A fun tune from thesession member Pere, aka "TinWhistler" on youtube. Taken from his playing here, without the triplets/16th notes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm_C-Ath-ww
Despite the fact that he claims it to be crap, I really like it.
How I back up this tune depends on how I feel at the time, but right now, I’ve been enjoying using Bminor chords with an E thrown in near the end.
I wouldn’t call it crap, but wish you would post old tunes more frequently.
R: mazurka ~ ??? :-/
Did Pere actually call this a ‘mazurka’? If so, as a ‘mazurka’, whatever the melody, as transcribed, it is crap to dance to, useless… :-P
Pere ~ in his own words:
Ok so a friend sent me two Clarke whistles, and he said in return I had to record and post on YouTube a video of some of my crappy compositions. So here it is, on the Clarke in D.
The first tune is strange. Maybe a mazurka, but I’m not sure. It sounds stupid anyway. I liked how my fingers sound when they hit the whistle on the table, like drums, that’s why I think I named it "Strange Drum", but I don’t like that name. ~ Pere
No, it’s not a mazurka, it’s not compound it’s simple, not 3/4 but duple!!!
There are 2 beats to the measure, simple/duple meter, rather than three, compound/triple meter ~ at least how Pere is playing it… So, if anything, 6/8, not in any stretch of the imagination 3/4…
Hey why is this crap here?? Well I said I wasn’t sure… it’s a hop-jig ain’t it? Nevermind let’s ignore it.
Sorry, I hope I didn’t offend anyone, including Pere, by posting this tune here. I really think it’s great a tune.
I don’t even know the extent of what a mazurka is, anyways, especially in the sense of the dance.
It fits a jig better, but seems to work played like a 3/4 tune, so I’m not sure….
And Slainte, I will do my best to post more old tunes in the future, and avoid more of the modern, ridiculously syncopated tunes.
p.s. Even if you don’t like it, Pere, you wouldn’t mind if I played it and found a set for our group using it?
Pere had obviously downed too many alcoholic espressos before playing this… ;-)
Just to be clear, I didn’t comment on the melody or the origin, just on the idea of it being a ‘muh-BURP-ahhh’…
No problem Joseph. I’d like to see your version.
C, I’m bad at tune types as you might know. I thought of this "tune" written the same way as this one:
Wouldn’t it be a hop-jig? (Please if the answer is no, just say no. Because I won’t understand another explanation about hop-jigs..)
Of course not a purely traditional hop jig, but I like the idea of the rhythmic feel of a hop jig underlying this tune.
Simple meter / duple / the bar divided by 2, 2 primary beats
On the simple side of this, it is ‘simple meter’, 2 beats to the bar, while a ‘hop jig’, like its equal the slip jig, is ‘compound’, each bar divided into thirds, 3 beats to the bar, as also is the waltz and mazurka…
Here’s this transcription again, only simplified just a little to get rid of the first and second endings and allow the final measures to show resolution on the tonic, the d, just for comparison’s sake:
T: Strange Drums, The
|: A |\
~F3 EFA | ~F3 EFA | ~E3 DEF | E2 D EFA |
~F3 EFA | ~F3 EFA | ~d2 A d2 e | efe d2 :|
|: e |\
~f2 e f2 e | d2 A Bde | ~f2 e f2 e | dBA BFA |
~f2 e f2 e | d2 B ABF | ~E3 DEF | ~E2 A d2 :|
But… C… I do "see" 3 beats per bar in this tune, at least that’s what I was thinking of when I "composed" it. It feels totally different if you transcribe it as a jig like that…
I thought of it as 3 groups of notes per bar (so 3 beats):
F2 FE FA | F2 FE FA | E2 ED EF | E2 DE FA |
F2 FE FA | F2 EA AB | d2 Ad-de | f2 ed BA | ETC ETC..
See? it would be totally different played like:
F3 EFA | F3 EFA | E3 DEF | E2D EFA | etc etc..
It would still sound crappy… but not the way I wanted it to sound.
Anyone get my point?
Pere, you recorded it, the link above, you do not play it as ‘compound’, you play it two beats to the bar… Sorry lad…
3rd listen ~ still 2 beats to the bar… :-/
Consider giving dance a try. If your brain can’t figure out the rhythm maybe your feet will do a better job of it…
Even your drummer figured that one out…
We don’t always get what we want ~
The old saying begins…
I’ll be back!
But… :( no…. no…. sorry but I still think I’m right…. I can’t give up now… I’ll be back! I’ll be back tomorrow with an audio example of that Lúnasa hop-jig followed by this tune and then you tell me why they’re so rhythmically different…
This is a jig and not a mazurka or something like that. And the B-part and the end of the A-part are even written down as a jig. It is possible to play the same notes as a mazurka, but then it doesn’t sound like it’s played on u-tube at all. But the way it is played (as a jig) I do like it. Nice tune!
Noooooooooooooooooo (I’m back)
In my stupid humble opinion.. this is not a frikin’ jig! lol it works as a jig too but believe me, believe it or not, I play it in hop-jig rhythm.
This proves my point:
Whoops, I didn’t mean to start anything by posting this tune here… I just liked it.
I think it works well as either one, but I prefer playing it in 3/4, where it’d just be a bit syncopated…
Pere throws down the gauntlet & gets rid of the duple… ;-)
Thanks, I enjoyed the listen…
THREE distinct beats per measure with a little more emphasis on the first, and a metronome to emphasis your point this time, instead of the 2-beats to a bar drum ~
T: Strange Drums, The
|: F2 FE FA | F2 FE FA | E2 ED EF | E2 DE FA |
F2 FE FA | F2 EF AB | d2 Ad de |[1 ef ed BA :|[2 ef AB de ||
|: ef ee fe | d2 AB de | ef ee fe | dB BA F/E/D |
f2 ef fe | d2 BA F/E/D | E2 ED EF|[1 E2 AB de :|[2 E2 DE F/G/A |]
On another issue, the crazyness concerning the so-called ‘hop jig’ ~ well ~ hop jig = slip jig = hop jig = slip jig = 9/8 = 3 x 3/8
However, then along comes some folks who like things fast, and as often happens when you start down that road, in order to move more quickly, you level the mountains or blow a tunnel through, put bridges across the valleys ~ and flatten things in the processing, from 9/8 and swing to 3/4 and ‘straight’ = 3 x 1/4 or 3 x 2/8 ~ but still ‘compound’, 3 beats to the measure with a little more oomph given the first of those three… But, as often happens with speed, such things are muddied and can become less clear, less defined…
But ~ I wouldn’t stop questioning your sanity. It would be good to have someone else in the same boat. I never stop questioning mine, for fear that if I do I’ll have missed the answer altogether… :-/
F Major to D Major
I transposed that last transcription down from F to D as that is the key originally given here… Pere’s linked to recording on Sound Lantern I did the transcription from was playing out here in ~
|: A2 AG Ac | A2 AG Ac | G2 GF GA | G2 FG Ac | ~
The U-Tube is still duple… Sorry…
Ok then let’s say I’m right about it on Soundlantern. And on UTube I’m semi-right, depending on the way you want to hear it ^^
Fine, it’s in 3/4 …
… but the Sound Lantern version still wasn’t a hop jig. It was played - this time - in 3/4, with 2 quavers per beat. That’s *not* the same as a hop jig, which has a distinct triplet feel to each measure.
Even the Lunasa tune, with which I’m not familiar, wasn’t what I understand as a hop jig, as played on that Sound Lantern clip.
It isn’t just a matter of ‘how I hear it’. With the banging in the background and the way it’s being played all freedom of choice is non-existant… :-/
Ben, folks have been flattening 9/8 into 3/4 for awhile, a tendency speed has with things ~ flattening them, making them ‘straight’, knocking the edges off, and for ‘interest’, a different take on it… For some reason a few are mislead to tagging this variatn form in 3/4 a ‘hop jig’, which once flattened it hardly qualifies as, all hop having been removed… So, another take on a hop/slip jig. No harm there, other than confusion for some… Without the ‘dance’ in the form, there can also be a tendency to treat the beats, with speed, as equal, rather than clearly defined as 3 counts… Another thing that can also affect that clarity is ‘compression’, which robs a tune of some of its defining lift, MP3 compression being one of the worst for this, though a strong player can still give good rhthmic (dance, measure & phrase) definition to a duple (6/8, 2/4, 4/4) or triple meter 9/8, 3/4) tune…
Pere, "C" is right when he says that you play it with 2 beats per bar (6/8), as in his transcription. But I do understand your idea of playing it as a slip or hop jig with some syncopated bars, and yes, I find this idea very attractive to my ear.
Yes, I agree, c, folks *have* been flattening things like this out. But, once they’ve done that to a hop jig, for instance, it’s lost its identity as a hop jig, IMO.
And my test would be the same as, I suspect, yours would be - try dancing a hop jig to it.
I might try and send you that Mazurka of mine some day …
Folks, I’d so love to agree with you, but I just can’t. I think this really depends on the way you hear it for the first time. Maybe it’s because of the fact that I’m the one who made it up.. it was in 3/4 in my brain from the beginning.
And when I played it in the video my brain and I were indeed playing it in 3/4, (believe me, I know my brain very well).
But I understand you not being in my brain had it much easier to hear it as 6/8. And once you figure it out as 6/8 it’s very hard for you to see it in 3/4. The opposite is happening to me, if I try to play this tune in 6/8 I fail, I simply CAN’T. (This proves I was never playing it in 6/8, at least not consciously).
SO: This is a slip-jig (or hop-jig, same thing) without "swing", played "straight" in 3/4. And NOT a jig even if your brain sees it like that. THE END.
P.D. Of course you can play it as a jig or whatever you want, its crappiness will never leave though.
Compound (3) & Simple (2)
If you don’t understand the pulse of a form, and feel it as well as hear it distinctly, the ‘dance’ in a tune, it ain’t going to translate to the ears of others. Whatever you might delude yourself into believing, and we often do ~ you were not playing it as ‘compound’, meaning 3 distinct beats to the measure with an extra emphasis on the first, but with still some clarity carried forward of 1 - 2 - 3… Think of that ol’ waltz thing ~ Boom-Chuck-Chuck! That needs to be clear. When it is, then the syncopations also have more life and lift, because they are clearly happening across the expected 3 count of a measure. That wasn’t happening. This is also where getting physical can help you to carry that feeling into the pulse of your playing. Learn and enjoy some dance and the dance will enter into your playing, and things like duple and treble time will become more distinct, and the little fancies that cross between beats will have more interest…
You can continue to think we’re the ones that are deluded, but such an approach isn’t likely to increase your understanding…
The above was in reference to the first recording… If you actually set a metronome to 3/4 you’ll hear clearly that Boom-Chuck-Chuck… How does that translate into playing, well, first, dynamics. You can even see these at work in the waveforms of recordings. The other way is with the use, in your case, winds, of ornamentation and tongueing. They can add to that clarity, but they can also take away from it when used poorly… This is dance music, they distinction of 2 or 3 is there to inform the dance, the dancers, as an aid, but also allowing for some teasing too, like the occassional crossing between beats, syncopation…