If we just have to leave it at "mojo... you wouldn't understand," then what's the point?

And for the record, programmed drums DO suck. Unless you want most of your rhythm section to sound programmed instead of sounding like a drummer.

But a drummer is a programmer, just with a different workflow...

Who are these "people" and how do we kill them without suffering any consequence here on earth...?

Aids? Trans fats?

Then we get to Bob O's corollary to intonation and resolving to absolute pitches, which acts as the proverbial last nail in the "uniformity masquerading as perfection" coffin.

I 100% agree that uniformity is not perfection... that makes no sense. Our ideas about perfection (in art) are predicated largely on our experience.

That's why, for example, why kids these days actually prefer the sound of music with MP3 compression... or why 99% of still life paintings have the light source coming from above. We like what we are accustomed to... which throws the whole "THIS is fuckin' MUSIC!" arguments out the window... mostly.

I think there's something persistent about the "human spirit" that subtends all this... but if that's true then that same spirit drove us to invent transistors and CPU's and MIDI and we're back at square one again...

1.) GREAT drumming is as much about conveying emotion as it is about timekeeping.

Fo show.

The way great, hell, even GOOD drummers accomplish this(even in the most simple musical forms) is the end result of a fairly BAFFLING number of "intent" cues which the intersection of the player, his instrument(s), the music itself, and those very same factors embraced by the ensemble, create.

Intuition, ultimately, is unteachable... and I get that. People sometimes ask me to teach guitar lessons, and all I can say is, "Egh... I'm a hack... I just go with my gut... I can't teach that." So, I get it.

Would you say this intuition can show up in drum programming? I mean, in the end it all comes down to using our ears anyway. Tracking, you say "let's take that again." Programming, you move the little boxes over a touch... same difference?

It cannot happen without some form of repetition. On the other hand, the "tolerance" of groove isn't necessarily simple math... even in seemingly obvious rhythmic figures.

So are you saying there's no way we can break it down to be able to say THIS song grooves, THAT song doesn't, and here's why, in a way that most people could go, "Oh yeah, I see what you're saying"?

[tannoy]

The problem with midi gridlocked drums at least in the context of the genres that I'm working in isn't that they're "too precise", really, it's that they force you to conform to their particular imprecision - the granularity of the divisions is not fine enough to allow for realistic syncopation. That's the whole problem with allowing computers to define parameters of music in general - it removes nuance.



Really ? Never recognized that regarding midi-resolution...but I'd agree if we're talking about velocity-layers of samples in comparison to the uncountable nuances a real drumset has to offer.


Marco

[ben_allison]

Really ? Never recognized that regarding midi-resolution...but I'd agree if we're talking about velocity-layers of samples in comparison to the uncountable nuances a real drumset has to offer.

That's an interesting question... where's the point of diminishing returns as far as "the continuity or reality," and "particulation."

Velocity layers for example.

Once something's in mix, compressed, and once the mix is compressed/limited/mp3ified, will the absence of continuity turn off listeners... or do velocity layers suffice... especially for something that sounds for such a brief amount of time like a drum?

I realize it's the accumulation of the little things that make a big difference... I'm not sure... just asking.

[ben_allison]

BTW, Ben, maybe I'm just old, but I've NEVER heard a midi programmed dance track that was half as compelling as, for example, a good Stevie Ray Vaughn shuffle -a good example would be "Pride and Joy" - which, as far as I know, is virtually impossible to duplicate via midi.

I understand it's certainly a challenge. But if you had samples of that kit, surely you could match up appropriate hits... it's tantamount to cutting up a photo, and overlaying the pieces over the original photo...

EDIT: Looking ahead to the next post, a drummer is a MUSICIAN, interacting with other HUMAN BEINGS, actively and passively - a programmer is "interacting" only with a machine, which cannot respond at all. There is no emotional interaction in programming. A drummer is not a programmer any more than a pianist is a programmer.

That's a fair point... but still, at the end of the day, we're using our ears... so you nudge until it "feels" right. Certainly it's WAY more work than just hiring a killer drummer... but surely the possibility exists that one can finesse a programmed track to, by and large, sound "right."

And let's not get into the "preference of kids who have no real experience with non-compressed music "preferring" MP3 compression. Ignorance is not preference.

Heh heh.

I agree that ignorance is pervasive. My only point was that our ideals are informed by our experience.

I mean, I get the Beatles, but I'd rather listen to Radiohead... they MOVE me more. It's not right or wrong. We are all born and raised in different times/places, and our preferences are formed by our individual experiences... so "better" or "right" is kind of a sliding scale.

[John Eppstein]

I understand it's certainly a challenge. But if you had samples of that kit, surely you could match up appropriate hits... it's tantamount to cutting up a photo, and overlaying the pieces over the original photo...



That's a fair point... but still, at the end of the day, we're using our ears... so you nudge until it "feels" right. Certainly it's WAY more work than just hiring a killer drummer... but surely the possibility exists that one can finesse a programmed track to, by and large, sound "right."


But that's not "grid programming" - it's laying in the individual beats by hand, which isn't the same thing at all.

I've heard guys who could hand play a drum machine and get a killer track - but trying to use a sequencer - hardware or software - won't get it. (At least in certain genres.)

Note that in this case I'm using "sequencer" not in the sense of an electronic recording program, but in the sense of a "robot" that does the placing of the hits on the grid. We may be having a semantic misunderstanding here and I don't want to get embroiled in another one of THOSE damnable things.

[ben_allison]

Note that in this case I'm using "sequencer" not in the sense of an electronic recording program, but in the sense of a "robot" that does the placing of the hits on the grid. We may be having a semantic misunderstanding here and I don't want to get embroiled in another one of THOSE damnable things.

Ohhhhhhhhhhkay. I get what you're saying. Doh!

No I've always meant a human, placing notes in DAW, by hand, and moving them based on their aesthetic, until it sucks as little possible. Not a machine making all the decisions.

Internetz are awesome! :lol:

[dwoz]

on the whole, "overrated" civility thing...some womb-ites were complaining that we'd completely lost the "shit brigade" vibe that we used to so dearly embrace. I thought to myself, "what a perfect thread...."


I think it's perfectly, easily possible to break down a "groove" and see the component physical aspects. BUT...I don't think it's possible to DISCUSS the component physical aspects, because the conceptual nature of "groove" is not illuminated by looking at the atomic building blocks.

I can (as any marginally competent musician can) parse out a part, and examine the regions that I elaborated on before, the formants, the point of attack, the body, and the release, also paying attention to the silences...what a painter would call the "negative space" aspects...

...and I (we) can define and categorize the semantics of that. but just as talking about covalent bonds in second orbitals between oxygen and hydrogen tell us everything we need to know about water, it however tells us nothing of what it feels like to come across a cool blue oasis in the middle of the desert...and the semantics of note attacks doesn't tell us the first thing about sex.

It's really all about sex.

[seaneldon]

But a drummer is a programmer, just with a different workflow...

No. Drummers can be musicians, and computers have workflow not laid out by drummers.

If it were laid out by drummers...that wouldn't have happened because the drummer would have played the drums and gotten it over with in a fraction of the time.

It's really all about sex.

Yes.

Also why the drummers "get it done" in a fraction of the time.

I'm not a drummer. I play one in the Womb.

[dwoz]

when you talk about programming drums, as vs. "capturing midi events"...I have a TrapKat midi controller. It's a setup with a bunch of trigger pads, cool piece of kit. You play it with sticks or your hands or whatever...and it tosses midi note on and velocity events into the stream.

Way, way different than programming via screen icons or whatnot.

Obviously, in the abstract, I can sit down and write a computer program that would give me the same timing nuances (to the extent that they can be actuated) in the digital realm, as I can by playing...I can program "feel"...but it will take me an awful long time.

again...groove happens at a much higher level of abstraction than the physical events that implement it.

[ben_allison]

on the whole, "overrated" civility thing...some womb-ites were complaining that we'd completely lost the "shit brigade" vibe that we used to so dearly embrace. I thought to myself, "what a perfect thread...."

:lol:

Fantastic. It smells like douche water in here, so something's working!

I think it's perfectly, easily possible to break down a "groove" and see the component physical aspects. BUT...I don't think it's possible to DISCUSS the component physical aspects, because the conceptual nature of "groove" is not illuminated by looking at the atomic building blocks.

I can (as any marginally competent musician can) parse out a part, and examine the regions that I elaborated on before, the formants, the point of attack, the body, and the release, also paying attention to the silences...what a painter would call the "negative space" aspects...

...and I (we) can define and categorize the semantics of that. but just as talking about covalent bonds in second orbitals between oxygen and hydrogen tell us everything we need to know about water, it however tells us nothing of what it feels like to come across a cool blue oasis in the middle of the desert...and the semantics of note attacks doesn't tell us the first thing about sex.

It's really all about sex.

Good post. I 100% get you, and agree. It's like "qualia." Some reject the idea, but I think it holds merit.

So then, I'll put this to you: if we are unable to unpack a virtually spiritual experience (like "groove"), then how can we conclusively say, it doesn't live on a grid? Because when you slap things on a grid, you aren't "feeling it"? Is that enough?

There's a bit of a gap between A and B; that being, between what we can't really define, and what we're adamant about.

Now, in a simple way, we know that when we hear two different notes together, we tend to prefer notes that have intervals that relate to each other mathematically.

Our 12 note system is a compromise, so let's just look at two just-intonation notes.

When they they relate to each other perfectly, we are most pleased... so, is there anything about this that can hold true for timing?

So, come back to our 12 not system... it's a compromise, but we dig it. It works, and there is something in the dissonance we can appreciate. So there is a threshold of dissonance, beyond which, we simply hear ugliness.

This should hold true for timing as well.

Not sure when I'm going, just thinking out loud.

[ben_allison]

when you talk about programming drums, as vs. "capturing midi events"...I have a TrapKat midi controller. It's a setup with a bunch of trigger pads, cool piece of kit. You play it with sticks or your hands or whatever...and it tosses midi note on and velocity events into the stream.

Way, way different than programming via screen icons or whatnot.

Yeah, I actually just got a Korg Nanopad for this reason!

[Mesmer]

BTW, Ben, maybe I'm just old, but I've NEVER heard a midi programmed dance track that was half as compelling as, for example, a good Stevie Ray Vaughn shuffle -a good example would be "Pride and Joy" - which, as far as I know, is virtually impossible to duplicate via midi.


John,
is Pride and Joy the song you were really thinking about? because having no experience with the legendary SRV I went ahead and streamed me the song, and I've got to say it was almost the opposite of what *I* thought a general Groovin' tune would be.

I mean, the ... how to describe it ... the compost, or the Jelly/Conserve ... emm, produced by the bass+guitars+drums was very very regular, with an emphasis on the upbeats ... I felt that a little bit of a slide in that song's grid, and it would become some Jamaican Ska... I'm curious what's going on there?

also,
I propose that since it's all about sex, and one of the four horsemen stated, you can't really teach it, because it amounts to teaching what is the flavor of Strawberry.... I propose that as John did, people start dropping names of tunes that are exemplary _groove_ on tape, ALONG with a singular or a few couple of most prominent features that can be identified with some effort, that the poster surmises makes the performance groove.

Example:
Solomon Burke, None of us are Free
I think the main guitar in lower register, doing a repetitive riff that can be heard to be just a tad behind the beat makes it groove. I also note the way the drummer is articulating the hi-hat, getting a lot of open-then-choked hits at "just the right time" whatever that means.

Well that was long winded. But I hope it catches on.

[ben_allison]

Examples! What a brilliant idea!

I think Fire Eyed Boy by Broken Social Scene has a great feel/groove/whatever.

[dwoz]

:lol:

Fantastic. It smells like douche water in here, so something's working!



Good post. I 100% get you, and agree. It's like "qualia." Some reject the idea, but I think it holds merit.

So then, I'll put this to you: if we are unable to unpack a virtually spiritual experience (like "groove"), then how can we conclusively say, it doesn't live on a grid? Because when you slap things on a grid, you aren't "feeling it"? Is that enough?

There's a bit of a gap between A and B; that being, between what we can't really define, and what we're adamant about.

Now, in a simple way, we know that when we hear two different notes together, we tend to prefer notes that have intervals that relate to each other mathematically.

Our 12 note system is a compromise, so let's just look at two just-intonation notes.

When they they relate to each other perfectly, we are most pleased... so, is there anything about this that can hold true for timing?

So, come back to our 12 not system... it's a compromise, but we dig it. It works, and there is something in the dissonance we can appreciate. So there is a threshold of dissonance, beyond which, we simply hear ugliness.

This should hold true for timing as well.

Not sure when I'm going, just thinking out loud.


calling a groove "qualia" is very tempting. But that's not exactly where I was going. I think a groove HAS an objective nature...at least as long as it's context is intact. Rather, where I was going, was more like the fact that you can't talk about a BOOK particularly well, by discussing it's component words and letters. The frequency of occurrence of the word "this", for example, cannot really tell us if the book is fiction or non-fiction...it can't tell us if it's a murder mystery or a science-fiction tome.

It may be able to tell us whether it's a first-person or third person narrative...but barely.

So, in the same way, discussing the selective micro-increment and or decrement of note position gives us the base rote tools for construction of groove, but it doesn't talk about juxtapositions, intent, context.

we then necessarily have to bring the discussion up into abstraction...talking about tension, release....which are relational terms, so we have to embed the discussion in a context if we hope for relevance.

...and of course, that relevance will be a moving target.

So you CAN talk about groove, but just not in terms of it's tools.

I can tell you about my hammer, and my saw, and my pile of wood....but that doesn't convey the notion of "house".

[dwoz]

We could talk about Ritchie Hayward on Waiting For Columbus...talk about how he uses "2" and "4". acceleration....and landing....acceleration....and landing. tension....release.....tension....release...

[Immanuel]

I once had a teacher, who asked us the simple and fundamental question, that very few of us had really thought about: "What does it take to give the impression that the band grooves?". Different suggestions came up. Many of them where based on synchronism. He then answered the question himself by asking a volunteer with no bass playing skills to be a sloppy bass player, while he played drums himself. It actually sounded groovy. Then, he said: "This is not, because I played the drums. Who wants to be a sloppy drummer now?". We then had a sloppy drummer volunteer, while our teacher played the bass. It still felt groovy.

My attempt at an explanation is, that our brains search for something in the music to 'lock' to. When it finds a groovy fix point, it locks to that, and then it experiences groove. Within active music therapy, this (whatever the actual mechanism is) can be very powerful, because when playing with a band of untrained people, if just the music therapist can establish a groove, groove will to most be, what is perceived - even though the rest of the band may be highly "humanized".

A couple of comments about this: A) I am quite sure, that the higher percentage of grooving people in the band, the better. Maybe in part because our brains do not have to filter "ungroovy noise" out. B) There might be an "odd element" somewhere in there too. A red dot on a white wall demands attention. A white dot on a red wall does the same. One ungroovy musician in a pack of highly groovy people may demand a lot of attention too from the listener. C) Maybe a bunch of you will disagree with these things. This may in part be, because you are trained into listening to things in a more analytic way than Joe Average. Part of producer's, AE's and musician's professional skill sets is to be able to pinpoint errors/faults in the music, sound and performance. I believe that most other people hear music in a more "intuitive" way.

[Immanuel]

The beginning of a sample is not the beginning of a note.
I've heard a couple of songs at free outdoor concerts with a band playing the probably most popular percussion based music in Denmark - Safri Duo. The two core members are classically trained at the music academy. I don't know the English word. Here the profession is called janitshar. They beat stuff with sticks; xylophones, drums ... stuff. They usually bring a singer and a sequencer track.

Their concerts are always packed with people.

Their sequenced tracks are awful IMO. They really do sound they are programmed to grid with the first sample of the sound being the beginning of the note. With some slooow attack "bass drum" sounds, the tracks lack behind so much, it almost feels like an echo. It is totally ungroovy, and I am amazed how these two musicians can play super tight on top of it without being dragged behind. I am also amazed, that they have not fixed this??? Maybe they just have enough cow bell in their monitoring ...

[Mesmer]

We could talk about Ritchie Hayward on Waiting For Columbus...talk about how he uses "2" and "4". acceleration....and landing....acceleration....and landing. tension....release.....tension....release...

WOW!! thanks.
It seems the band is called Little Feat, this is a live album called "waiting for columbus", I'm right now listening to "Fat man in the Bathtub". And let me tell you that since the first bar this is GROOVE! at least to me. And it'd find it very hard to describe why, other than:

it reminds me of The Mixerman Diaries where Cottons insists on overdubbing one night, and to paraphrase "ends up filling every little subdivision pocket in the main beat" but being Cottons, it ends up being a Flustercuck.

I say it reminds me of that because it's as if that happened but the drummer had good skill and taste. The drums appear dense, but really are not. I think there might be a key there.

[Mesmer]

Examples! What a brilliant idea!

I think Fire Eyed Boy by Broken Social Scene has a great feel/groove/whatever.

found it and loved it, thanks for tuning me to what sounds like a great new (to me) band! thanks.

a. they sound so clipped.... the sound is so clipped ... ... ...
b. wouldn't have thought of this as an example of groove; very interested in what others may comment. I just found the rhythm to be regular... ok not passive, but you know like in a grid. It was musical though. ? how do you hear groove here (friendly question intonation [internetz proofing])?

[Mesmer]

@Immanuel

what you say is very compatible with my little notion that Groove is more fertile in band where people have *that* ....erm... jazzblues-scene-mindset where your goal as a musician is for your playing to be sssooo good, that it is difficult to notice it ... one goes transparent, and people are not waiting for their time to shred in *solo mode* but rather trying to make each other look good and the song sound like it's making love.

this ties well with a thread I've been meaning to start for ages.

[Dave Perry]

Little Feat is generally awesome.

[Bob Olhsson]

...I am amazed how these two musicians can play super tight on top of it without being dragged behind. I am also amazed, that they have not fixed this??? ...Sometimes musicians are the last to realize this kind of problem. It's true one player can glue trainwrecks together however it's also true that the weakest member of a band limits what it is capable of.

[Immanuel]

Sometimes musicians are the last to realize this kind of problem.
Could be the "hearing what one expects to hear" syndrome.

[John Eppstein]

So then, I'll put this to you: if we are unable to unpack a virtually spiritual experience (like "groove"), then how can we conclusively say, it doesn't live on a grid? Because when you slap things on a grid, you aren't "feeling it"? Is that enough?

I'd put it more as "the grid doesn't feel", so when you snap to a grid it takes the emotion out of it. This is a simplification, of course, but that's the general idea.

Now, in a simple way, we know that when we hear two different notes together, we tend to prefer notes that have intervals that relate to each other mathematically.

Our 12 note system is a compromise, so let's just look at two just-intonation notes.

When they they relate to each other perfectly, we are most pleased... so, is there anything about this that can hold true for timing?

Oh, really? I'd suggest that you study microtonal music a bit, ranging from Indian classical music to the compositions of Harry Partch to the "blue notes" of traditional jazz and torch singers to various rock artists who incorporate deliberate dissonance beginning with The Velvet Underground. Also check the recent threads here on (mis)application of Autotune.

So, come back to our 12 not system... it's a compromise, but we dig it. It works, and there is something in the dissonance we can appreciate. So there is a threshold of dissonance, beyond which, we simply hear ugliness.

There are many classically trained musicians who hear the "equally tempered scale" as the "ill tempered scale". Generalizing about temperment and tuning is a slippery slope.

This should hold true for timing as well.

Not sure when I'm going, just thinking out loud.

Well, at least you're upfront about it. Both timing and pitch incorporate many "shades of gray".

John,
is Pride and Joy the song you were really thinking about? because having no experience with the legendary SRV I went ahead and streamed me the song, and I've got to say it was almost the opposite of what *I* thought a general Groovin' tune would be.


Are you kidding "Pride and Joy" grooves like a motherfucker - in a way that's very difficult to program without it sounding wooden. Granted, in this particular tune it's the combination of the drums and the bass, but the bass alone would not be able to pull gridlocked drums into the groove. ALL of SRV's stuff grooves and swings HARD, although in various grooves.

For another example, it's like the difference between Jimmy Reed and any number of clueless white rock bands trying to cover "Big Boss Man"

Just what would you call a groove, anyway?

calling a groove "qualia" is very tempting. But that's not exactly where I was going. I think a groove HAS an objective nature...at least as long as it's context is intact. Rather, where I was going, was more like the fact that you can't talk about a BOOK particularly well, by discussing it's component words and letters. The frequency of occurrence of the word "this", for example, cannot really tell us if the book is fiction or non-fiction...it can't tell us if it's a murder mystery or a science-fiction tome.

It may be able to tell us whether it's a first-person or third person narrative...but barely.

So, in the same way, discussing the selective micro-increment and or decrement of note position gives us the base rote tools for construction of groove, but it doesn't talk about juxtapositions, intent, context.

we then necessarily have to bring the discussion up into abstraction...talking about tension, release....which are relational terms, so we have to embed the discussion in a context if we hope for relevance.

...and of course, that relevance will be a moving target.

So you CAN talk about groove, but just not in terms of it's tools.

I can tell you about my hammer, and my saw, and my pile of wood....but that doesn't convey the notion of "house".

Damn, nailed it again!

[MGMc]

Little Feat is generally awesome.

Love me some Feats!

I would like to submit Steve Jordan to this conversation. I never quite understood how he could play the most common, simple patterns and make them sound so idiosyncratic.

This song is a pretty good example of that. Keith grooves like a mofo too, as does the whole band here.

85aCbRjtV9w

[Bob Olhsson]

Could be the "hearing what one expects to hear" syndrome.Exactly!

[Mesmer]

Are you kidding "Pride and Joy" grooves like a motherfucker - in a way that's very difficult to program without it sounding wooden. Granted, in this particular tune it's the combination of the drums and the bass, but the bass alone would not be able to pull gridlocked drums into the groove. ALL of SRV's stuff grooves and swings HARD, although in various grooves.

For another example, it's like the difference between Jimmy Reed and any number of clueless white rock bands trying to cover "Big Boss Man"

Just what would you call a groove, anyway?



Hi
I'll have a go at it again with better speakers tomorrow.

I've submitted the best example I could muster (well short of a good Jamiroquai but let's not go there) already.

I'm quickly discovering people apply the term groove to a much broader spectrum of rhythm possibilities than I initialy thought.

:Thumbsup: this thread!

[Immanuel]

By the way, the body is the perfect groove-o-meter.

And my feet can't sit still to this:
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ua_4qlTJWGc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ua_4qlTJWGc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

[TubaSolo]

Note that in this case I'm using "sequencer" not in the sense of an electronic recording program, but in the sense of a "robot" that does the placing of the hits on the grid.

That would be called an arpeggiator.


I think it's perfectly, easily possible to break down a "groove" and see the component physical aspects. BUT...I don't think it's possible to DISCUSS the component physical aspects, because the conceptual nature of "groove" is not illuminated by looking at the atomic building blocks.


We all know, "Talking about music = dancing about architecture", even though that's what we do here and sometimes it's worthwhile. But talking about the notion of groove is the worst part of that I think.

Ever asked a good jazz pianist to do a rock piano solo? Nine time out of ten it wont work. Trying to establish one rule, or universal definition of "groove" that would apply everywhere is like looking for the unifying theory in physics. Good luck with that... :Wink:

To me it's all a matter of style or genre, i.e, quantize any form of properly played acoustic music and it's likely to sound terrible, unless it's for comedy purposes. But take a bunch of musos, albeit competent, and have them play any recent electronic-based dance hit, the "analog way", that will sound terrible too. Doesn't necessary make it less musically valid.

I like to believe that any healthy individual who likes music should be able to feel all sorts of grooves, unquantized, quantized, swing, rubato... as long as there's intention, idea and energy behind it, groove has many flavors, and they're all tasty.

[DPower]

But take a bunch of musos, albeit competent, and have them play any recent electronic-based dance hit, the "analog way", that will sound terrible too.

Tell that to Senor Coconut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9umMKbSuQiU

And as for groove, I can't believe no one has mentioned the absolute gods of groove:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x8GZx_u9aI

[Immanuel]

Tell that to Senor Coconut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9umMKbSuQiU

And as for groove, I can't believe no one has mentioned the absolute gods of groove:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x8GZx_u9aI
One mans groove is another mans ... whatever to call it. I find neither of these clips very groovy. I don't know. Maybe I am one of the only James Brown immune people on earth. But to me, that song lacks the spark that makes my groove-o-meter peak.

[TubaSolo]

Tell that to Senor Coconut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9umMKbSuQiU

Believe it or not I was thinking of him as I was typing that... which is why I added "unless for comedic purposes" :grin: but he's clearly an exception, who can make people laugh AND dance AND maybe reconsider some preconceived notions about what grooves and what doesn't (Kraftwerk vs Mambo)... Uwe Schmidt is a true idol of mine.


And as for groove, I can't believe no one has mentioned the absolute gods of groove:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x8GZx_u9aI

All hail to the godfather!

... and some of the smartest/ grooviest uses of the quantize function come from the electronic-funk generation he spawned (flame away if you must, there's way more to this than a loop)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mxebk1zAx2w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mxebk1zAx2w)

[DPower]

One mans groove is another mans ... whatever to call it. I find neither of these clips very groovy. I don't know. Maybe I am one of the only James Brown immune people on earth. But to me, that song lacks the spark that makes my groove-o-meter peak.

Well, I have to take a hard stance on this...

Sorry, but if you don't feel your ass unconsciously moving to either of those clips, or even the very first bar of the DJ Sneak clip Tuba posted, then you don't have groove.

It is that black and white to me (pun intended). :lol:

I think a lot of you are confusing feel with groove. It's all semantics in the end, but in my world, if my ass isn't twitching, then it isn't groove.

I'm also a bit surprised no one has mentioned one of the most important factors in groove which is syncopation. The DJ Sneak clip immediately hits you with groove due to the syncopated nature of the loop.

[ben_allison]

found it and loved it, thanks for tuning me to what sounds like a great new (to me) band! thanks.

No prob! They've been popular in Canada for a while. They're kinda like an Indie supergroup.

wouldn't have thought of this as an example of groove; very interested in what others may comment. I just found the rhythm to be regular... ok not passive, but you know like in a grid. It was musical though. ? how do you hear groove here (friendly question intonation [internetz proofing])?

:lol: internet proofing. I bob my head when I listen to it. That's my only real reference point for "groove"!

Same thing with The National's, "Mistaken For Strangers." Possibly not what most people would look at as an example of "groove," but it makes me bob my head.

There are many classically trained musicians who hear the "equally tempered scale" as the "ill tempered scale". Generalizing about temperment and tuning is a slippery slope.

I guess that just confirms "right" in art is about our experience and expectations.

[ben_allison]

Sorry, but if you don't feel your ass unconsciously moving to either of those clips, or even the very first bar of the DJ Sneak clip Tuba posted, then you don't have groove.

Why aren't we allowed to be moved by different things?

The Naked Gun movies are horrible comedy. I feel EMBARRASSED for everyone involved. They don't make me laugh.

I think Arrested Development is absolutely brilliant.

Someone out there has the opposite opinion... that's allowed, right?

[ben_allison]

Also...

Sigur Ros' () is a masterpiece... but I never bob my head to it. It's slow, and sad. But it's absolutely brilliant music.

Goes groove always apply... does it need to?

Does all music need to motivate one to dance, and is that really what groove is about?

[Immanuel]

I'm also a bit surprised no one has mentioned one of the most important factors in groove which is syncopation. The DJ Sneak clip immediately hits you with groove due to the syncopated nature of the loop.
Before anything (can also be note endings) outside the measure of the beat in a song is added, it is in my opinion just pulse (there might be situations, I've forgotten about in this moment). I very rarely "get" pulse music.

[DPower]

Also...

Sigur Ros' () is a masterpiece... but I never bob my head to it. It's slow, and sad. But it's absolutely brilliant music.

Goes groove always apply... does it need to?

Does all music need to motivate one to dance, and is that really what groove is about?

I also love Sigur Ros (as a sleep aid... ;) ), just as I love classical music. Groove is not a term I would apply to either. Music doesn't need to groove. Music doesn't need to do anything, it is what it is. But if we want to talk about groove, then yeah, in my opinion, the term is fairly restricted.

Like it was said before, groove is sex, and you either have it, or your partner is just humouring you...

[Immanuel]

I also love Sigur Ros (as a sleep aid... ;) ), just as I love classical music. Groove is not a term I would apply to either. Music doesn't need to groove. Music doesn't need to do anything, it is what it is. But if we want to talk about groove, then yeah, in my opinion, the term is fairly restricted.

Like it was said before, groove is sex, and you either have it, or your partner is just humouring you...
... or you brag about it ... and as we say in Denmark: "Empty barrels make more noise".

On another note about different perceptions of groove. I've got a friend, who plays in a Metal band, which actually grooves. The Marla Glen song, in the youtube link I posted, didn't make his legs rock.

[Bob Olhsson]

Somebody posted this link to YouTube of a concert I recorded in 1975. I haven't heard this in 30 years but speaking of groove...

This was recorded to 15 ips 1/4" 2 track with a couple Ampex mixers using a couple U-67s in front of the stage, an AKG D-202 on the organ Leslie, maybe a 57 on the piano and a split on the lead vocal 57. I was monitoring with headphones from the side of the stage and it's a miracle I could hear anything at all. Unfortunately the low end got hosed by the cheap hi-passed mastering job, a common occurrence back in the vinyl era.

The drummer was a ten year old who had never performed in public before. Everybody else, to put it very mildly, grooved...

Enjoy!


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WB9dYx6FWhA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WB9dYx6FWhA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[DPower]

I've got a friend, who plays in a Metal band, which actually grooves.

Metal... Groove... ?

That I'd like to hear. Got a link?

[dwoz]

That would be called an arpeggiator.



We all know, "Talking about music = dancing about architecture", even though that's what we do here and sometimes it's worthwhile. But talking about the notion of groove is the worst part of that I think.

Ever asked a good jazz pianist to do a rock piano solo? Nine time out of ten it wont work. Trying to establish one rule, or universal definition of "groove" that would apply everywhere is like looking for the unifying theory in physics. Good luck with that... :Wink:

To me it's all a matter of style or genre, i.e, quantize any form of properly played acoustic music and it's likely to sound terrible, unless it's for comedy purposes. But take a bunch of musos, albeit competent, and have them play any recent electronic-based dance hit, the "analog way", that will sound terrible too. Doesn't necessary make it less musically valid.

I like to believe that any healthy individual who likes music should be able to feel all sorts of grooves, unquantized, quantized, swing, rubato... as long as there's intention, idea and energy behind it, groove has many flavors, and they're all tasty.

Completely agree. every discussion about groove has to be within a specific context.

I despair at the closed-minded idea that groove is only present in american roots-based music.

I think that opinion arises because that is where you find many of the prime examples of exaggerated time manipulation.

For another example of a killer groove that is pretty much dead straight up, I suggest Robert Palmer's "I didn't mean to turn you on".

[dwoz]

The Naked Gun movies are horrible comedy. I feel EMBARRASSED for everyone involved. They don't make me laugh.


THANK YOU!

[MGMc]

Did no one like my Keith Richards & and the X-pensive Winos video as an example? Honestly, I think the way those guy individually and collectively slink around the beat is nothing short of masterful.

[Bob Olhsson]

...I despair at the closed-minded idea that groove is only present in american roots-based music...Groove is present in virtually all oral tradition and non-conducted music. It's how people play music together without looking at an arm-waver. Groove is every bit as fundamental to music as harmony.

Music made a questionable turn during the Victorian era when conducting written music note for note became fashionable in Europe. American "roots" music is actually a fusion of Scottish, Irish, English, French, German and West African music from before the Victorian era. It's a link back to ALL of our oral tradition music which was preserved by African American slaves and their descendants who were the music teachers to the poor in the southeastern United States.

That's why the music resonates so deeply around the world.

[MGMc]

Wow. Bob, I agree with whoever said that you should be writing a book a couple pages ago.

[dwoz]

Here's a very curious thing:

my teen daughters are listening to a teen-targeted group on the box right now, and the vox are heavily autotune-effected (name one of these groups that ISN'T these days...)

and there's a curious thing happening. The background is very straight-up grid, and because of the singer's pitching characteristics, the autotune next-note grabs fall behind the beat in a very consistent and "groove-like" way.

In other words, the singer's rather lackluster and "vanilla" phrasing is IMPROVED by the use of autotune.

I am beginning to believe that this is what the kids like about autotuned voices...it pushes on the PHRASING.

Now they're playing the black eyed peas, "good night"...same damn thing. The groove comes from the enhanced phrasing that the melodyne/autotune gives it.

[DPower]

I despair at the closed-minded idea that groove is only present in american roots-based music.

For another example of a killer groove that is pretty much dead straight up, I suggest Robert Palmer's "I didn't mean to turn you on".

As for the first part, Bob tackles that quite succinctly below.

As for the Robert Palmer song, I hear that as a perfect example of how syncopation creates groove.

Groove is present in virtually all oral tradition and non-conducted music. It's how people play music together without looking at an arm-waver. Groove is every bit as fundamental to music as harmony.

Music made a questionable turn during the Victorian era when conducting written music note for note became fashionable in Europe. American "roots" music is actually a fusion of Scottish, Irish, English, French, German and West African music from before the Victorian era. It's a link back to ALL of our oral tradition music which was preserved by African American slaves and their descendants who were the music teachers to the poor in the southeastern United States.

That's why the music resonates so deeply around the world.

Seriously Bob, write a book!

[Immanuel]

Metal... Groove... ?

That I'd like to hear. Got a link?
Pick 'Naked Silence' Tell me, if you don't feel the groove in the intro and in the bass section starting at 3:20.


Did no one like my Keith Richards & and the X-pensive Winos video as an example? Honestly, I think the way those guy individually and collectively slink around the beat is nothing short of masterful.
I found it a fine example of simple effective drums.

[Keks]

Groove is present in virtually all oral tradition and non-conducted music. It's how people play music together without looking at an arm-waver. Groove is every bit as fundamental to music as harmony.


Uhm, so, groove is the grid, in a way?
It defines the impulses that have to be felt together, to make music coherent,
and it defines release points in rhythmic embellishment?

[Bob Olhsson]

It's a virtual grid because almost nothing is ever played right on the grid. The grid is the human body's feeling of total relaxation., i.e. even breathing.

It's all about the feeling of tension against that of total relaxation. This has been studied a great deal in India. Music therapy touches on it too but I learned the most from some Indian classical folks.

Great musicians performing as an ensemble can accelerate phrases and parts of songs for effect. Overdubbing is sped up by sticking to even time. Getting rid of overdubbing opens up vistas in music that haven't been seen in years.

[ben_allison]

Getting rid of overdubbing opens up vistas in music that haven't been seen in years.

But that's scary! It would force you to make decisions and commit, or "live in the moment."

WHO DOES THAT?!

:Coolio:

[DPower]

Pick 'Naked Silence' Tell me, if you don't feel the groove in the intro and in the bass section starting at 3:20.

Google gives me nothing, nor does myspace... Link?

[otek]

I disagree with the notion that syncopation is necessary to the groove.

Yes, most styles of music associated with the word contain syncopation to SOME degree. But I also find excessive syncopation can be a "cheap thrill" at best, and directly detrimental to the groove at worst.

I also find it fascinating how groove is "constructed" so differently around the world, yet anyone from any cultural background can get into a good groove - be it at a Cuban coffee house, a Balinese Gamelan recital, a New York jazz club or a beach in Rio De Janeiro.


otek

[Keks]

It's all about the feeling of tension against that of total relaxation. This has been studied a great deal in India. Music therapy touches on it too but I learned the most from some Indian classical folks.


Bob, that is interesting.
Do you have some reading/listening advice?
I plan to go to India in the future and try to get in touch with Indian music,
but I'd like to have some basic knowledge of what's it about before.

[dwoz]

I disagree with the notion that syncopation is necessary to the groove.

Yes, most styles of music associated with the word contain syncopation to SOME degree. But I also find excessive syncopation can be a "cheap thrill" at best, and directly detrimental to the groove at worst.

I also find it fascinating how groove is "constructed" so differently around the world, yet anyone from any cultural background can get into a good groove - be it at a Cuban coffee house, a Balinese Gamelan recital, a New York jazz club or a beach in Rio De Janeiro.


otek

I think that's related to my statement that we have a very hard time "talking groove" when we talk at the level of specific technique. As you note, syncopation != groove, but groove can arise out of syncopation.

[ben_allison]

I think that's related to my statement that we have a very hard time "talking groove" when we talk at the level of specific technique. As you note, syncopation != groove, but groove can arise out of syncopation.

Hmm... to the point you made last night: note position doesn't say "groove" like words don't say "book" or "genre" or "good reading"... granted. And yet we are still able to talk about Crime and Punishment, for example... if we like the plot, or the characters. How we feel about the narrative, or how symbolism was developed. Or... how we hated the whole bloody 600 pages!

And, and here's the cool part: we're able to talk about why, both from an "objective" point of view (objective as can be, with a view to literary traditions, and common schools of thought) and from a subjective experience.

So what about groove can we talk about, if we're going to run with that analogy?

[Immanuel]

Google gives me nothing, nor does myspace... Link?
Sorry. I forgot the link http://www.myspace.com/methonia

[DPower]

Sorry. I forgot the link http://www.myspace.com/methonia

Yeah, at 3:20 they're coming close to grooving... It's too bad they can't hit the pocket though. I find the timing really loose. Too loose for a true groove. Still, bonus points to them for trying.

[mclights]

In other words, the singer's rather lackluster and "vanilla" phrasing is IMPROVED by the use of autotune.


It defines the impulses that have to be felt together, to make music coherent,
and it defines release points in rhythmic embellishment?

in short, what is the problem with doing anything and everything possible to achieve 'groove' if its in the name of the song? based on everyones responses, it seems like groove is many things to many people. it would be a pretty boring musical world if it wasn't.

guess what im trying to say is tools=bad only if the end result sounds bad. its all a matter of defining your own tastes as to what 'good' should sound like...and, as a friend of mine told me once: "if you can hear it, you can play it".

[Mesmer]

For another example of a killer groove that is pretty much dead straight up, I suggest Robert Palmer's "I didn't mean to turn you on".

I don't know to be honest ...

A. yes I feel all the elements in arrangements having an atypical yet seductively enjoyable interplay of timings

B. somehow the distance between that recorded document and the Life of a live performance with a strong acoustic foundation that has been recorded seem to turn me off (for the intention implied by A).

So first impression (A): it has "a" groove of some kind in there
But then (B) I have to come clean with myself and admit that anyone who asked me to describe the song would get a combination of these adjectives: rich, catchy, syncopated, playful ... but not "it grooves".

that make sense? yes it looks I suffer from a Afro bias towards qualifying things with that coveted label "groove".

[Mesmer]

Did no one like my Keith Richards & and the X-pensive Winos video as an example? Honestly, I think the way those guy individually and collectively slink around the beat is nothing short of masterful.

Mc I have to listen to it with better speakers; it seems a lot of the good stuff is in the low end which this laptop doesn't acknowledge into existence.....

[Mesmer]

:lol: internet proofing. I bob my head when I listen to it. That's my only real reference point for "groove"!


yes but it's such a slow bob ... in my totally idiosyncratic reference vague anti-definition of what is not groove the pacing seems to be really key. Like the slowest tempo that seems to evoke "groove"-the-label from me would be right around:

"Son of a Preacher Man" by Dusty Springfield (not those lowly others :) )

[gronk]

Uhm, so, groove is the grid, in a way?
It defines the impulses that have to be felt together, to make music coherent,
and it defines release points in rhythmic embellishment?

Maybe it's more of an action/reaction thing...the latency in the response makes it swing ?

Hey Bob, I'd like to pre-order four copies of that book.

[Mesmer]

I really had no Idea this thread would be so fascinating I literally thought I'd be done by 7 posts max. really! :Thumbsup:wombs!

Groove is present in virtually all oral tradition and non-conducted music. It's how people play music together without looking at an arm-waver. Groove is every bit as fundamental to music as harmony.

Music made a questionable turn during the Victorian era when conducting written music note for note became fashionable in Europe. American "roots" music is actually a fusion of Scottish, Irish, English, French, German and West African music from before the Victorian era. It's a link back to ALL of our oral tradition music which was preserved by African American slaves and their descendants who were the music teachers to the poor in the southeastern United States.

That's why the music resonates so deeply around the world.


Well from the example of youtube posted I gather as mentioned before that it seems Groove means slightly but clearly different things to different people.

Pulse
Feel
Intensity

Swing
Groove

laptop speakers speaking here, but to me that beautiful soul music posted has the first three and some Swing. It is really so great, that genre is really so great ... but as the comments on Sigur Ros amazing to listen to ... to me, an internet production brat with limited experience, but not to groove to....

catch ma drift you catz? <---- definite groovy speak

[Fulcrum]

Because Mesmer mentions her.. and because this never fails to get me moving on the outside as well as on the inside.

dp4339EbVn8

[gronk]

Because Mesmer mentions her.. and because this never fails to get me moving on the outside as well as on the inside.



Oh yeah! Hadn't heard that for a while, it does the same for me.

[TubaSolo]

Oh yeah! Hadn't heard that for a while, it does the same for me.

+1

Until that damn bridge arrives.

This thread should broach the subject of bridges ruining the groove.

So there you are, grooving along nicely with the tune, then suddenly it's like the songwriter is thinking out loud: "hmmm, they're probably be gettin' tired of this right about now, those spoiled, inconsistent, low-focus, average IQ, ADD-stricken GP would-be listeners, so I have to get their attention back with, er, something a bit different, let's see, why not THIS"

And very often, "this" is some predictable little melodic trick, by definition less powerful than the main idea, which only allows to build back tension to go back to the hook.

Laborious.

I agree, good music is a delicate balance between repetition and variation, but when the going is good my brain puts a sign on the door saying "Do Not Disturb This Groove". And the fucking bridge often IGNORES THAT SIGN.

Just sayin'

:Roll eyes:

<duck>

[J.G.]

OH FER CHRIST'S SAKE, ya either groove or ya don't and if the people don't get THEEE groove, then they can suck a rhythm stick. :Razz:

NOW, ya want groooove? Check THIS SHIT OUT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut9_nhyTlkc

; J

[TubaSolo]

And undisrupted all the way :D

:Thumbsup:

[Bob Olhsson]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/izXCYnJWhjY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/izXCYnJWhjY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[tannoy]

...and here we go with the slightly disgrooved version...:Roll eyes:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n63JR13G3AM&hl=de_DE&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n63JR13G3AM&hl=de_DE&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


Marco

[TheNetStudio]

The groove...she was drilled into me at a young age. Full force.

I had a drum teacher when I was about 9 years old named Mr. Gary, who would OBSESS, even with FOURTH GRADERS, about "the groove". The single most important aspect of connecting the listener to the music, he said.


Beee-ware the groooove...


"Play what you just played, this time without looking at it. Feel it, and play with your body more than your mind."

I'll tell you what...he made mostly uninterested 4th graders play like it wasn't even a class. It was fun.

It grooved.


Song prosody always seems to play a part in the groove for me. And I have also noticed a connection between tempo and groove. For me, most songs seem to have a sort of optimum tempo. I can feel the groove of a song better the closer I get to it's optimal tempo and meter.

It's obvious I know - but I'll say it anyway - when everybody plays together, and listens to each other, and has a song conversation as a band, groove usually just happens. for some people that takes work, for others it just comes naturally.

YMMV

[Immanuel]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/izXCYnJWhjY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/izXCYnJWhjY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
That cymbal bell or whatever it is at around 2:00 is unbelieveably groovy in this arrangement!

[TheNetStudio]

Music made a questionable turn during the Victorian era when conducting written music note for note became fashionable in Europe.


Thank You, Thank You, THANK YOU!

Why is it that so many musicians feel like they have to mimic a song exactly like the record for it to be good?

I understand the honor that many want to maintain for the original composer/player, and I understand keeping the integrity of a song. But do I really have to play a song note-for-note from the record for it to be good?

I agree that songs should maintain their signature parts, and even trying to keep the original feel is a good idea. But can't a person throw in some inversions, chord substitutions, or a nice guitar lick here and there and still keep the song integrity?

Am I the only one that feels that songs are simply structures that we can plug our own feelings and creativity in to?

[Fulcrum]

Wow, what a pocket, J. Thanks for that, I think.

Now check this yaw:

BF24CaUrNSI

[DPower]

OH FER CHRIST'S SAKE, ya either groove or ya don't and if the people don't get THEEE groove, then they can suck a rhythm stick. :Razz:

NOW, ya want groooove? Check THIS SHIT OUT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut9_nhyTlkc

; J

JG... I think I love you. :D

[otek]

Music made a questionable turn during the Victorian era when conducting written music note for note became fashionable in Europe.

Not sure how to read this.... Isn't this a bit of a slur on ALL "western" classical music as we know it today?

It seems to me that conducting music cannot be put down to mere "fashion" - a conductor is the only sensible way of synchronizing an ensemble that in some cases takes up the size of half a football field. Something tells me Berlioz and Wagner drew the same conclusion at some point.


otek

[Dave Perry]

Great conductors put a lot of nuance and fluidity into the way they guide the orchestra, too. They aren't all stiff and metronome-like.

[Bob Olhsson]

...Isn't this a bit of a slur on ALL "western" classical music as we know it today?...I have problems with the pedestal "western" classical music has been put on compared to the older oral music traditions and oral tradition knowledge in general. A lot of history was rewritten to support the idea that the concepts underlying the industrial revolution were "superior" and represented "progress" as opposed to simply being a different way.

[Slipperman]

Wow, what a pocket, J. Thanks for that, I think.

Now check this yaw:

BF24CaUrNSI

I think I was about 8 yrs. old when my older brother Steve brought home SATFS "Stand".

He gave it a few spins and abandoned it for "Electric Ladyland". I stole it from his room and proceeded to play the shit out of it on my GE suitcase stereo in the playroom before he caught me. By that juncture I had effectively destroyed the record with my crap needle. He basically let me keep it in disgust.

Probably got a minor beatdown for that... I don't remember.

There were so many.

HOHOHO.

Got it taken away(returned to my brothers collection with a warning to him) because my sister Martha(who I used to refer to as "martyr") ratted me out to my father that there was a song called "Sex Machine" and another called "Don't call me nigger Whitey" on the record. She was still spinning Herman's Hermits, South Pacific, and My fair Lady. "The rain in Spain falls mainly on your brain" I used to sing along at the top of my lungs endlessly, usually over the OTHER songs on the record... causing her to cry and prompting more visits from the old man's belt.

Anyhoo.

A few years later in my early teens I briefly re-discovered the record as something to practice drums to, and proceeded to beat the fuck outta it all over again for a short time, now understanding my brothers hatred to the damage done to vinyl by my long retired GE suitcase. I stopped spinning it because it was killing the needle on the DUAL 1229.

Too bad I did.

Probably would have made me a much better drummer than what I switched to:

ELP Tarkus.

Which has some hilariously brilliant music but probably some of the WORST "groove" drumming of the era.

It's like an UN-groove tutorial. HOHOHO Pt#2.

Ahh me.

Endless folly.

SM.

[Jason Phair]

A few years later in my early teens I briefly re-discovered the record as something to practice drums to, and proceeded to beat the fuck outta it all over again for a short time, now understanding my brothers hatred to the damage done to vinyl by my long retired GE suitcase. I stopped spinning it because it was killing the needle on the DUAL 1229.

Too bad I did.

Probably would have made me a much better drummer than what I switched to:

ELP Tarkus.

Which has some hilariously brilliant music but probably some of the WORST "groove" drumming of the era.

It's like an UN-groove tutorial. HOHOHO Pt#2.

Ahh me.

Endless folly.

SM.



Funny, I was just talking about how Neil Peart is the least groovalicious, centerofthemotherfuckingbeatineverygoddamnthinghep lays drummer in the world.

Carl Palmer is up there in the top 5 though.

[Mesmer]

Wow, what a pocket, J. Thanks for that, I think.

Now check this yaw:

BF24CaUrNSI


Gahh!

so many thoughtssssss.... soo little forum spaceEEEeee!!

okaaay:
wow lady keyboards. lady keyboards with white hair?!. lady keyboards with white hair is pregnant?... lady keyboards with white hair is pregnant might be a crossdresser ??... !!!

wow forget grooving, this is pure win just for the Fashion points!!

song might be a bit repetitive but entertaining!

groove is soo there ... but (or and?) ... this goes straight to the Funk department firstly, and maybe secondly to the groove department.

also,

do we have consensus on what a few of us were getting at? that it seems "groove" is mostly found in a semi-narrow range of tempos (of which that SATFS and Dusty are examples in the lower parts) ?

I say that because again, that Soul spiritual that Bob posted seems to have so much Feel, Intensity, Swing with a sweet Pulse ... but 'cause of the tempo my emotions are stirred and my inner-self is moved but NOT in the regular, danceable way a "groove" (what I would call a "groove") does...

agreements, disagreements?

btw was that Dusty live or lip-synch?

[Mesmer]

That cymbal bell or whatever it is at around 2:00 is unbelieveably groovy in this arrangement!

yea it is,
hadn't even noticed it until you brought it up ... it's quite an enjoyable ride of a part ... like in disneyland.

[Mesmer]

WsLlIkHnVAQ

elements or quality that may be the culprit of this grooving: every single goddaaammed part!:icon_eek: no?

[Mesmer]

Wow, what a pocket, J. Thanks for that, I think.

Now check this yaw:

BF24CaUrNSI



BTW someone please answer me: what is that microphone the lead singer is using? I mean W.O.W it becomes so present on a few rough spots in the first few mins ... it's spookey even after the youtube mangling ... it so damn present. I know what my next microphone buy is going to be.... if someone here can ID it that is.

[John Eppstein]

Not sure how to read this.... Isn't this a bit of a slur on ALL "western" classical music as we know it today?

It seems to me that conducting music cannot be put down to mere "fashion" - a conductor is the only sensible way of synchronizing an ensemble that in some cases takes up the size of half a football field. Something tells me Berlioz and Wagner drew the same conclusion at some point.


otek

According to what I learned in Music History class back in college, before the Victorian era it was understood that certain types of passages were to be vehicles for improvisation and were not to be played as written, which was often only the basic chord structure. A prime example of this is the Coda section of your typical Bach Fugue and similar baroque compositions, which was generally merely notated as two of three sustained chords. During the Victorian era a formalism took over in classical performance that caused these sections to be played exactly as written which was anything but the intent of the composer. Proper performance practice on this stuff was only rediscovered around the '60s and is still not completely accepted by all classicists.

[Bob Olhsson]

btw was that Dusty live or lip-synch?
If it is lip sync, it's not to the record. That's why I went and found the record which i remembered grooving a lot harder.

[gronk]

If it is lip sync, it's not to the record. That's why I went and found the record which i remembered grooving a lot harder.


Looks to me like she's singing live to a backing tape.

[TubaSolo]

According to what I learned in Music History class back in college, before the Victorian era it was understood that certain types of passages were to be vehicles for improvisation and were not to be played as written, which was often only the basic chord structure. A prime example of this is the Coda section of your typical Bach Fugue and similar baroque compositions, which was generally merely notated as two of three sustained chords. During the Victorian era a formalism took over in classical performance that caused these sections to be played exactly as written which was anything but the intent of the composer. Proper performance practice on this stuff was only rediscovered around the '60s and is still not completely accepted by all classicists.

The improvised cadenza was a (short) window the composer gave to the soloist to dazzle the audience on his own, while the orchestra shuts up, right before the end of the piece generally.

It doesn't change the fact that orchestras were always conducted. The sole entitled interpreter and conveyor of the composer's thought is the conductor (then the soloist, if it's a concerto), which like Otek said is obviously the only way to go when you're dealing with 100+ players.

Improvised music was neglected by the "serious" western world music tradition, at least until the late 60s and the astounding discovery that Jazz, Indian music, African drumming etc were not inferior primitive nonsense (a.k.a pure evil) but could actually be learned from.

It's sad that for centuries that mentality gave us countless brilliant players who were actually human sequencers incapable of improvising.

OTOH when I hear the Rite Of Spring, or any major symphonic work, I still think... small price to pay to achieve that magic if you ask me. It couldn't have been done any other way.

Trying to compare any of those fuckin' monuments with, I dunno, a jazz trio improvising, even beautifully... is pointless at best.

Besides, who would have needed 5000 improvising fiddle combos in 1850 Vienna? It would have spoiled the Sachertorte.

Sorry... back to the groove. :D

[dwoz]

And I have also noticed a connection between tempo and groove. For me, most songs seem to have a sort of optimum tempo. I can feel the groove of a song better the closer I get to it's optimal tempo and meter.

YMMV


You might be happy to know that Wagner, one of the premier conductors of his era and also composer to some of the most seminal influences to heavy metal, agreed with you.

Go read "On Conducting" by Richard Wagner. He was quite pissed off about just this point, declaring that in his day, his peers in the conducting world were butchering Mozart.

[Fulcrum]

Looks to me like she's singing live to a backing tape.

That was my impression, too. Although I can't even be sure about that.. it didn't sound like the Memphis Cats backing her up on the clip. Although it seemed like they were playing the same notes and the same charts as the Cats had, it sounded.. different. A second viewing of this clip tells me that it wasn't just a made-for-TV mix, or the pisspoor technology of how late-1960s TV translated audio.. this band didn't groove quite as much as the original recording.

Which wouldn't surprise me.. groove isn't quite as much of a concern for studio orchestras as it would have been for a band in a Memphis recording studio in 1968. At the very least, a studio orchestra of that period wouldn't likely use a term like "groove" to describe what it is they do.. they are probably more concerned with that guy up on the box swatting flies. Nowadays we do hear classical composers talking about groove, and yes, we are seeing a bit of a return to the totally improvised cadenza (I remember being rather shocked when, during a performance of Rhapsody In Blue a few years ago, Marcus Roberts felt free to completely ignore the written cadenzas that Gershwin had provided-- but I still got why he was doing it). Back then, things were just a bit more compartmentalized as far as musician attitudes to music other than the one in which they were most comfortable playing.

Dwoz, regarding tempo, didn't you say something similar about Team Zeitgeist back in the day? :Wink:

[dwoz]

Dwoz, regarding tempo, didn't you say something similar about Team Zeitgeist back in the day? :Wink:

Yes, most certainly. And if I remember correctly, we bumped the tempo 2 bpm and it made a significant difference.

[Mojo]

BTW someone please answer me: what is that microphone the lead singer is using? I mean W.O.W it becomes so present on a few rough spots in the first few mins ... it's spookey even after the youtube mangling ... it so damn present. I know what my next microphone buy is going to be.... if someone here can ID it that is.

http://mydisfunkshun.home.comcast.net/%7Emydisfunkshun/images/ev_635a.jpg

It appears to be an EV 635A.

I'm glad to see that tempo has been mentioned. I have seen where a change of key helps as well. It's not that any one of these parameters create groove, it's everything all at once that makes a song click. Sometimes just a slight change in one thing creates a chain of events that makes the whole thing fall in the pocket.
http://mydisfunkshun.home.comcast.net/%7Emydisfunkshun/ev_635a_m-w.jpg

[frnjplayer]

Gahh!



song might be a bit repetitive but entertaining!





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coM_6KZn1Tw

Sometimes it's the way that a few very simple and repetitive parts play off each other that makes the whole thing work.

[otek]

Improvised music was neglected by the "serious" western world music tradition, at least until the late 60s and the astounding discovery that Jazz, Indian music, African drumming etc were not inferior primitive nonsense (a.k.a pure evil) but could actually be learned from.


Some of the people I admire the most in classical music had a pretty good idea, though.

Already in 1952, Aaron Copland wrote:

"The slave ships brought a precious cargo of wonderfully gifted musicians, with an instinctive feeling for the most complex rhythmic pulsations. The strength of that musical impulse is attested to by the fact that it is just as alive today in the back streets of Rio De Janeiro or Havana or New Orleans as it was two hundred years ago"

There is more of the same, and I certainly don't see Copland looking down his nose at the oral music traditions.


otek

[Bob Olhsson]

Aaron Copland was not typical.

What Copeland probably didn't know about was the music school for slaves in New Orleans that operated between the 1600s and the 1860s. The racist "colored people got rhythm" myth has been promoted and believed by many many people while there's actually a great deal more to the story of why there have been so many extraordinary musicians of African descent in the western hemisphere.

[dwoz]

Bob, you keep bangin' that same drum.


Can you forward along any links or references that you may have? It will likely be fascinating reading...

[otek]

The racist "colored people got rhythm" myth

I sincerely hope none of my post gave you that vibe. If so I will remove it.


otek

[eagan]

What Copeland probably didn't know about was the music school for slaves in New Orleans that operated between the 1600s and the 1860s.

I don't know for certain, but I seriously doubt that, Bob. You would have to do much more to convince me that Aaron Copland was really that naive and unaware of musical history in the United States.

The quote from Otek was from the book "Music and Imagination" by Copland, which is a compilation of a series of university lectures. That specific quote (I just flipped through and found it) is in the midst of extended talking about composers in the formal "classical" world drawing in all sorts of ways from all sorts of different traditions of what we might generally call "folk music" (traditional, informal) from assorted cultures around the planet.

There's certainly nothing in there I see that suggests that anybody coming from a particular cultural background only knows old traditions and nothing beyond that, no further knowledge and education and development. If anything, the point being made in that particular lecture seems to me to be all about how many things in American music have grown out of a long process of gradually creating hybrids drawn from all kinds of various old sources and traditions.



JLE

[Bob Olhsson]

Certainly not you but Copeland and many others were subject to that view because the great black artists of the '20s, and '30s appeared to come from nowhere. The publicity painted the "natural talent" picture instead of crediting the incredibly gifted music teachers who taught all poor kids, both black and white in the southeastern U.S.

I wish I had some links, it's a book somebody ought to write. My friend Donnell Hickman who had grown up in Louisiana (whose clip I posted) first told me some about this but the importance didn't register with me back in the mid '70s. I learned more about it when I took the docent training at the Country Music Hall of Fame shortly after we moved to Nashville. Then I started asking questions.

I have Copeland's book. It is simply something almost nobody knows about in academia. I'm not happy that I only found out a few years ago.

[Dave Perry]

What Copeland probably didn't know about was the music school for slaves in New Orleans that operated between the 1600s and the 1860s.

Are you implying that this school was in some significant way responsible for the eventual emergence of blues and jazz?

[Bob Olhsson]

Absolutely!

[Dave Perry]

A very important school, then!

Did it have a name?

[TubaSolo]

Some of the people I admire the most in classical music had a pretty good idea, though.

Already in 1952, Aaron Copland wrote:
(...)


Aaron Copland was not typical.


Like Debussy hearing the Gamelan ensembles at the Paris World Fair in 1900 and saying "those people figured out everything"... musical visionaries of that caliber were always ahead of their time. I was referring more to the exclusively west-centric way in which the academic establishment considered and taught music until recently.

The music school for slaves Bob is talking about is a fascinating subject, and should definitely be documented in a book somewhere. Studying the darkest pages of history from a music perspective, seeing how creation moves forward and creates beauty and joy no matter what, often in the middle of pure hell.... helps restoring faith in mankind a bit. Otherwise history is just non-stop fucked-up shit :Uh oh:

[MGMc]

Yeah, a great soundtrack can go a long way in neutralizing a shit movie, no?

[Keks]

It's sad that for centuries that mentality gave us countless brilliant players who were actually human sequencers incapable of improvising.


I dunno, that seems a bit over-simplistic to me.
Great players have always transcended the sequencing.
otoh there are too many 'improvisers' that build boring sequences of learned patterns and licks, so,
I don't perceive improvisation as an absolute value.

Also the often stated 'rhythmic disabilities' of classical musicians are a myth, imo.
They can do, what their standard repertoire demands of them.
Give an average Rock Band 90min of written music, to be performed on Friday.


In my top ten of memorable musical experiences it is pretty much 50/50 of western classical and pop/jazz-tradition concerts.
So, like Louis Armstrong supposedly said:
"There are two kinds of music.
Good and bad."


Just as a side note,
all the best,
the keks

[Bob Olhsson]

History frequently has a political agenda in an attempt to get people to identify with a bunch of concepts. In many cases the reader has no idea of the historical context of that agenda or of the high probability that any facts that don't support the political agenda have probably been left out.

Here in the U.S. almost all of the world history we are taught is from a Victorian British point of view. In fact far more so that what people in Great Britain seem to be taught. This is how American politicians get away with seemingly endless foreign policy blunders.

[otek]

Thanks for elucidating on all this, Bob. I understand your whole point much clearer now.


otek

[Tim Halligan]

Yeah, a great soundtrack can go a long way in neutralizing a shit movie, no?

Actually...no.

A shit movie is still a shit movie regardless of the soundtrack.

Cheers,
Tim

[MGMc]

Either you missed the metaphor or you're a real Debbie Downer. :D

[TubaSolo]

Great players have always transcended the sequencing.
otoh there are too many 'improvisers' that build boring sequences of learned patterns and licks, so,
I don't perceive improvisation as an absolute value.


You're completely right, I agree, two interpretations of the same piece can be worlds apart from each other, and be both accurate and remarkable. "Human sequencers" is indeed a poor choice of words for such superior players, for whom there is plenty of freedom inside the constraints of a score.

It still remains that for ages we had an over-specialized academic system where the practice of improvisation was in no way encouraged, at least for students who were destined to become instrumentists, not composers.

[Bob Olhsson]

I've long suspected that improvisation is a natural product of groove. When you know exactly where time is, you can plan ahead while playing the notes on autopilot.

[dwoz]

There are two pieces of genius in a performed bit of music.

First, the creative genius of composition,

Second, the interpretive genius of elaboration.

both required.

favor the one over the other at your peril, as has been shown to us countless times over the millenia...

[mclights]

NOW, ya want groooove? Check THIS SHIT OUT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut9_nhyTlkc

:lol::lol:owned

[Bob Olhsson]

Interpretive genius along with timeliness.

Music always has a context or else it can't communicate. This is part of why recordings are rarely, if ever as engaging as the best live performances. A great musician plays to both the audience and to the occasion. It makes the best thing to play a constantly moving target.

[ben_allison]

Interpretive genius along with timeliness.

Music always has a context or else it can't communicate. This is part of why recordings are rarely, if ever as engaging as the best live performances. A great musician plays to both the audience and to the occasion. The best thing to play is a constantly moving target.

I can attest to this.

When doing vocals live, they're generally "on." Pitch, and performance. Alone in my basement? Take after take after take. Then an hour comping.

:Mad:

[chillydog]

these guys always had the groove down pat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llTXtbFNGmQ

two thumbs up for Little Feat as well. 'Skin it Back' hooked me. Their first couple records had a lo-fi/americana sound, but when they added Barrere Clayton and Gradney for Dixie Chicken things really jelled. Lowell George's vocal and slide phrasing were just icing on the cake. While the live 'Waiting For Columbus' has it's moments the definitive LF recordings with Lowell at the helm are 'Feats Don't Fail Me Now' and 'Dixie Chicken'. These records had an ensemble groove much like The Band, another amazingly cohesive groove-oriented band in a slightly different style.

[Fulcrum]

There are two pieces of genius in a performed bit of music.

First, the creative genius of composition,

Second, the interpretive genius of elaboration.

both required.

favor the one over the other at your peril, as has been shown to us countless times over the millenia...

In that context, Frank Sinatra was the exception that proved the rule. He didn't write, but man, could he interpret. And yeah, there's groove in there.

[Bob Olhsson]

Tommy Dowd used to say "A hit record is the combination of a hit song, a hit performance and a hit mix."
I couldn't agree more.

[dwoz]

In that context, Frank Sinatra was the exception that proved the rule. He didn't write, but man, could he interpret. And yeah, there's groove in there.

I never said they had to be the same person.

[Bob Olhsson]

I never said they had to be the same person.And in most cases they haven't come from the same person.