Click here to load reader
Upload
milton-mermikides
View
401
Download
4.857
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
An analysis of the intro of Jimi Hendrix's Little Wing using Milton Mermikides's SLW time-feel model.
Citation preview
142
3.4 Swing Blocks
Swing values as arrangement in Lit t l e Wing (1967)
Jimi Hendrix’s Little Wing (Hendrix 1967) is a seminal piece in the rock guitar
repertoire, with its blending of country double-stops, jazz chord-melody technique,
unorthodox guitar voicings and a sophisticated rhythmic feel. Although often included as
part of the electric guitarist’s pedagogy, it’s apparently moderate technical demands
disguise sophisticated time-feel elements that are notoriously difficult to recreate
convincingly. The introduction (CD1.30) is performed solo (with bell tones later added at
the onbeats of each bar) with quite a loose tempo (in the 65 to 72 bpm range) so it is
reasonable to take the performance as the master time-line, which focuses on swing
rather latency elements. Semiquaver swing values vary widely with a broad spread across
the 44-72% range with a wide standard deviation, so is it fair to call the swing ‘loose’ and
leave it at that? Not at all, a closer look at the values (Figure 3.4.1 p 143), and more
informed listening, suggests controlled groupings of similar swing values, here broadly
categorized as Straight (<53%), Light (53-56%), Medium (56-63%) and Heavy (>63%).
These values are not implicated with tight rigidity, some fields fall on the cusp between
two categories, and occasionally a member of a group may fall out of the range.
Furthermore, there are some ambiguities in measurement when embellishments are used,
or in the absence of adjacent onbeats. However the general shifts between swing value
groups are very clear, attention to which reveals an effective structural mechanism at
work. CD1.31 demonstrates a one bar rhythmic pattern played in the four swing
categories: Straight (50%), Light (55%), Medium (62%) and Heavy (69%). These are all
performed first with sequences electronic clicks and then live guitar for comparison.
143
Figure 3.4.1. Semiquaver and quaver swing analysis of Little Wing introduction (CD1.30). Broadly
defined swing categories are grouped together in discernible blocks.
Swing analysis has so far been made in reference to the semiquaver, but a quaver
swing analysis, the length discrepancy between adjacent quavers within a crotchet, has
144
also been conducted (lower part of stave in Figure 3.4.1). These values are generally
straight which leaves little to say on the matter. Furthermore most swing values at the
quaver level may actually represent rubato elements (an accelerando would create a
higher swing calculation, for example). Nonetheless, bar 7 beats 3 and 4, provide an
opportunity to discuss the topic of swing values existing on multiple levels, or swing
telescopy. For clarity, a simplistic approximation of this passage is taken, with Pattern A
possessing swing values of 60% (quaver) and 50% (semiquavers) (Figure 3.4.2a). Pattern
B has 50% quaver and 60% semiquaver swing values (Figure 3.4.2b).
Figure 3.4.2. Pattern A contains two equal length quavers each containing a pair of 60% swung
semiquavers. Pattern B has a swing of 60% at the quaver level, with each quaver containing straight
semiquavers. Timings at 60bpm are shown, only the 3rd semiquaver is different between Pattern A and B,
but the musical effect is significantly different (CD1.32).
145
Semiquaver placements of Pattern A and Pattern B would be identical, apart from
the 3rd semiquaver (timings for 60bpm are shown in the central portion of Figure 3.4.2).
The musical effect of this distinction is huge, CD1.32 plays Pattern A followed by
Pattern B. This is heard as an electronically positioned click followed by a guitar
performance). A multi-level swing analysis allows clear description of otherwise
unfathomable rhythmic patterns, and in the use of double-time and half-time rhythmic
devices. Further analyses by the author have revealed for example in the playing of Wes
Montgomery the use of swung quavers followed by the use of straight quavers, to
accommodate swung semiquavers.
The typical viewpoint of swing is as a stylistic characteristic, or representative of a
particular artist. Little Wing however provides a clear example of widely varied swing
values used as a structural mechanism in performance (a far more sophisticated and
intuitive version of the ‘swing-latin-swing’ format found in some jazz arrangements) and
explains part of the virtuosity in its execution and the challenge in its convincing
reproduction.