Playing Time Vs Playing Within The Time

There is a definite difference between playing time and playing within the time. To illustrate, let's look at a couple statements with which I think everyone reading this will agree.

First: Every musician should be able to play in time. And: Not every musician is able to play in time.

Now, a controversial statement, but one I think you'll also like: The drummer shouldn't have to keep time for the other band members.

Personally, I don't play time. When I started studying drums I was never taught to do that. I play parts, colors, phrases, et al, but "in" time and "within" the time and I believe that is due to my musical upbringing.

I was raised on classical music and started playing piano when I was four or five years old. After gaining some expertise with the elementary books I started playing with a metronome. My older sister, who wound up being an Eastman graduate, also worked with the metronome. This led me to the conclusion that all musicians used a metronome and could keep their own time.

When observing symphony orchestra concerts, I noticed the conductor set the tempo and kept the time. The different sections of the orchestra followed his lead. Especially notable was the percussion section. They didn't keep the time but played their parts within the tempo set by the conductor. Because of this, I never considered percussion players as being timekeepers but rather other musicians in the orchestra playing their parts and making their contribution to the whole.

Fast forward to observing big band jazz. It seemed to me the same thing was happening: the conductor set the tempo and kept the time with the baton. It seemed the drummer was playing his "part" the same as the other musicians in the band were doing.

By the time I progressed to more improvised jazz like Dave Brubeck's Time Out album, I was in college and getting interested in the drums. To my ears, the time wasn't being established by the drums but was being played by everyone. On "Blue Rondo a la Turk" Brubeck's piano was setting the pace... da-da, da-da, da-da, da-da-da, da-da, da-da, da-da, da-da-da. Joe Morello was playing similarly but not totally responsible for the time. Same as on "Take Five." The piano set the tone. Joe was playing his "part." When they swung in 4/4 and Joe was playing the jazz ride on the cymbal, it still seemed Joe was playing his "part" and everyone else was playing their parts.

The same perception happened when listening to my first Jimmy Smith album. When the drummer was playing the ride, it was his "part." And Monk with Frankie Dunlop; Miles Davis with Philly Joe Jones, and so on....

My first introduction to Tony Williams was the Miles Davis album Miles in Europe. Inconceivable to me that Tony was keeping time. He was playing his "parts" (yes, plural) "within' the time. (And killing it!) Elvin Jones with John Coltrane? More plural "parts" within the time. (And more killing!) Max Roach played patterns and melodies. Jimmy Cobb often played straight quarter notes on the cymbal. To me, that was his part in the music. And so on...

Even when playing funk or rock beats. Those repeated steady beats to me were the drummer's part in the music. I didn't consider that it was keeping time for the other musicians. After all, the guitar and/or keyboard were also playing steady patterns... their parts.

So, there's the difference. Some drummers approach the instrument as playing and keeping time for the band. But I don't believe they should have to do that. All the musicians in the band should be strong enough to keep the time themselves and play together with the others in the band. Like orchestra and big band musicians.

Other drummers play their part and play phrases, colors, ideas and even melodies as their contributions to the music, but in time and within the time.

Those are my kind of drummers.

Comments