Very nice. But I think the essence of the song (the lyrics, the mood) is caught by a true musical genius in Brad Mehldau. Check it out. Now THAT is a masterpiece.
Each jazz artist will play the same tune in his own way so this is not a comment against Dave Brubeck who perhaps has produced THE miost famous number in "Take Five" but anyone who has been hit by the version of "My Favorite Things" by John Coltrane will find it difficult to get carried away by any other version. Coltrane's version is phenomenal and unforgettable.
you cant transcribe it.... thats not what jazz is... even brubeck wouldnt be able to tell what he did... i remember seeing an interview with oscar peterson and someone asked him to tell the audience what he just played, note for note, and he said he couldnt as he himself doesnt quite know what he did...
@slapmyfunkybass - you can transcribe it, and to do so is instructive when learning styles or helpful for people who don't have a decade to devote to improvisation but would like to play a piece this beautiful. Oscar Peterson is a great example - Hal Leonard's "The Very Best of Oscar Peterson" has note-for-note transcriptions of some of his most complex recordings, e.g. 'Round Midnight. I would love if one of the Brubeck anthologies had "My Favorite Things" transcribed - it's a gorgeous piece!
Eu simplesmente adoro esse arranjo. Lembro com saudades nao dos bolachoes de vinil que meu irmao ainda conserva, mas sim daquela época de tecnologia limitada, mas com qualidade impar. Saudades daquela casa, daquele vitrolao, dos velhos, das tias, dos vizinhos, do fusquinha. Ouvir Brubeck além do prazer, é mergulhar no passado.
@chogo888 this is definitely in a fast 3/4. It's a Jazz Waltz, and they're all in 3/4. Listen to the pattern of cadences and the emphasis on strong and weak beats as well as the fact that the ride hits aren't swung (if it was 6/8, the 8th would be swung and the ride would be swinging away.) Instead, the pulse that's half the ride is swung.
All that to say it's fast three. Probably around q.=240 or dotted half = 120
@takeitsaxman2012 but brubeck is playing in a triplet feel... i wouldnt have said 240 either or a fast three.... far from it, its a steady tempo, listen to the bass... a cadence isnt really a good way to decide a time signature... it could be a feminine cadence so wouldnt naturally finish on the beat expected... maybe the drummer is in 3, but brubeck's playing has a compound feel...
The drummer is the foundation of the beat for the whole piece. Most good soloistic parts have a compound rhythmic feel because it creates interest. We're not talking about Brubeck's playing here, we're talking about the piece as a whole. The bass is just emphasizing the strong pulse. This is a true jazz waltz and the bass+drums proves it, because it's a STRONG-weak-weak fast three feel, with half the beat duration swung, even in Brubeck's part.
@takeitsaxman2012 well, most would say drums and bass are the foundation of the beat... yes, it's in waltz time but why couldnt it be in 9/8? brubeck's solo is full of triplets which points to a compound feel, the drums and bass are just emphasing first beat of each triplet, with the first having a stronger feel
@slapmyfunkybass The biggest reason is because it's in four bar phrases. If you're going for bigger divisions of the beat, 12/8 is more logical than 9/8. The biggest reason it's in 3/4 is because that's the way Richard Rogers wrote it...and the way ALL jazz waltzes are written; nobody's really going to write a jazz waltz that's in a different subdivision because of tradition: the same reason we do a lot of the things we do in music. Look up an original score. I know Music Notes dot com has one.
@takeitsaxman2012 yes, it is written in 3/4 you're right, but most jazz is played with a swing feel, giving a lilt to the music, so 9/8 would be more appropriate... i dont understand your comment about "bigger divisions of the beat 12/8 is more logical than 9/8... either time signature is still a quarter note divided into 3
@slapmyfunkybass The lilt feel isn't accomplished by time signature it's a style. Swing 4 isn't ever written in a 12/8 feel except in musical theater when the composer has no idea what he's doing. I'm not sure what kinda aural training or music theory you've had, but that's my major in school. It's just a matter of tradition and aural identification. The reason 9/8 is less likely 12/8 is because of the chord progression and melodic development.
That would be a measure by measure layout of the text in 9/8
Not to mention, it still begs the question, if it's in a compound triple meter (9/8, 6/8, 12,8 or whatever), why are the 16th notes in the hi-hat swung?
And to answer my own question, the 16th notes wouldn't be swung. It's a principal of what's easiest to read. It's likely that Brubeck and his trio here weren't using written music, which means I have to approach this from the point of view of someone transcribing it. No jazz transcriber/arranger/composer in their right mind would EVER write compound meter swing 16th's because it's very difficult to read and pointlessly so when you could just write it in a fast 3/4 with swing 8s
@takeitsaxman2012 i dont think i've ever seen a jazz piece in 12/8 or 9/8 but that doesnt mean it shouldnt be played that way, swing feel implies compound time. you have said yourself 3/4 in swing 8ths, true swing feel is the crotchet, quaver triplet, not a dotted quaver, semiquaver... therefore, it's compound time.
yes, if you transcribed it you would write 3/4 (with a swing feel) but my point is its true time signature is 9/8
@takeitsaxman2012@takeitsaxman2012 i dont think i've ever seen a jazz piece in 12/8 or 9/8 but that doesnt mean it shouldnt be played that way, swing feel implies compound time. you have said yourself 3/4 in swing 8ths, true swing feel is the crotchet, quaver triplet, not a dotted quaver, semiquaver... therefore, it's compound time.
yes, if you transcribed it you would write 3/4 (with a swing feel) but my point is its true time signature is 9/8
@chogo888@chogo888 this is definitely in a fast 3/4. It's a Jazz Waltz, and they're all in 3/4. Listen to the pattern of cadences and the emphasis on strong and weak beats as well as the fact that the ride hits aren't swung (if it was 6/8, the 8th would be swung and the ride would be swinging away.) Instead, the pulse that's half the ride is swung.
All that to say it's fast three. Probably around q.=240 or dotted half = 120
there probably isn't isnt a sheet music transcription for this version. This was improvised by a very sophisticated group of musicians, particul.. Brubeck. i am sure he could pick up melody by ear, or read the basic chords and just go nuts with it! good luck This is music that is played form the heart and imagination, not just from sheet music.
If you want a transcription get a copy of the Real Book. It has the lead sheet for the original song, it's not exactly what he plays but it's a start. They just improvise on the changes.
I'm gonna blaspheme here and say I love this a whole lot more than Coltrane's version. HA!
webdiva369 2 months ago 4
hey this tfs's 25 song.
MrGray012 2 months ago
and to think he wanted to be a cowboy.
treeratrecordings 2 months ago
Dave Brubeck deserves every gram of respect. A truly genious.
Latkoski96 2 months ago
i'm getting drunk in awesomness, jazzieness, artness, beauty!
zoritoo 2 months ago
Cool. Only thing (or person, rather.) cooler is JESUS CHRIST. Happy realy birthday, JESUS CHRIST.
peacheslovesjesus 3 months ago 4
Comment removed
dontbeyellow 3 months ago
That was terrific and thanks for posting! Oops, gotta go...my schnitzel with noodles is just about done...
quirpco 6 months ago
Oooh, how I love this song! thanks
vjstv0101 6 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i got here from the coltrane 1966 newport version. wtf is this bullshit>
groalerable 7 months ago
no words can describe this 3 minutes of heaven
madEternity 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
How can educated people listen to Brubeck?
Stale and unimaginative.
Easleytee 10 months ago
@Easleytee Educated people do listen to Brubeck.It's the stupid one's that don't get it.
thetruthdudeyerhi 10 months ago 5
@Easleytee dude your just square
sparten17708 10 months ago
@Easleytee the same way educated people unfortunately have to read stale and unimaginative commentary from from people like you
mpcguy 9 months ago
@Easleytee I think you just need your ears checked. Idk what's stale or unimaginative about this at all.
gotmeagrape 7 months ago
@Easleytee hope you're joking
0live0wire0 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hello my channel then know of chords and harmony GOSPEL ..
Hope you enjoy and subscribe to help promote my videos ..
I count on the kindness and help you;.....
thank you and god bless
MichelKeyJazz 10 months ago
I just found a note for note transcript by Dan Fischer just google it!
jimbomed 10 months ago
@jimbomed Please, email it to my gmail. (richard.westhaver) I can not freaking find a downloadable, or even printable version anywhere.
hashbrunz 1 week ago
This is so unbelievably great. I wish the breakdown at 2:27 was longer though!
BOSOX9004 11 months ago
Very nice. But I think the essence of the song (the lyrics, the mood) is caught by a true musical genius in Brad Mehldau. Check it out. Now THAT is a masterpiece.
tpstrat14 1 year ago
@tpstrat14
I agree. This is good, perhaps very good, but it doesn't come close to Mehldau's version.
StanleyDonwood 11 months ago
@StanleyDonwood That version of My Favorite Things is currently my favorite song on Earth. It has been for a year actually.
tpstrat14 11 months ago
@tpstrat14 link?
windowsforvista 11 months ago
I´m hooooked up on this one!
schnipsikabel 1 year ago
What is it with the glasses man?
Esuper1 1 year ago
@Esuper1 yes, he is this man with glasses
basnopisets 1 year ago
immediately added to favorites
pighead17 1 year ago
Each jazz artist will play the same tune in his own way so this is not a comment against Dave Brubeck who perhaps has produced THE miost famous number in "Take Five" but anyone who has been hit by the version of "My Favorite Things" by John Coltrane will find it difficult to get carried away by any other version. Coltrane's version is phenomenal and unforgettable.
sujitjp45 1 year ago
this is ridiculously awesome
oggleman 1 year ago
I listen to this in the summer.
drumsandivory 1 year ago
There is only one possible thing I would ever want to change about this...MAKE IT LONGER!!!
BOSOX9004 1 year ago 3
you cant transcribe it.... thats not what jazz is... even brubeck wouldnt be able to tell what he did... i remember seeing an interview with oscar peterson and someone asked him to tell the audience what he just played, note for note, and he said he couldnt as he himself doesnt quite know what he did...
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass - you can transcribe it, and to do so is instructive when learning styles or helpful for people who don't have a decade to devote to improvisation but would like to play a piece this beautiful. Oscar Peterson is a great example - Hal Leonard's "The Very Best of Oscar Peterson" has note-for-note transcriptions of some of his most complex recordings, e.g. 'Round Midnight. I would love if one of the Brubeck anthologies had "My Favorite Things" transcribed - it's a gorgeous piece!
mlineber 1 year ago
@mlineber Google Dave brubeck transcription my favorite things dan fischer .....you can down load a note for note transcription for free
jimbomed 10 months ago 3
@jimbomed - that's a great transcription; thanks for the heads-up!
mlineber 10 months ago
Perfecto. viva Dave Brubeck.
ermojaquero 1 year ago
girls in white dresses with blue satin sashes, brown paper boxes tied up with string, these are a few of my favorite things....
74project 1 year ago
love this song n john coltranes version
apollocreedmusic 1 year ago
Eu simplesmente adoro esse arranjo. Lembro com saudades nao dos bolachoes de vinil que meu irmao ainda conserva, mas sim daquela época de tecnologia limitada, mas com qualidade impar. Saudades daquela casa, daquele vitrolao, dos velhos, das tias, dos vizinhos, do fusquinha. Ouvir Brubeck além do prazer, é mergulhar no passado.
pcquaqua 1 year ago
whats the time signature? 6/4?
chogo888 1 year ago
@chogo888 No, no, 3/4
DB1815 1 year ago
@DB1815 6/8
awesomewelles90 1 year ago
@chogo888 this is definitely in a fast 3/4. It's a Jazz Waltz, and they're all in 3/4. Listen to the pattern of cadences and the emphasis on strong and weak beats as well as the fact that the ride hits aren't swung (if it was 6/8, the 8th would be swung and the ride would be swinging away.) Instead, the pulse that's half the ride is swung.
All that to say it's fast three. Probably around q.=240 or dotted half = 120
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
@takeitsaxman2012 but brubeck is playing in a triplet feel... i wouldnt have said 240 either or a fast three.... far from it, its a steady tempo, listen to the bass... a cadence isnt really a good way to decide a time signature... it could be a feminine cadence so wouldnt naturally finish on the beat expected... maybe the drummer is in 3, but brubeck's playing has a compound feel...
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass
The drummer is the foundation of the beat for the whole piece. Most good soloistic parts have a compound rhythmic feel because it creates interest. We're not talking about Brubeck's playing here, we're talking about the piece as a whole. The bass is just emphasizing the strong pulse. This is a true jazz waltz and the bass+drums proves it, because it's a STRONG-weak-weak fast three feel, with half the beat duration swung, even in Brubeck's part.
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
@takeitsaxman2012 well, most would say drums and bass are the foundation of the beat... yes, it's in waltz time but why couldnt it be in 9/8? brubeck's solo is full of triplets which points to a compound feel, the drums and bass are just emphasing first beat of each triplet, with the first having a stronger feel
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass The biggest reason is because it's in four bar phrases. If you're going for bigger divisions of the beat, 12/8 is more logical than 9/8. The biggest reason it's in 3/4 is because that's the way Richard Rogers wrote it...and the way ALL jazz waltzes are written; nobody's really going to write a jazz waltz that's in a different subdivision because of tradition: the same reason we do a lot of the things we do in music. Look up an original score. I know Music Notes dot com has one.
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
@takeitsaxman2012 yes, it is written in 3/4 you're right, but most jazz is played with a swing feel, giving a lilt to the music, so 9/8 would be more appropriate... i dont understand your comment about "bigger divisions of the beat 12/8 is more logical than 9/8... either time signature is still a quarter note divided into 3
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass The lilt feel isn't accomplished by time signature it's a style. Swing 4 isn't ever written in a 12/8 feel except in musical theater when the composer has no idea what he's doing. I'm not sure what kinda aural training or music theory you've had, but that's my major in school. It's just a matter of tradition and aural identification. The reason 9/8 is less likely 12/8 is because of the chord progression and melodic development.
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass
Take the original text of the piece:
Raindrops on roses and whiskers on
kittensBright copper kettles and
warm woolen mittens Brown paper
packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favorite
things.
That would be a measure by measure layout of the text in 9/8
Not to mention, it still begs the question, if it's in a compound triple meter (9/8, 6/8, 12,8 or whatever), why are the 16th notes in the hi-hat swung?
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
Comment removed
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass
And to answer my own question, the 16th notes wouldn't be swung. It's a principal of what's easiest to read. It's likely that Brubeck and his trio here weren't using written music, which means I have to approach this from the point of view of someone transcribing it. No jazz transcriber/arranger/composer in their right mind would EVER write compound meter swing 16th's because it's very difficult to read and pointlessly so when you could just write it in a fast 3/4 with swing 8s
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
@takeitsaxman2012 i dont think i've ever seen a jazz piece in 12/8 or 9/8 but that doesnt mean it shouldnt be played that way, swing feel implies compound time. you have said yourself 3/4 in swing 8ths, true swing feel is the crotchet, quaver triplet, not a dotted quaver, semiquaver... therefore, it's compound time.
yes, if you transcribed it you would write 3/4 (with a swing feel) but my point is its true time signature is 9/8
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@slapmyfunkybass You just have to count it right...just off the beat.
jimbomed 10 months ago
@takeitsaxman2012 @takeitsaxman2012 i dont think i've ever seen a jazz piece in 12/8 or 9/8 but that doesnt mean it shouldnt be played that way, swing feel implies compound time. you have said yourself 3/4 in swing 8ths, true swing feel is the crotchet, quaver triplet, not a dotted quaver, semiquaver... therefore, it's compound time.
yes, if you transcribed it you would write 3/4 (with a swing feel) but my point is its true time signature is 9/8
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
@chogo888 @chogo888 this is definitely in a fast 3/4. It's a Jazz Waltz, and they're all in 3/4. Listen to the pattern of cadences and the emphasis on strong and weak beats as well as the fact that the ride hits aren't swung (if it was 6/8, the 8th would be swung and the ride would be swinging away.) Instead, the pulse that's half the ride is swung.
All that to say it's fast three. Probably around q.=240 or dotted half = 120
takeitsaxman2012 1 year ago
really good version! thanks for posting!
AlexiLaiho6 2 years ago 2
wow! so easy yet complex, thanks for posting
gramule 2 years ago
Where could I find this record? Which album?
Irmacht 2 years ago
This kind interpretation that's I love. It's beatifull the way Dave play each compass. That's jazz I like me.Thanks to down this video.
lrz0288 2 years ago
Do you know this man is still alive at 89
pianoorganman 2 years ago 22
yep, but i wonder if he's still able to perform. he was hospitalized in april.
photoelectrician 2 years ago
@photoelectrician Saw him play a couple weeks ago in Chicago.
neiltoupin 7 months ago
@photoelectrician He was performing as late as mid last year.
heraldmonkey 2 months ago
@pianoorganman Legends never die they simply grow old!
CONSTRINGACY 1 year ago
@pianoorganman
90 now
leeperryismerry 1 year ago
@pianoorganman He's 91 now, his birthday was a couple days ago!
clickcijum 2 months ago
@clickcijum Couldn't agree more. What an artist. So was Paul Desmond of course. Two of the greatest musicians that ever played jazz.
Annie7954 1 month ago
This is a fine version ... great.
Do yourself a favor if you haven't already done so and check out Pete Jolly's version too.
He tears it up ..
Mousler100 2 years ago
the aim of a solo transcription in jazz is not to reproduce that solo but to learn from past masters
VodkaJazz 2 years ago 11
@VodkaJazz ... uh yea... and to do that, you must reproduce their solo. You make zero point
tpstrat14 1 year ago
get it by ear, or improvise by urself!
ericoschmitt 2 years ago
damn this is best version of favorite things
VDFM1 2 years ago 4
there probably isn't isnt a sheet music transcription for this version. This was improvised by a very sophisticated group of musicians, particul.. Brubeck. i am sure he could pick up melody by ear, or read the basic chords and just go nuts with it! good luck This is music that is played form the heart and imagination, not just from sheet music.
octave7 3 years ago 18
@octave7 actually brubek is probably not one of jazz's better improvisers, his strength is much more his composition
ak47mustang 1 year ago 2
@ak47mustang and unusual timings
slapmyfunkybass 1 year ago
If you want a transcription get a copy of the Real Book. It has the lead sheet for the original song, it's not exactly what he plays but it's a start. They just improvise on the changes.
Nateon 3 years ago 2
really good song
jeineke 3 years ago
This is one of my favorite things.... great song, great musician.
mykologist 3 years ago