Little experiment

so the difference was only in timing?

kawafanboi so the difference was only in timing?

Yes, even though to introduce that delay there might be other artifacts (which I can't hear) leading to some people thinking there was a change e.g. in the tone of the instrument.

Finally got this playing.

TBH, I hear no difference. 😃

I wonder how many people here have played in an ensemble, practiced with metronome often, or recorded to a midi click frequently. After reading the clue in the title, I think I got it pretty quickly. Just wondering if that kind of experience helps heighten the sense of timing.

I'm not sure it's a sense of timing as such. It's also a matter of attaching importance to the timing. For me, for example, the two sound clips are equivalent because their difference is irrelevant; the meaning in the music is unaltered from one clip to the next.

dore_m most definitely. In my case I am trained classically and always practiced with the metronome with ticks aligned with the fastest notes (1/8 or 1/16) of a given passage . That’s why I’m struggling playing jazz which is frustrating as I love it but the swing is against my DNA that’s maybe why I had a sense that there was a slight delta , even though I had to check by looking at the waves to confirm my impression as it’s definitely not easy to spot and I m not certain I would have bet money based on my impression .

I knew there should be some delay, it's in the title after all but it doesn't change it for me. Both sound equivalent as music and as feel. But I think people who listen and play a lot of jazz are naturally more sensitive to the swing.

CyberGene But I think people who listen and play a lot of jazz are naturally more sensitive to the swing.

I'd like to think that I was proficient at jazz, but I'm clearly not - but I guess I fall into the category of listening to jazz a lot. I also played in music groups as a kid, especially drum and bugle corps (which is marching band on steroids).

Also did alot of midi recording to a click, and can see how off I am when quantizing.

I used to play a lot of jazz but after I switched to classical the first thing I noticed was how cr*ppy my rubato was, so for many years now I've been practicing a classical/romantic solo piano feel where tempo and rhythm are not that strict and I guess I've lost that jazz feel... So, I agree with @RIP that this might have to do with classical vs jazz idiom. I wouldn't say classical isn't about having a good sense of rhythm though, maybe depends on the repertoire, I'm personally more about slow and lyrical pieces.

Just to be sure I'm clear, this is what I think:

• some people may not care about such "exact" timing, by either not even realizing they exist, or realizing it but having learn (or feel like it's good to) ignore them
• some people may care greatly about such "exact" timing, either wanting it to be perfectly on time (like @navindra seems to do) or wanting it "off" as @dore_m does (and to a less degree many others including myself)

I don't think there's a good or right here, just an observation.

FWIW my daughter plays in various orchestras and the other day she played in a pretty big one in which I estimated (from the public) her distance from the timpani being about 10m. At 300m/s that's about 30ms. She did say that the timpani was playing a bit late, whereas I (from the audience) thought they were perfectly on time 😃

I voted for both being equally good.

RIP I don't know if this is a reasonable claim or not (within human limits), but I definitely felt and feel the difference in timing between the two samples and #1 remains my preference even after the explanation. #2 gives me the shivers, for whatever reason.

I would listen to some different real life examples of exact / off timing before definitively pronouncing that I prefer one over the other.

I noticed the difference ... but if the stated difference (delay vs. no delay) were not given then I would not be able to tell you what the difference was.

RIP FWIW my daughter plays in various orchestras and the other day she played in a pretty big one in which I estimated (from the public) her distance from the timpani being about 10m. At 300m/s that's about 30ms. She did say that the timpani was playing a bit late, whereas I (from the audience) thought they were perfectly on time

You think that's far, in our drum and bugle corps, we were often 30-35 yards away from the conductor, and 70 yards away from the furthest musician on the field. You have to play in time by looking at the conductor and not listening sometimes.

RIP some people may not care about such "exact" timing

RIP some people may care greatly about such "exact" timing

I liked clip #2 the best as described before.

But listening to various music in real life, I like both approaches depending on the piece, musicians, instruments used, general mood, my mood, and so on.

Sometimes highly exact, tight timing is super powerful and makes a piece come across very, again, powerfully. Which can be utterly enjoyable and engaging.

Some other times a bit of laid back groove can add a fitting atmosphere and rather enjoyable engagement and feelings of joy (or other emotion) in quite another way.

Both are ways of expressing music. Real, powerful music comes from deeply within, and thrives on authentic expression. Whichever way. Music (and all other kinds of art), luckily, isn't an exact science.

Which doesn't mean li'l experiments like this aren't fun and educational!

Cheers and happy discoveries,

HZ

I’ve heard pipe organ players learn to cope with hearing the sound lagging behind their playing too.

CyberGene

i initially felt the digital piano actually responds a little too fast and too consistently, it was throwing me off alot when i first bought my 520. it made everything easier to play and i didn't have to worry about pressing the key all the way down, so it was very relaxing, it almost felt like the piano was predicting my playing or playing on its own, because there's now such a large timing window between inputs that is virtually impossible to screw up.

Joannchr actually jazz is always in time! There no rubaton in jazz! And accents are on 2 and 4 🙂

Khuja Wangtishvili The beginning of each beat is on perfect time yes, but the 1/8 notes are played 'like' triplets and are neither on time , nor conform to classical notation. This coupled with the specific accentuation to emphasise the backbeat is what is disconcerting for a classical musician . In fact the triplet notation is just an approximation as the swing cannot really be written with classical notation, according to jazz purists. Indeed it has nothing to do with rubato , given with a rubato it is a borrow/pay approach with time where you choose to drag certain notes but accelerate other notes so the duration of an entire bar stay constant, so it is more like changing the tempo several times in the same bar which is obviously completely different.

Joannchr yes, it's all of course, i just wrote it as man6 classical trained musicians do not knot it. I a
Started learning jazz few months ago and I have to say it's like starting g to learning music again, but it help so much and I as musian made a big step forward