What is the correct way to realize this ambiguous swing notation?

Question

I'm practicing a choral accompaniment on the piano, and it indicates swung 8ths. However, in some places the rhythm is notated as 3 eighth-note triplets, and in others, it uses 16th-16th-8th. Initially, I thought that these two rhythms would be realized identically, and I didn't know why it would be notated in two different ways, but then it got me thinking: is a beat containing 16th notes "exempt" from the swing indication?

Here are some examples to illustrate my question.

In this case, I've been playing realization 1, but I'm starting to think maybe I should be playing realization 2 with the straight rhythm.

In the opposite case, where the 16ths are on the second half of the beat, realization 1 makes more sense to me.

In short, when 16th notes occur in a piece with swung 8ths, does the swing get calculated first and then subdivided, or does the beat containing the 16ths break out of swing and get played straight? What about smaller subdivisions?

EDIT: I have noted that Dorico playback uses Realization 2 in both cases.

Answer 1

Assuming that this is an arrangement of an established piece, you should listen to a recording of the original and play it as close to that as you can. Choral arrangements are notorious for having poorly-transcribed rhythms, in my experience. The publisher will often simplify rhythms, which leads to a difference between how the song actually goes and how the music says it should go. This is particularly true for music in the K-12 educational market.

If it's an original composition, write the composer and ask.

Answer 2

16th-16th-8th is not an idiomatic swing rhythm and if you see it written it's a sure indication that the composer/arranger is not familiar with the style. Since the notation is ambiguous, play whatever you think works musically: straight (classically), triplet eighths, or something in between.

Answer 3

The swing rhythm notation convention I'm familiar with is the following:

• groups of eight notes are swinged
• eight note triples are notated as eight note triplets
• groups including sixteenth notes are played straight

Looking at your example 1:

• realisation 1 is incorrect. If you want to notate a triplet, write a triplet
• realisation 2 is correct

Example 2:

• realisation 1 is incorrect. In turn, if you wanted to notate a rhythm to be played this way, you would notate it exactly this way: 2 eight notes and 2 sixteenth notes under a triplet mark
• realisation 2 is correct

Answer 4

A lot of the time, realisation 1 (the top one) will end up being played. But in reality, the semi-quavers in the top realisation 2 can still be, and should be, part of the swing (triplets) rhythm. As in there would be 3 triplets timing, and the 2 semis get played on the 1st of those quavers, leaving the 3rd quaver played as the 3rd quaver triplet. Very slightly different timing.

In the 2nd example, realisation 1 would be how it was expected to be played - there's no ambiguity - the sign is there to show all pairs of quavers need the first to be twice as long as the second. And that will be reflected where the semis are, too. The semis played on the timing of the last 2 'quavers', leaving the two 'semiquavers' (now in reality a triplet quaver) played in their proper timing.

It will depend on how fast the tempo of the piece is, and how hard the swing is. The only way to check out the difference in reality is to use a metronome set at a rather slow speed, and count like heck, trying out both of the options. I suspect it'll morph into 3 equal triplets at some point as the tempo increases. But at slower tempos, it's an important consideration - especially when there may be others playing at the same time.

There again, if it's jazz, and there's only the one player for that part, it's pretty well acceptable to 'go with the flow', and play with whichever timing you feel at the time!

Not an easy one to explain in words, but I tried... Good question!

Answer 5

Ok, let's have a look at triplet systematics first.

A triplet has 3 equidistant positions in time. If you play a note (loud event) or a rest (silent event) at any of them, there are 8 combinations A - H of note and rest for a triplet. The most prominent one in Jazz or Blues is C, the heart beat.

Now, let's go back in time, when Jazz musicians played all night in bars with lots of smoke and dimmed lights. Assume you want to note down melodies during performance or rehearsal under these conditions. The correct way to notate the heart beat is using notation C.

However, it's time consuming, and it tends to look quite ugly for a Jazz piece with lots of heart beats, e.g. alternating with regular quarter notes (ECEC for a measure, if you like). The visual appearance is that of 2 eight notes straight. So people started to use that shorthand notation AND indicate "swing", i.e. meaning "play the heart beat C instead of eight notes straight".

Now, there are songs, which further subdivide any of the two heart beat notes as another heart beat (C), which is probably what you are puzzled with. But this would be a very unsusual feel. As has already been mentioned in other answers, you won't be able to hear this nuance at high enough tempo (where already 70 BPM can be fast for this effect). If you can listen to this song or have additional information, you can follow this route.

However I tend to percieve your 6 notations as sloppy notations, meaning all the same thing in timing. Let me show you, why.

With the swing-convention stated above, the triplets named C are obvious heart beats, while the third one can only be A, assuming sloppiness. Then it's a pecuiliar, but logical way to notate the triplet with 3 notes: the bar simply indicates the shift to the middle position.

With this in mind, it's easy then to perceive all 6 notations as exactly the same pattern in time. Peculiar as these variations are, the'd follow a consistent logic to "somehow mark the middle position of the triplet", be there a rest or a note.