Tempo/Feeling Changes

Everything about the swinging music we love to DJ

Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy

Message
Author
mousethief
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:29 pm
Location: dfw - a wretched hive of scum & villainy

Tempo/Feeling Changes

#1 Post by mousethief » Tue Jun 29, 2004 11:42 am

Especially mid-song. I'm delving into my collection to find more interesting breaks and/or tempo changes to spice up my sets.

Any info you can shoot my way (on anything) is great.

Thanks!

Kalman
"The cause of reform is hurt, not helped, when an activist makes an idiotic suggestion."

User avatar
Soupbone
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:39 pm
Location: Seattle

#2 Post by Soupbone » Tue Jun 29, 2004 4:32 pm

My current fave song with a tempo/mood change, mid-stream is one that I used for the final all skate at the All Bal Weekend Invitational J&J. Historically, the last song for this event is "crazy," so I felt I could get away with it.

The song is: Mildred Bailey Orchestra, "Shoutin' in the Amen Corner."
Gary

Image

User avatar
djstarr
Posts: 1043
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 2:09 pm
Location: Seattle

#3 Post by djstarr » Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:02 pm

Some current faves:

Darktown Strutter's Ball - Alberta Hunter - Amtrak Blues
After You've Gone - Eddie Lang/Joe Venuti w/Jack Teagarden - Jack Teagarden Jazz Archive 1931 - 1934 (this is a fun song - almost all of 3 minutes at 104, then last 30 seconds at 243).
Ain't Misbehavin - Fats Waller - The Very Best of Fats Waller - first half is nice slow blues at 95, last half is kickass charleston at 266
Ol' Man River - Eddie Condon - Bixieland:Treasury of Jazz (just tried this for the first time - it's nice; first half is a little cheesy, but then breaks into mid-tempo dixie feel).

The ones above have only one tempo change which most people can handle (although I think Ain't Misbehavin is the most challenging one to dance to). I've also tried "Ride, Red, Ride" off of Lucky Millinder's Apollo Jump - this goes between 170 and 340 multiple times and unless you know the song really well I don't think you can easily dance to it.

JSAlmonte
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 8:15 am
Location: Washington, DC

#4 Post by JSAlmonte » Wed Jun 30, 2004 2:01 pm

"My Wild Irish Roses"-Chick Webb-Jazz Archives Stompin' At The Savoy 1934/1939

The intro is slow, then the song kicks in ridiculously fast, periocially punctuated with slow breaks.

jerry

mousethief
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:29 pm
Location: dfw - a wretched hive of scum & villainy

#5 Post by mousethief » Thu Jul 01, 2004 2:01 pm

My hot, hot girlfriend and I just did a gig with an all-male chorus, which was a chore, believe me. But the band did a good job of adapting to the vocals and gave us something to dance to.

Top it off, a friend of ours just released a new album and one of his songs is a Sinatra-esque piece, which has an *oofa* section where the tempo and feeling drop to a burlesque quality then comes back up.

*oofa* - where girls can those switches and i can dig the girls

Kalman
"The cause of reform is hurt, not helped, when an activist makes an idiotic suggestion."

User avatar
Greg Avakian
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

#6 Post by Greg Avakian » Fri Jul 09, 2004 6:38 am

Just a suggestion/not a fact:
I think it's nicer to start fast and slow down rather than to start slow and speed up.
While either situation can create laughter and a sense of fun, I know that a lot of people who might come out on the floor for a blues dance or a slow Lindy are going to be disappointed when they suddently can't dance (if the music is fast).

Of course something like Alberta Hunter's version of 'darktown strutter's ball' works beautifully as a tempo/feeling change from slow to fast because the "fast" part is about (from memory) 168 BPM.

User avatar
falty411
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 9:22 am
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

#7 Post by falty411 » Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:56 pm

Greg Avakian wrote:Just a suggestion/not a fact:
I think it's nicer to start fast and slow down rather than to start slow and speed up.
While either situation can create laughter and a sense of fun, I know that a lot of people who might come out on the floor for a blues dance or a slow Lindy are going to be disappointed when they suddently can't dance (if the music is fast).
what makes you think that people who were excited to dance a fast song arent going to be disappointed when it slows down?

also, if they suddenly "cant dance" because the music changes tempo, thats their fault not the musics

i think both ways can be fun, but like anything if you do it too much its annoying. once an evening is fun.
-mikey faltesek

"Dancing is the union of the body with the rhythm and the sound of the music." Al Minns in 1984

User avatar
Greg Avakian
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

#8 Post by Greg Avakian » Sun Jul 11, 2004 8:48 am

falty411 wrote:
Greg Avakian wrote:Just a suggestion/not a fact:
I think it's nicer to start fast and slow down rather than to start slow and speed up.
While either situation can create laughter and a sense of fun, I know that a lot of people who might come out on the floor for a blues dance or a slow Lindy are going to be disappointed when they suddently can't dance (if the music is fast).
what makes you think that people who were excited to dance a fast song arent going to be disappointed when it slows down?
There are a few who might be, but they are the minority if they are disappointed because they can't dance. Everyone has a preference; I wasn't posting about that.

I think we have discussed to death that a DJ is supposed to watch the floor? It is a given in any post a DJ should be watching the room and have a good sense of what kind of dancers are on the floor.
falty411 wrote: also, if they suddenly "cant dance" because the music changes tempo, thats their fault not the musics
Same comment as above. I thought of this and didn't think I needed to address it because it was so obvious:
Fast dancers can probably dance slow, many more slow dancers can't dance fast. A smart DJ should be aware of this -whether or not they think it's a dancers "fault".

User avatar
12bars
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 3:25 pm
Location: nyc

#9 Post by 12bars » Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:12 pm

Greg Avakian wrote: Same comment as above. I thought of this and didn't think I needed to address it because it was so obvious:
Fast dancers can probably dance slow, many more slow dancers can't dance fast. A smart DJ should be aware of this -whether or not they think it's a dancers "fault".
i dont find that obvious. dancers who cant dance fast occur about as regularly as dancers who cant dance slow. dancing slow is a skill just as dancing fast is a skill, just because you can do one doesnt mean you can do the other without practice.

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#10 Post by Lawrence » Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:05 pm

falty411 wrote:also, if they suddenly "cant dance" because the music changes tempo, thats their fault not the musics
(*Kicking myself as I take the bait...*) Sure, it might be a dancer's "fault" for not being able (read: not wanting) to dance fast; but it is more-relevantly the DJ's "fault" for not recognizing that fact and insisting they are so wrong for their preference that they should suffer through it, anyway.

Your other point was far more apt: fast dancers would probably be disappointed to form a jam-circle and then find out that the tempo halves to a slow, bluesy number. (Although I guess I would find that kinda funny to watch).

That's why I generally avoid drastic tempo shifts within a song, altogether. Most tempo shifts occur in doubling or halving the tempo, which I submit is too much change unless the dancers are geared up for it (as in a performance). If I do play songs with tempo shifts, the shifts are often incidental (e.g. gradual through the course of the song, like "Blues for Stephanie" off "On the Road" that unnoticeably goes from 150ish down to 120ish by the end of the song) or somewhat less than 50% in either direction at any given point (like Oscar Peterson's "D & E"): not doubletime or halftime. I tend to leave drastic tempo shifts to between songs.

For similar reasons, I use gradual tempo increases to teach fast dancing, instead of jumping the tempo up from where they are comfortable on one song to where they are not comfortable on the other. As I go through different pointers on moving more efficiently, I move the pitch control up from where they are comfortable to where they would not think they would be comfortable were it not for the gradual shift.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

User avatar
Greg Avakian
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

#11 Post by Greg Avakian » Mon Jul 12, 2004 9:51 am

Well put. I think what got me to react is that all the songs mentioned above (that I own and did a tempo check on) go from the 120ish zone to the 240ish zone or higher.

Just curious: how many people have DJed a Novice, Advanced or Champion J&J or strictly and can tell us what the tempos were?

At ALHC last year Paulette told me no faster than 220BPM for the Champion Strictly which I asigned Reuben to do. I know Reuben went above that -which, BTW, I think was a good idea- but I'm wondering what the actual numbers were. At Hellzapoppin' I think the strictlies were in the 260-280 zone for the fastest song.

A lot of regular dancers can't do Bal that fast...

User avatar
Mr Awesomer
Posts: 1089
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 10:21 pm
Location: Altadena, CA
Contact:

#12 Post by Mr Awesomer » Mon Jul 12, 2004 10:22 am

I think I played material in the 240 range.

Back to the subject, if a dancer didn't like the sudden tempo change, they could just stop dancing. It aint that big a deal.
Reuben Brown
Southern California

User avatar
falty411
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 9:22 am
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

#13 Post by falty411 » Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:24 pm

Lawrence wrote:Your other point was far more apt: fast dancers would probably be disappointed to form a jam-circle and then find out that the tempo halves to a slow, bluesy number. (Although I guess I would find that kinda funny to watch).
if jams start every time a fast song comes on in your scene, then you definitly arent playing enough fast music. The only reason jams form to fast songs is because your scene probably never plays them, its so shocking and different that it throws everyone into a state of confusion so they just form in a circle and start clapping.

i wonder if the oppisite would be true, if the music in a scene was only fast, and you played a slow song, maybe a blues jam would start.
-mikey faltesek

"Dancing is the union of the body with the rhythm and the sound of the music." Al Minns in 1984

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#14 Post by Lawrence » Tue Jul 13, 2004 2:01 pm

falty411 wrote:if jams start every time a fast song comes on in your scene, then you definitly arent playing enough fast music. The only reason jams form to fast songs is because your scene probably never plays them, its so shocking and different that it throws everyone into a state of confusion so they just form in a circle and start clapping.
Your ability to mistakenly infer obtuse, irrelevant comments out of absolutely nowhere and then re-state them invectively continues to amaze me.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

User avatar
Lawrence
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 2:08 pm
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

#15 Post by Lawrence » Tue Jul 13, 2004 2:05 pm

GuruReuben wrote:Back to the subject, if a dancer didn't like the sudden tempo change, they could just stop dancing. It aint that big a deal.
Truth be told, NONE of this stuff is a big deal. 8)

But the point of DJing is to NOT inspire dancers to stop dancing.
Lawrence Page
Austin Lindy Hop
http://www.AustinLindy.com

Locked