[Dixielandjazz] Re: stride vs. comp; 'holes' in dixieland

[Dan Augustine]

Folks--
    I wrote the following a couple of days ago, but then didn't send it because i thought y'all with more experience playing and decades more of listening than i have would find it at the best overly simplistic and at the worst flat wrong.
    But i see Sheik (to whom, congratulations and felicitations on his post) has said a lot of what i wanted to say, with better detail and knowledge, so i thought i'd send this along as a "me too".  I think a lot of people don't post because they're intimidated by people with vastly more experience and knowledge than they have.  All it takes for them (and me) to cower in their shell is the occasional flame of abuse or ill-feeling from one poster to another.  I felt that way a couple of days ago by what a couple of people said to each other (not to me), so i said awthehellwith it.

    Dan
-------------------
     One of the things i like about good (or 'good') dixieland bands
is that their sound is 'transparent'.  That is, i can hear all of the
instruments, even though they're all playing at the same time, but
they're purposely leaving 'holes' in the line of notes they're
playing, so that the other instruments can be heard in the gaps.  I
think that studies have been done on the human perception of sound
that is continuously the same, which tends to 'disappear' into the
background after a while.  Novice dixieland bands (including
excellent players from other musical styles) usually seem to think of
dixieland as a free-for-all, play as many notes as you can as fast as
you can, without listening to the other players.
     The tuba player 'should' be playing almost entirely on the beat,
in the tuba (not trombone) range, leaving the off-beats for the banjo
and drums.  If he plays continuous notes, he covers up the holes for
the other rhythm instruments to sound in.  I have to remind myself of
this sometimes while playing, and when i play fewer notes, the band's
rhythm seems to get stronger and more focused (i think, "What would
Bill Carroll do?"). String bass playing 4-beat is a different kind of
sound, since it's usually not quite as loud and the note-stream is
soft enough to allow the off-beats of banjo and drums to be heard
better than if a tuba were playing it.  Both establish and anchor the
beat.
     Better trumpet players seem to be able to play enough notes of
the melody to let it be recognized, but they don't play continuous
notes either and so leave room for the clarinet to be heard,
embellishing the melody and giving it a two-dimensional effect and a
linear tone-color.  The trombone also gains by not trying to play a
continuous stream of notes, and adds fills and punctuations at
unexpected places, little japes and pointed remarks.  For the best
mix of sound and style, each instrument needs to stay in its role; we
don't need the tuba-player playing harmony parts in the trombone
range, or trombonists playing the bass part.
     What we have, ladies and gentlemen, is an organized hubbub, but a
civilized one in which each voice leaves some room for the others to
make comments, while still speaking in a different voice, the role
for that instrument.  It is, precisely, counterpoint, and to my mind
the main joy of good dixieland, in much the same was as a Bach fugue
is counterpoint, except that this is mostly improvised. To my mind,
nothing finer or more human has ever been invented than this kind of
dixieland, and shows how a wonderful piece of immediate art in sound
can be created by players who limit what they do to improve the whole
sound of the group.  It takes years of playing dixieland and playing
together to be able to play less, for a greater sound.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:17:48 -0500
>From: "David W. Littlefield" <dwlit at cpcug.org>
>Subject: Re: [Dixielandjazz] stride vs. comp
>
>Whatever rhythm instrument one plays, one should do what's appropriate to
>the music genre, the basic style of the band, and what the others are
>playing. This requires knowing what the leader wants and constant listening
>to the sound of the *whole* band. A relevant factor when playing in public
>is what has entertainment value to the particular audience; relevant also
>when making records.
>
>In OKOM, there's a basic hierarchy: Horns are at the top, piano, then
>banjo/guitar in the middle, bass below them, and drums at the bottom.
>Rhythm players have to understand that they are there to support the horns,
>to provide a *floor* so the horns play better and the dancers can
>sure-footedly groove the roof. This is true whether the band play a 2-beat
>or 4-beat style.
>
>Piano is the prime fill maker, and constitutionally has the freedom to add
>some touches of syncopation, etc., at other times. But piano must be
>prepared to play straight rhythm, ie boom-chuck, or comp simply, instantly.
>For example, the second he hears one or more horns playing syncops or
>riffs, he should boom-chuck, because square 4/4 will propel the syncops
>into the stratosphere; the other rhythm cats should do the same. The bass
>player may not like it, but 2-handed piano is part of the old music, and
>boom-chucking gives the rhythm a lot more "whack". Piano should try to
>sense whether the rhytmists want a little space to do fills. The other
>night guitar and I felt the bass want to fill the 7th-8th bars, so we let
>up and gave him the space, last half of tune just stopped at those
>measures; by then he knew we were giving him the floor, so he doubled his
>efforts; we did this for a couple of choruses, and it really lifted the
>whole performance. From an OKOM listener's perspective, the active 2-fisted
>piano adds to the entertainment value.
>
>Banjo/guitar are adjuncts to the percussion. Chunk, chunk, chunk! Listen
>for when piano gives some space. The extent of their freedom depends on
>whether the bass and drums are perfoming their proper roles! They try to
>learn what support each horn soloist prefers. They should consider that a
>constant hard 4 rhythm needs to be relieved regularly or it comes to have a
>pounding effect. So: some off-beats, held notes, some syncops, glisses, as
>a change-up. Chunk-a chunk-a chunk-a style generally sucks, except that in
>an out chorus it's one very useful changeup for enhancing the intensity of
>the climax. I played/subbed on banjo with a couple of no-piano bands where
>the leader wanted straight 4/4; that was ok, except that whenever I
>listened to both bands off the bandstand, I found the unrelieved 4/4 to be
>colorless, boring, and give that pounding effect. So when I played with
>them, I put in a bit of relief. The drummer of one band used off-beats now
>and again, and standard fills; I usually played right along with him, and
>it was very effective, loads of fun to interact with him, and the
>hornpersons usually were delighted. But basically straight rhythm is
>required, and the main satisfaction for a string player must be to make the
>band sound and feel better. Of course, the mindful leader will give
>stringplayer some solo space. String (especially banjo) fills and solos
>have decided entertainment value for the general public.
>
>Sorry bass and drums, but your role is basically straight rhythm. KISS. A
>few small changeups are cool, as is an *occasional* break, sometimes even a
>solo--perhaps a couple per set. Your main creativity must be in supporting
>the rest of the band; of course, the drummer has more tools to work with,
>and that can have significant impact on the sound and feel of the band.
>Bass creativity has little basic entertainment value, can screw up the band
>very easily.
>
>--Sheik

-- 
**----------------------------------------------------------**
** Dan Augustine - ds.augustine at mail.utexas.edu             **
** Office of Admissions, University of Texas; Austin, Texas **
**----------------------------------------------------------**