How Do You Swing a Quarter Note? An Analysis of the Great Walking Bassists of the 1950s and 60s.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Name: Steven Willem ZwaninkMain Subject: Jazz Double Bass Research Coach: Patrick SchenkiusTitle of Research: How do you Swing a Quarter Note? An Analysis of the Great Walking Bassists of the 1950s and 60s.Research Question: In theory, a bass player's walking quarter notes should not swing, as they are not syncopated like eighth notes are for example; syncopation being a necessary condition of what it is to swing, in that it allows for the long-short lilt that people identify with swing music. In practice however, it is evident that certain bassists are able to create a swing feeling, through a highly complex, and often idiosyncratic approach to quarter note placement within the 'big beat,' as well as to sound production and articulation. By using sonic visualization software such as Audacity, my goal is to shed light on the unique and often highly mysterious properties behind swinging bass lines: are there strategies in common between swinging bassists, or does each performer swing in their own inimitable way; do swinging bass lines rely on a temporal tension between bassist and drummer; and to what extent are the timbral properties of an instrument and the attack with which a string is engaged relevant?Research Process:My research process involves four phases: Firstly, selecting contrasting examples of swinging bass players from the 1950s and 1960s; secondly, studying selected examples using Audacity, creating a visual data set that will then be used to examine what the similarities and differences are between each bassist's approach to swinging quarter notes; thirdly, examining whether the push and pull of swinging quarter notes results from either tension or synchronicity between a bassist and a drummer, as well as what effect the tonal shape of the quarter notes the bassist plays, as related to timbre and attack, have on swing feel; and fourthly, examining my own instincts with regards to the spectrum and parameters of the various swinging quarter notes of each bassist studied.Summary of Results: I have recently discovered in my own playing, that regardless of which drummer with whom I am playing, that my time feel needs to remain strong and unchangeable by what it is they are doing. This allows me to swing immediately and consistently on my own, or with whomever I am playing, provided the drummer is competent. All of this together answers my initial questions of: Do swinging bass lines rely on a temporal tension between bassist and drummer? No. Can the bassist swing his quarter notes all on his own? Yes. To what extent are the timbral properties of an instrument and the attack with which a string is engaged relevant? Extremely. In undertaking this study I have had the opportunity to think critically about a major parameter of jazz bass performance that is highly ephemeral and rarely quantified, though at the end of this project I now realize that that major parameter, while reliant on time, is actually sound and articulation. keywords: bass, jazz, swing, big beat
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".