Wouldn't it be more approachable to see what's possible with the subdivisions that you like to use rather than choosing a % of the speed and forcing numbers that you've never used before. The 3:4 to 4:3 sounds neat though. You can also play in 7 by playing 4 dotted 8ths followed by 3 half triplets. Now it could be fun to add on dotted 8th or one more triplet?
Thanks for watching Yann! It's all about experimentation, so whether it's % or subdivisions or any other approach the goal is to find and try new sounds until we get something we really like. Plenty more full-length masterclasses on the website -- www.jazzcomposerspresent.com
Sure, that is a possible approach as well. I was just interested in exploring what these shifts illustrated in the video might sound like, and how I might use them in a piece. I like asking the question "what if I" when trying to think of new approaches.
Some great modulation stuff in here. In my very unprofessional opinion, I don't think that thinking in percentages is a good approach to thinking about modulations. Once you know how you modulating relative to the subdivision your using it can be nice to know that but I certainly wouldn't use it as a starting point. You can end up with much more abstract modulations if you think from a subdivision prespective(at least I think so). For example, with your 7/4 idea you have if you were to accent every 7th 16th note then your implying 4/4 as septuplets and then if you were to play the original 7/4 idea as a polymeter over the new pulse it could be cool. That approach is thinking more polyrhythmically as opposed just accenting a random number from a subdivision. That approach also has its benefits as well. Those just some thoughts. Great video!
Glad you enjoyed the video. I have also used the approach you describe as well. I thought that approaching the change in tempo as a percent would be interesting to explore, and maybe yield a different result? More “food for thought” than anything else.
Thanks for watching Finley - glad you enjoyed it (and Andrew's thoughts in reply)! Plenty of full-length masterclasses available on the website: www.jazzcomposerspresent.com
Wouldn't it be more approachable to see what's possible with the subdivisions that you like to use rather than choosing a % of the speed and forcing numbers that you've never used before.
The 3:4 to 4:3 sounds neat though. You can also play in 7 by playing 4 dotted 8ths followed by 3 half triplets. Now it could be fun to add on dotted 8th or one more triplet?
Thanks for watching Yann! It's all about experimentation, so whether it's % or subdivisions or any other approach the goal is to find and try new sounds until we get something we really like.
Plenty more full-length masterclasses on the website -- www.jazzcomposerspresent.com
Sure, that is a possible approach as well. I was just interested in exploring what these shifts illustrated in the video might sound like, and how I might use them in a piece. I like asking the question "what if I" when trying to think of new approaches.
Some great modulation stuff in here. In my very unprofessional opinion, I don't think that thinking in percentages is a good approach to thinking about modulations. Once you know how you modulating relative to the subdivision your using it can be nice to know that but I certainly wouldn't use it as a starting point. You can end up with much more abstract modulations if you think from a subdivision prespective(at least I think so). For example, with your 7/4 idea you have if you were to accent every 7th 16th note then your implying 4/4 as septuplets and then if you were to play the original 7/4 idea as a polymeter over the new pulse it could be cool. That approach is thinking more polyrhythmically as opposed just accenting a random number from a subdivision. That approach also has its benefits as well. Those just some thoughts.
Great video!
Glad you enjoyed the video. I have also used the approach you describe as well. I thought that approaching the change in tempo as a percent would be interesting to explore, and maybe yield a different result? More “food for thought” than anything else.
Thanks for watching Finley - glad you enjoyed it (and Andrew's thoughts in reply)! Plenty of full-length masterclasses available on the website: www.jazzcomposerspresent.com