etcetera, I'm not trying to fight with you. I've been saying all along that this is just a forest for the trees discussion. I am absolutely sure that those implied meter changes are in this version. So if you tell me you hear 7/8, 7/4 and 5/4, I won't doubt it.

But that's how Brad plays with time. Look, if you play any meter variation long enough, it will synchronize eventually with 4/4. Right? Play 7/8 and at the 4th measure you're back in synch. So clearly any variation on the meter is possible as long as the big picture remains.

So I can say without a doubt that probably all of us are correct (depending on how you look at it).

But that wasn't why I brought up the topic (or hijacked in this case). What I originally discovered is something that I had worked on with my teacher in the past which is playing 3 against 4. I find that all the rhythmic differences come out at various times in a 3 against 4 playing. I practiced this with the LH at 4/4 and RH at 3/4. That varying subdivision is what I discovered with Mehldau and I started hearing it as a syncopated pattern.

For example, let's use "Take 5" as a base. You could look at it as just 5/4, or you can hear the syncopated pattern in the beat which is very specific to this tune (which is partly a play on 3 against 4).

As you already know all variations of meters like 7/8, 4/4, 5/4 are just combinations of 4/4 (or 2/4) and 3/4. Right? 3-4, or 2-2-3, or 3-2, etc. So I figure if you understand all the possible rhythmic variations with 3 against 4 or 4 against 3 then the secret is out.

So I'm not telling you you are wrong at all. Simply that I'm looking at it a different angle (simplified in my mind).

I'm listening to the chord changes.

jazzwee,

having the transcriptions in front of me helps.

I am not disagreeing about the fact that 4 bars of 7=7bars of 4. But this tune is definitely not in 4/4 all the way through, or 7/4 in that sake(at least the intro. But the underlying meter(most of the time) is 7.

I think you should just ask your teacher, it doesn't hurt to get his opinion, he probably knows much better than any of us

I sure will. You're right, he should know better than any of us.

Side topic: my teacher thinks that playing in odd meters is not true to Jazz so he doesn't encourage me to go beyond 4/4 and 3/4. So I'm pushing it with him a little when I start delving into rhythmic concepts. I don't quite agree with him here. But I have to respect his historical roots in Jazz.

btw 7 is usually felt as

half note,half note,dotted quarter,dotted quarter,

so one trick to figuring if its in 7 is by hearing the two dotted quarter notes.. Brad plays that on his LH comping, and bass plays it too.. in fact, thats the first thing you hear on the clip you sent me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsW6K51lQkQ&feature=related

I agree with that etcetera. Now in your head, can you overlay 4/4 against that same rhythm?

That's what I'm talking about it. I'm hearing the superimposition and it affects the phrasing. You may not hear this as we all perceive it differently, but when superimposed, I feel an enhanced swing.

What I learned sometime ago was the overlaying of one meter against another meter. So this training seems to make me see it in a little different setting. Then it becomes arguable which one is the main meter or the overlay.

If we were playing classical here, there would be no argument as we would only be talking downbeats. But this is jazz so the upbeats and the swing intervals between eighths count.

jazzwee,

whatever Brad is doing he is playing it against 7/4, maybe he is doing 4/4 over 7/4. 5/4 over 7/4 or 3/4 over 7/4, but its all in 7/4.. if you are saying he is just playing 4/4 over it, then you are oversimplyfying it, chances are that he is doing all the above plus metric modulation using triplets, where every 4 triplet becomes the new beat.. etc.

I have a general idea, but I　can't say I actually know what brad is doing exactly.. I know there are ways to play 5/4 7/4 over 4/4, but I can't say I am very good at it. I mean I can play 3/4 against normal 4/4 bass line, but playing 5/4 and 7/4 is entire different thing..,

now playing 3/4, 4/4/ 5/4 over a 7/4 bass ostinato.. that's way beyond me for sure. I mean lets say you start your 4/4 over the third beat of 7,

the 2nd measure of 4/4 will start in beat 7 in 7/4
the 3rd measurre of 4/4 will start on 4 of 2nd measure in 7/4
the 4th measure of 4/4 will start on 1st beat of 3rd measure in 7/4

and so on.

or you can play 2 measures of 7 as 5+5+4, 3+3+3+5, 2+3+4+5, against a constant LH ostinato that always starts on 1.

I know these things conceptually, but I am far from actually using any of this musically. If you can actually do all that after few years of studying, then I am truly impressed.

Like I said, I did a lot of work with 3 against 4. If you haven't done that then maybe I'm not understandable here. What I mean by that is playing 4/4 against a 3/4 in eighth notes. When combined it's a syncopation pattern. There's a syncopation pattern in each of the time signatures. So practically anything can be subdivided into a syncopation pattern that can fit into 4/4. So if you think of the syncopation pattern of 7/8 against 4/4, and 12/8 against 4/4 and so on, you can keep switching meters and it will sound complicated but it's not.

This subdivision concept is not global -- I cannot subdivide 5/4 in 4/4 at least not anything that sounds like Jazz. That stands by itself (and other similar ratios). I don't know if that can be syncopated.

Now if you think of what Brad is doing by counting, it is massively complex. This is the big block in my initial understanding of Mehldau.

BTW - I don't think I would have grasped this on my own. My teacher went through his own history of searching for his own understanding of meters, and then he started asking his drummer buddies (big names as you can imagine, like those that played with Bill). His initial question was how to make 3/4 swing. So that's where the meter overlay came into the discussion since long ago he learned that from one of these drummers.

If you've never done it, 3 against 4 seems really difficult to absorb, especially in eighth notes. I think that's the main one that seems to be the base of it all. Now I can see that the basic syncopation that Brad uses is exactly based on this. I only know it because I practiced it. So this is no genius on my part. I just started hearing what I've been practicing.

So now my teacher doesn't refer to these as meters but as "syncopation" styles. Brad sticks long enough to a syncopation pattern and it will take the character of a meter. But then he changes the pattern and you could think of it as another meter change. I just hear the difference in the pattern itself.

I just had a listen and it's in 7/4 the entire time the rhythm section is playing...

I will bet $100 with anybody that claims otherwise.

| 1234,123 |

The intro is 7/4 also.

And you hear him phrase his lines 1234-123? That's not what I'm hearing Jazz+.

I tried to conceptualize what I'm hearing and I understand now that at least in this time signature, I'm hearing his phrasings in SIXTEENTH NOTES.

So the phrasing pattern in my ear, now that I write it down put it to paper is 14/8. And I'm hearing two sets of 7 notes phrases.

Patterns like this (in sixteenths):

|111_111
_111_11 |

|_111_11
_111_11 |

|111111_
111111 _|

I split the bars in two because then I hear each measure as 2/4. I'm hearing symmetrical patterns.

Whether it is a fact to you or not, I hear it as patterns that I can synchronize every 2 beats of 4/4 in my head.

So much work to write this down when I can already hear all the permutations and combinations in my head/ear.

The question now is "Why am I hearing Symmetrical Patterns in an Odd Meter?". You can judge for yourself but since it is symmetrical to me I don't feel like I get lost in it.

This is Jazz, not classical music. There has to be "pairs" of notes to swing. So in my hearing I can tap this like swing.

I'm curious Jazz+, how do you play a Jazz Waltz? 123-123 like classical?

You can think whatever you want... that doesn't change the reality that the bass player and the drummer are thinking and playing 7/4 the whole way.

Didn't you just claim that they change meters?

Of course Mehldau is doing poly-metric stuff over the top of the 7/4.

But I already agree that it is in 7. I just noted WHY I'm seeing it differently. And my vision of it allows me to also view the "poly-metric" as just 16th note pattern changes.

Jazz+

Yea, it's 7/4 for sure.. thank god, at least someone here agrees!! And I explained what he might be doing on the previous post.



I never really got the feeling that we agreed on the song being in 7 until now.

I wrote down the pattern in my head on paper, like I said, which I subdivided within the context of 2/4. When I actually counted the pattern I'm hearing it was in 14. But I still view it the same way. I'm tapping to it like 2/4.

I'm certainly not counting it out as 1234-123 and make it swing.

Yeah right Jazz+, as you said it also changed meters.

btw for more information on rhythmic=superimpostion stuff, check out Bergonzi's Melodic Rhythms, What I was talking about earlier is somewhat based on that.

jazzwee,

On the solo part he actually change meter.. You'll see it very clearly when you see the transcription.



So Jazz+ is correct as far as the solo part is concerned.. but when the rhythm section comes in, its in 7 all the way. And you can clearly hear 1234-123 from the rhythm section.

On the recording I have of ATTYA, (Art Of The Trio, Volume 4) Mehldau plays 7 mostly in his solo piano intro but there are sections where he goes off the strict 7 that can measured as meter changes... when the bass and drums enter is 7/4 thereafter.

Okay here's the transcription, take a look(you'll have to register to d/l the file).

http://www.pianofiles.com/search/music/sheets/brad+mehldau+-+all+the+things+you+are%28typhmedia%29

I don't see how you are able to feel 2/4 the entire way through this. That just doesn't make any sense.

OK. Granted the tune is in 7. I already agree to that as I counted what I heard at the beginning (Part 1).

Now help me out here because I can clearly hear AND see the bass player dishing out those quarter notes at 4 beats per chord.

Part 2: Go to 4:08. Watch Rossi's fingers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsW6K51lQkQ&feature=related

Am I blind (and deaf)? Or is he (a member of the Rhythm section) playing against the meter? You can clearly hear his changes.

Your ears are playing tricks on you, it happens to me too. The timing is flying by quickly.

The bass and drums play 7 (4 beats for a chord, then 3 beats for the next chord, then again 4 beats for the next chord, then 3 beats for the next chord, etc.)

Because you're looking at the beats in 7 and I look at it at 14. Didn't you read what I hear in my head? And his patterns are divisible by two.

Anyway, this can only go so far because obviously you cannot hear the pattern superimposition I'm hearing. So let's just let it go.

My final comment on the 2/4 question:

My original post that started all this was that I can hear a pattern in my head that I can repeat, and I hear it in all of his playing. That premise hasn't changed regardless of the debate. One of these days my technical ability will allow me to execute what I hear.

Yea, Jazz+ is right

when you hear walking bass line in 7, it's easy to get lost and feel like it's in 4, because we are used to hearing walking bass line in 4. But if you listen carefully (or listen to it at a slower tempo using amazing slow downer) you'll find that its 4 beats per chord than 3 beats per chord.

Rossi's fingers on the bass? It's my friend Larry Grenadier on bass amd Jeff Ballard on drums. Your eyes are playing tricks on you now.

OK. I'll accept that, although in 4/4 those chords in ATTYA take a full bar for each chord so I would have understood that to mean that in 7/4 each chord uses up all 7 beats. This is new to me that a chord would be split like that in an odd meter.