Posted by Leland on October 17, 2000 at 01:11:15:
In Reply to: Re: Wierd time signature composers posted by Joe Baker on October 16, 2000 at 22:50:38:
Joe here beat me to the punch about Don Ellis. To expand, here's a few things from Ellis's part in the liner notes of the "Don Ellis Orchestra - 'Live' At Montery!" album:
"Arif Mardin, the Turkish jazz composer, gave me a chart in 9 divided 2 2 2 3 that was based on a Turkish folk rhythm, and made me more aware of the fact that the off-numbered meters which at first seem so exotic and difficult to us, are really very natural and a part of the folk culture of much of the world. As a matter of fact, friends have told me of playing Greek club dates where all the main dances were in 7 and 9, and even little kids could dance to these rhythms -- and would get annoyed at the musicians if they missed a beat!"
"The longest meter I have attempted to date is a piece in 85. But this isn't so far fetched as one might think at first, because at the Department of Ethnomusicology at UCLA I learned of one folk song with a 108 beat cycle!"
"In the beginning there used to be two arguments against playing jazz in these new rhythms and meters: 1) They are not 'natural.' And my answer was: not natural to whom? They are natural to a great portion of the world's peoples. 2) You can do the same thing in 4/4. This is ridiculous, if one can't play comfortably in 5 and 7 for example, how can one hope to superimpose these correctly over 4/4? Also superimposing any other meter over 4/4 is NOT the same thing as playing in that meter exclusively."
Don also describes studying with the Indian musician Hari Har Rao at UCLA and privately, learning exercises for ways of counting to keep place in a given cycle, no matter how long or involved. He also mentioned how jazz educator John Mehegan made the statement in the 60's that anything that was not in 4/4 could not possibly be considered jazz.
Odd meters certainly do not originate in cutting-edge music composition. It could be said that they "occur naturally", in the sense that folk music is as close as music comes to sprouting from the ground. Yes, there are compositions where an odd time signature's purpose seems only to be to appease judges at a band festival. But, Ellis's 33 222 1 222 (in "a traditional nineteen", as he called it in the performance), Pat Metheny's First Circle (in 12/8 [3 2 3 2 2] and 10/8 [3 3 2 2]), and Brubeck's Take Five wouldn't seem right to me in any other meter -- they groove like nobody's business just the way they are.
Learning to play these kinds of things is an interesting journey, with this kind of flash of revelation when you finally do feel it. It's a counting exercise at first read, but the sonner the attempt is made to feel the groove, the better the performance's flow will be.
I thoroughly enjoy playing in odd meters, but I'll be darned if I can explain why.