Metronome Settings - "Putting" the metronome on different beats

[JakeAcci]

Was reviewing this with another guitarist, it's a pretty cool idea and maybe one worth reviewing here too. I know it's been discussed before.

Is this useful? As with most of posts, probably not. Just kidding. These are fun challenges to try to hear time in different ways, be really in command of different subdivisions, and be able to play with more rhythmically advanced players and not lose your s***.

Anyway

in 4/4:

Most basic - metronome is on all quarter notes, or half notes, beats 1 and 3.

Common for feeling swing (though some argue its effectiveness) - beats 2 and 4.

Great for trying to keep "more" time on your own - just beat 1, or beat 1 of every other measure.

Same as above, but with more internal reliance on hearing beat 1: set metronome to be just beat 2 or beat 4.

Much harder, good for syncopation: Metronome on the and of 2 and and of 4. Or, the and of 1 and and of 3.

Also hard: metronome just on the and of 4, or just on the and of 2.

Metronome could be on any of 4 16th note upbeats within a half measure (metronome clicks twice pe measure, for example, the "e" of 1 and the "e" of 3.

Metronome could be on any of 8 16th note upbeats within a whole measure (ex, metronome only clicks on "uh" of 3)

For feeling cross rhythm: metronome clicks dotted half notes ( 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4)

Harder: dotted quarter

Harder: dotted eighth

Groups of five: 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Groups of five eighth notes

Same with groups of seven.

Then you could get into various things with triplets...

in 3/4

All the same basic ideas as above. Plus:

metronome on half notes ( 1 2 3 1 2 3)
Metronome on whole notes (1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3)

Any of the above moved forward or back an 8th note or 16th note.

I have not tried: metronome as quarter or half note triplets in 3/4.

In other meters

Same concepts, just changing the duration of what we hear in various units. Ex, in 7/8, something happens every 5 8th notes, etc.

"Wait a minute, the metronome plays the quarter note!"

Good night, everybody!

[pkirk]

very nice post.

[viccortes285]

A plus addition with Peterson Tuners, for a added charge it adds a Metronome


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[emanresu]

Try rising the metronome tempo gradually over 300 bpm and the ticks as each 2nd 8ths.

[JakeAcci]

Here is an attempt at at Billie's Bounce with metronome on and of 4. Not perfect but was a fun challenge.

Billies bounce and of 4

[AlsoRan]

That was fun. I tried stomping my feet to that metronome while you played, all the while accenting the "2."

Somehow, that 2 just kept clicking before I felt it. What a revealing and fun little exercise.

[JakeAcci]

That was fun. I tried stomping my feet to that metronome while you played, all the while accenting the "2."

Somehow, that 2 just kept clicking before I felt it. What a revealing and fun little exercise.

Yeah I was rushing a lot in the first few takes, kept on hearing it as "1" so I had to chill out a LOT to get the take I posted. Definitely shows you where you are weak.

[emanresu]

Eh, do try my dropout metronome also. It can be like playing with a crazy bongoplayer look my sig.

[christianm77]

I've been doing a lot of work recently with the metronome on + of 1 and 3. 16th syncopations are obviously good for, well 16th stuff. I remember doing this with Teen Town a couple of years ago.

I rather like learning to play where the metronome isn't - double time of a single time off beat click is fun. Try confirmation bridge with the off beat click for instance.

This stuff is good for sticking down the rhythms you are trying to play. Remember metronomic time is boring on it's own though. It's like eating too much healthy food, you need some GREASE!

[mr. beaumont]

Drum genius 2.0 has a metronome feature with cool subdivisions, really musical stuff. Highly recommended.

[emanresu]

This stuff is good for sticking down the rhythms you are trying to play. Remember metronomic time is boring on it's own though. It's like eating too much healthy food, you need some GREASE!

Heh,
Finally you've said something that I completely disagree 1/2 of the time. For me, one of the major fun practicing groovy music is when the notes start to feel like small explosions with metronome. That takes a bit more than getting it just to groove.. which feels great also.

But about the grease, there are plenty of very beautiful music that is a bit out of tune and sync. Well, can be even a LOT out of order but still being very very nice and convincing.

I guess accuracy is one of those things that can be either way. Depends.

[christianm77]

Heh,
Finally you've said something that I completely disagree 1/2 of the time. For me, one of the major fun practicing groovy music is when the notes start to feel like small explosions with metronome. That takes a bit more than getting it just to groove.. which feels great also.

But about the grease, there are plenty of very beautiful music that is a bit out of tune and sync. Well, can be even a LOT out of order but still being very very nice and convincing.

I guess accuracy is one of those things that can be either way. Depends.

I do not accept that the metronome is any sort of gold standard for what time should be for jazz. Absolutely not. Never was.

(Well Tristano thought it was, but I respectfully disagree.)

The metronome is a training tool, music is made by musicians responding to biological time, not clock time. That's not to say timing should ever be anything but highly accurate and very specific.

For example, you wouldn't say there is anything rhythmically inaccurate about Stevie Wonder's music, but try setting a click to it and you will realise that it is not metronomic.

Good drummers understand this.

[emanresu]

For natural feel we can use this as metronome

[mr. beaumont]

I've been doing a lot of work recently with the metronome on + of 1 and 3. 16th syncopations are obviously good for, well 16th stuff. I remember doing this with Teen Town a couple of years ago.

I rather like learning to play where the metronome isn't - double time of a single time off beat click is fun. Try confirmation bridge with the off beat click for instance.

This stuff is good for sticking down the rhythms you are trying to play. Remember metronomic time is boring on it's own though. It's like eating too much healthy food, you need some GREASE!

the "and" of 1 and 3 is a good one, especially if you swing it. A great groove to ride on.

[VinceMGuitar]

Great thread! I've recently been working on All The Things You Are uptempo with the metronome clicking on 2 and 4. I know I've screwed it up when all of a sudden it's tapping on 1 and 3!

I need to try some of the other ideas here.

I realize I've focused a lot of energy on note selection but am weaker in the area of time. I can easily get off the beat and lost if the drummer is adventurous and doesn't stick to a more predictable format.

A lot of Metheny stuff I'm listening to tells me he is very focused on rhythmic aspects. Even to the sacrifice of melodic aspects. It's a cool kind of trade-off. And I can tell I need work because I get lost even listening to him play a blues!! For example the tune Turnaround on 80/81. That's a great example of adventurous drumming. DeJohnette is definitely not predictable. And Pat is definitely playing with a more rhythmic focus than melodic focus in some pretty obvious spots. Very cool stuff.

[christianm77]

the "and" of 1 and 3 is a good one, especially if you swing it. A great groove to ride on.

I was actually taught this in an honest to god guitar lesson... Where did you come across this exercise?

[christianm77]

Great thread! I've recently been working on All The Things You Are uptempo with the metronome clicking on 2 and 4. I know I've screwed it up when all of a sudden it's tapping on 1 and 3!

I need to try some of the other ideas here.

I realize I've focused a lot of energy on note selection but am weaker in the area of time. I can easily get off the beat and lost if the drummer is adventurous and doesn't stick to a more predictable format.

A lot of Metheny stuff I'm listening to tells me he is very focused on rhythmic aspects. Even to the sacrifice of melodic aspects. It's a cool kind of trade-off. And I can tell I need work because I get lost even listening to him play a blues!! For example the tune Turnaround on 80/81. That's a great example of adventurous drumming. DeJohnette is definitely not predictable. And Pat is definitely playing with a more rhythmic focus than melodic focus in some pretty obvious spots. Very cool stuff.

Have you listened to that Metheny lesson audio that was doing the rounds on YouTube? He basically talks about rhythm and describing the harmony with triads.

[christianm77]

For the sake of counterargument here is Adam Rafferty and Mike Longo arguing why it can be counter productive to use a metronome.

Don’t Use a Metronome

Should You Practice Jazz With A Metronome?

Jeff Berlin (!) posted here a while ago pointing out why he is against metronome use in practice.

Who do you believe? I don't know... Many greats have used a metronome, many greats haven't.

Whether or not you choose to use a metronome in your practice, it's good to know there are two sides to the story. I used to think metronome practice was the only way to develop rhythm. Now I realise it is entirely useless for building up a sense of rhythm, but quite useful for checking for inaccuracies in your sense of time - inaccuracies compared to a very mathematical, mechanical ideal.

Plus, I love me a good flame war ;-)

[JakeAcci]

Ok, I didn't read the articles, however, I've seen arguments. And here's the thing. Metronome = a tool, a tool that is good for some things and bad for others. It can solve certain problems, cause other problems, and be irrelevant to other issues. It's a tool. To say "always play with a metronome" or "never play with a metronome" is, to me, click bait. But it's good to explore a much more usueful and nuanced question - when and for what purposes ?is a metronome useful, and when is it not?

[mr. beaumont]

I was actually taught this in an honest to god guitar lesson... Where did you come across this exercise?

I hadnt, but I like it. A "lazy charleston"

I can imagine a greasy blue note swing, conga hits on the and n' 3...

[christianm77]

Ok, I didn't read the articles, however, I've seen arguments. And here's the thing. Metronome = a tool, a tool that is good for some things and bad for others. It can solve certain problems, cause other problems, and be irrelevant to other issues. It's a tool. To say "always play with a metronome" or "never play with a metronome" is, to me, click bait. But it's good to explore a much more usueful and nuanced question - when and for what purposes ?is a metronome useful, and when is it not?

Read the articles, they are a perspective, even if you disagree. Mike Longo's time is IMO about as good as it gets. Adam Rafferty is no slouch either.

The takeaway is that you can sound metronomic and solid and not actually be metronomic at all - they give MJ, Stevie and so on as examples.... Interesting thought.

I've been pursuing ML's teachings (and yes still working with a metronome a fair bit too) and I think it works, actually... The African drumming video above is where it's at :-)

[pkirk]

In the Longo and Rafferty essays they argue that music with a groove doesn't line up with a metronome, which is most probably true, but I don't find it to be a good argument for or against using a metronome: it is an observation that "groove" (especially as they mean it) is a different thing than (long term) metronomic accuracy. It takes several bars for the metronome to diverge with a Stevie Wonder song: they aren't dropping beats ever other bar or changing tempo constantly. In particular, I didn't think they make a strong case that using a metronome hurts your groove: at best they argue it doesn't help.

I'm listening to Hoenig with Heckselman on the smalls live feed right now: I can't imagine they got to their concept of rhythm without
a bunch of metronome work, and it sounds pretty groovy to me, but maybe they didn't use metronomes. I'd be curious if anybody knows.

[christianm77]

In the Longo and Rafferty essays they argue that music with a groove doesn't line up with a metronome, which is most probably true, but I don't find it to be a good argument for or against using a metronome: it is an observation that "groove" (especially as they mean it) is a different thing than (long term) metronomic accuracy. It takes several bars for the metronome to diverge with a Stevie Wonder song: they aren't dropping beats ever other bar or changing tempo constantly. In particular, I didn't think they make a strong case that using a metronome hurts your groove: at best they argue it doesn't help.

NO, there's too many terrific players who do work with a metronome for me to accept that this practice is damaging. Emily Remler swings pretty hard to me, and she was a metronome obsessive.

I'd really recommend ML's teaching materials though. I think they have done a lot for my feel.

I'm listening to Hoenig with Heckselman on the smalls live feed right now: I can't imagine they got to their concept of rhythm without
a bunch of metronome work, and it sounds pretty groovy to me, but maybe they didn't use metronomes. I'd be curious if anybody knows.

Yeah... The swing stuff can be very elastic though.... Also a lot of the great rock bands have timing like sticky toffee

I have Hoenig's books... I can't remember what he talks about in them re: practice... Will check them out.

The problem with them is that page 1 is 'learn your triplets' and I realised I needed to do that. 3 years later... ;-)

The thing I take away from this is that rhythm is an art form in the same way as harmony or melody is. There are different aesthetics. The modern aesthetic is very click based.

Taking the example of classical music for example - classical musicians are often accused of having 'bad time' - this is unfair, great classical players have a great sense of rhythm for the music they play. A string quartet breathes and phrases together in a way that's very non-metronomic.

The same is true of any musical tradition. Jazz musicians of the swing and bop era played largely in 4/4 (or polymeter over 4/4) and probably wouldn't have done so well in the meters used in Balkan music, and so on. Hard bop musicians adapting to playing 'latin feels' often did so in their own, highly American jazz kind of way. Blue Bossa is not really a Bossa, and so on.

Modern jazz is obviously very eclectic. I can't say I think any of it swings as hard as Wes at the Half Note (sorry Gilad) but you certainly can't say modern players have bad time. OTOH I do think the obsession with click time can be counterproductive for swing feel, making musicians rather dry from a timing point of view. The musicians that do best with a metronome seem to be those who remember that ultimately it's about physical body time. Drummers can't really get away from this because their instrument is so physical. On the guitar it's easier to forget.

Also, playing too much with a click can make players drag - an effect I have heard mentioned by several musicians. You may learn to sit back on the click to groove with it rather than projecting your own groove.

Even now there are great drummers on the scene you play highly metronomic and those who are much more pulse based. A working drummer's time/feel aesthetic probably evolves depending on what type of work they do. Jazz drummers never work with a click live, so they play differently to drummers playing a lot of sessions and shows etc.

What I object to a bit is inflexible metronomic playing, where players won't come with the ebb and flow of the group because they feel that there is such a thing as right and wrong objectively. There isn't - musical timing an art, not a science. It might be metronomic for some musics, but in others a natural flexibility in the time is super important.

[pkirk]

Taking the example of classical music for example - classical musicians are often accused of having 'bad time' - this is unfair, great classical players have a great sense of rhythm for the music they play. A string quartet breathes and phrases together in a way that's very non-metronomic.

OK, but Longo's article quotes a bunch of people in the classical tradition dissing "metronomic" time:
But slowing down and speeding up is a critical aspect of expression in much classical music: and not surprisingly since the music is pre-composed, and so to be expressive at all requires the manipulation of those remaining elements that are not specified. In contrast, Rafferty says that african time and european time are completely different things: so it seems like they want to have it both ways: either the european aethetic applies or it doesnt. I tend to believe it doesn't, but that is because I think groove is at first approximated by constant time, whereas (as I understand it) in the classical tradition, one starts to mess with tempi from the start.

In any case, I think they both make good points about groove and pulse in jazz, and any insight passed down from Dizzy is important. I just think that the argument against ever using a metronome is weak.

And, since this is largely a forum of enthusiasts such as myself, rather than fully committed and frequently working artists, most of us would benefit from more time precision. You can't groove if you cant imply any kind of pulse, metronomic or otherwise in your playing.

It's kind of like saying Wes couldn't read music, so reading music is bad for you.

[christianm77]

OK, but Longo's article quotes a bunch of people in the classical tradition dissing "metronomic" time:
But slowing down and speeding up is a critical aspect of expression in much classical music: and not surprisingly since the music is pre-composed, and so to be expressive at all requires the manipulation of those remaining elements that are not specified. In contrast, Rafferty says that african time and european time are completely different things: so it seems like they want to have it both ways: either the european aethetic applies or it doesnt. I tend to believe it doesn't, but that is because I think groove is at first approximated by constant time, whereas (as I understand it) in the classical tradition, one starts to mess with tempi from the start.

In any case, I think they both make good points about groove and pulse in jazz, and any insight passed down from Dizzy is important. I just think that the argument against ever using a metronome is weak.

If you are interested in disappearing down a rabbit hole of debate on this topic, albeit with some very interesting points made on both sides, the piano forum debate that comes up when you google 'mike longo metronome' is worth a look.

Anything I would say here either way would largely be repeating info from this.

And, since this is largely a forum of enthusiasts such as myself, rather than fully committed and frequently working artists, most of us would benefit from more time precision. You can't groove if you cant imply any kind of pulse, metronomic or otherwise in your playing.

My god, I think any player would emphasise the importance of rhythm. I know I as a working player that this is my main preoccupation.

As the quote goes 'there are two sorts of player, those that work on their time and those that dont and I know who I'd rather work with.'

Boring metronomic time is better than wildly innacurate time for sure. That said there are players who always practice with a metronome and don't get any better in this regard.

TBH the biggest thing that would benefit the enthusiast players is the opportunity to get together with other players. I get the impression there are lots of players who don't get this opportunity?

It's kind of like saying Wes couldn't read music, so reading music is bad for you.

I think that's kind of a false comparison, but I feel most of the argument on this subject has already been made elsewhere.

Practicing with a metronome on 2 and 4 or any beat will not of itself improve your time feel. It may help you get used to locking into a specific tempo.

In any case I have a whole bunch of ways I work on time which I can share if anyone is interested.