My rule of thumb is not based on a BPM number but rather feel. When I can no longer swing triplets, that's when the time begins to smooth out to straight eighth & sixteenths.

It's going to depend on your technique; that will determine where the pivot point takes place.

Although it may sound overtly obvious, work on swinging triplets in your time keeping as much as you can, playing as fast as you can. It's all about feel, so do what makes the music feel its best.

Many thanks.

If you listen to the LP "Rich vs Roach", you can hear Buddy and Max playing different parts of the same songs. At faster tempos, Buddy plays the ride cymbal with much more triplet feel than Max. To me, Max sounds very relaxed and "cool", while Buddy seems more aggressive and even faster - even though the tempo is unchanged.

I think we need to double check the 140-150 quote - as that makes no sense. Way, way, way too slow to even ponder straightening the 1/8ths. For example -

Here's a snippet from a Bob Mintzer Big Band cut (John's played with this band, but this cut is with Peter Erskine) - anyway the tempo is at 235bpm - a lot faster than 150. It's a tune called Spectrum has a nice modern, forward motion to it - so I'd thought I'd see how how much Peter was "evening out" the triplets to get this feel.




So the answer in this case at 235bpm - not at all. Check out the audio file - the pic is of the 5th bar you hear. But even the last two bars before the fade (where the ride cymbal is a straight jazz pattern) is right on the grid - exact triplets @ 235bpm.

Here's the audio snippet -

erskine_spectrum_excerpt.mp3


This isn't to say that swing 1/8th don't or shouldn't straighten out at faster tempos - but the rule of thumb is really closer to Bart's explanation than many might think. As the tempo goes up, you try to make it feel the same as it would slower - loose, swinging, forward moving. And at higher tempos (north of 230bpm) that does become impossible - you might be able to play it as triplets but not make it "seem" to feel the same - thus the evening out. It is really quite natural.

But I don't think it is something to overly focus on - compared to note choices, accent patterns, rhythmic choices. These are things that make these guys sound like they're floating through the bars. The modern, forward motion thing is so much more about continually turn the phrasing around, mixing it up, keeping it unpredictable - and that's far more about note choices than tightening or loosening the grid.

By the way this piece is from the "The Bob Mintzer Big Band - The First Decade" a compilation with both Peter and John on various tracks. Highly recommended.

http://www.amazon.com/First-Decade-Bob-Mintzer-Band/dp/B000003DED

I assumed you were, and you're not wrong.

The interesting thing here, I think, is that the technical need to straighten things out at these tempos kind of goes hand in hand with the musical needs as well. I mean, even if one could execute the perfect triplets at 300+, would it sound right? Probably not, that the whole history of jazz is filled with players (of all instruments) coming to the conclusion that the line needs to breathe and flow no matter what the tempo. And thus far there's been overwhelming agreement that it doesn't. And at the end of the day everything we do is building on and extended the aural tradition that came before us.

David

At the risk of sounding a little hippy-dippy, is this perhaps because part of what is expressed in music is the physical actions which create the sound? I mean, music isn't really music until someone, or something plays it. It's the movement from conception to physical execution which is "musicianship". We can all hear tension/difficulty in motion in others' playing (not so easily our own, usually) "Music" can really be heard when the actions that create it are relaxed and controlled.

I can't find the words to say just what I'm trying to say.

Or maybe I'm just having a flashback from my early twenties...
In that case, ignore me.