Does Tenuto actually mean "full value"?

[AndrewMeronek]

Asking because of how often I see musicians play series of notes with tenuto markings as separated and NOT full value. It can be aggravating.

[LeTromboniste]

Depends on context and any number of factors. For some composers, moments in time or places, tenuto has implications about weight of the note and stress more than just about holding full duration.

Edit: I meant that yes, generally that indicates full duration, but in certain contexts it means more than merely full duration. Especially in contexts where the default for an unmarked note already tends to be pretty much full duration. Then it's more about the articulation and shape of the note than the actual value

[Wilktone]

Yes, it should indicate the note is to be played full value.

What's the context? Big band, orchestra, concert band?

This topic has been on my mind a lot lately because I've been working with some other composers to produce a concert of original big band music. Some of the composers (usually the rhythm section players, but sometimes the horn players) are horrible at marking their articulations and leave quarter notes with no articulation at all over them. That would typically default to a short quarter note, but there are almost always circumstances in the same charts where the composer seems to have wanted them long. As a result, as we've been rehearsing this music the band sort of defaulted to a not-short-not-long quarter note, sometimes even on things that have articulations, because we've been constantly second guessing what's desired.

After getting the composers on board with marking their articulations and rehearsing the music a couple of times we're now locking in better. Maybe the musicians you're noticing just need feedback that they're not playing the articulations correctly because they're second guessing?

[Wilktone]

Update, what Maximillian wrote before I submitted my post is absolutely true about context. But I would point out that the historical context is necessary to understand what was desired by the composer. These days articulations are more standardized than they used to be, so modern editions using tenutos I would suggest full value note unless you suspect that the context was otherwise.

[Doug Elliott]

It would be useful to have a discussion of ALL articulation markings, how they are used now and what they meant in different eras.
Unfortunately there's not as much standardization as I'd like. And a lot of printed music (and manuscript) is full of mistakes and inconsistencies between parts.
And I suspect there are regional differences in interpretation too.

[AndrewMeronek]

What's the context? Big band, orchestra, concert band?

My most recent observation is big band, but I've seen it in pretty much all contexts.

There is, in fact, a specific notation that is different from tenuto that means long but separated: portato.

I agree that when it comes to articulation, there are a lot of wildly different meanings for some markings. But as far as I know, tenuto should not be one of the them.

[robcat2075]

To add to the spectrum, I often see a lone tenuto mark in an already slurred phrase, meaning to slightly linger on that note.

I feel like the common "big band" performance practice of quarter-notes-short led to a profusion of tenuto marks by arrangers to counteract that habit among performers raised on that, just to get back to notes having their full value, short of being tied or slurred to the next note.

I also feel that keyboard, wind and string players have different ideas about what the various note-length marks should produce, creating further uncertainty when something is transcribed from one medium to another.

[Doug Elliott]

Since when is an unmarked quarter note short?

[Wilktone]

Since when is an unmarked quarter note short?

Yeah, that’s part of the problem, it’s not always consistent from player to player.

But I have long heard that in a swing context quarter notes typically would be played short unless marked otherwise. Personally, I always mark them.

But here is an excellent resource on jazz articulations that also states quarter notes should be interpreted short unless marked otherwise.

https://www.evanrogersmusic.com/blog-co ... ticulation

The author also agrees that tenuto markings are to be played full value.

I feel like the common "big band" performance practice of quarter-notes-short led to a profusion of tenuto marks by arrangers to counteract that habit among performers raised on that, just to get back to notes having their full value, short of being tied or slurred to the next note.

That’s just the standard practice for big band writing. If you want a quarter note played full value, use a tenuto. Again, I feel the quarter note should be marked either way, no ambiguity and no one in the section second guesses wrong.

My most recent observation is big band, but I've seen it in pretty much all contexts.

There is, in fact, a specific notation that is different from tenuto that means long but separated: portato.

I agree that when it comes to articulation, there are a lot of wildly different meanings for some markings. But as far as I know, tenuto should not be one of the them.

Yeah, I agree that it’s strange for good players to not play tenuto full value. Do you think it’s intentional or just laziness? Short changing long notes and releasing them early is something I work with students a lot.

[robcat2075]

I feel like the common "big band" performance practice of quarter-notes-short led to a profusion of tenuto marks by arrangers to counteract that habit among performers raised on that, just to get back to notes having their full value, short of being tied or slurred to the next note.

That’s just the standard practice for big band writing....

That's the problem.

Those hard-charging big band players also show up in orchestras and concert bands where the standard big band practices don't apply.

I've been in ensembles where the conductor had to talk the trumpets down from a jazz articulation in a "classical" piece.

[Wilktone]

That's the problem.

Those hard-charging big band players also show up in orchestras and concert bands where the standard big band practices don't apply.

I've been in ensembles where the conductor had to talk the trumpets down from a jazz articulation in a "classical" piece.

Oh, I don’t disagree with you here at all. I had to work hard to get out of that habit myself.

Context does matter.

Now let’s talk about getting string players to swing…

[Doug Elliott]

A long rope

[JohnL]

A long rope

I've been known to point out that our clarinet section couldn't swing from the end of a rope...

[robcat2075]

Now let’s talk about getting string players to swing…

I recall, back in college, writing an orchestral piece that had a section I imagined to be swing-like and to that end, I wrote in upside-down bowings for the strings that were up-bows on the down beats and down-bows on the up beats.

Even though "the college orchestra" was not going to play this thing... I recruited an orchestra of my own for that... the college orchestra conductor still freaked when he saw these bowings in my score.

"NO! You are not going to confuse MY STRING PLAYERS with that nonsense."

So I said i'd change it, but never did. I had already copied out the parts... in ink!

[LeTromboniste]

In the defence of string players, modern bows, with their concave curve and weighted tip, are physically designed to play as even as possible, with as little difference in articulation and note length between downbows and upbows as possible. Swinging requires fighting against the physics of the instrument (on top of going against the strong emphasis on evenness in their modern classical training). Go back to short, light, tapered bows, and uneven 8ths become the default.

[Doug Elliott]

In my opinion, which only counts in my world, unmarked quarter notes should be 3/4 to 7/8 length, long but articulated - in other words differently from staccato or tenuto.. Of all the horn players I've hired for my own gigs rhere have only been one or two I had to ask to play longer quarters.

[Wilktone]

In the defence of string players, modern bows, with their concave curve and weighted tip, are physically designed to play as even as possible, with as little difference in articulation and note length between downbows and upbows as possible. Swinging requires fighting against the physics of the instrument (on top of going against the strong emphasis on evenness in their modern classical training). Go back to short, light, tapered bows, and uneven 8ths become the default.

Well, maybe? Certainly there are string players who are quite capable of swinging hard while playing arco. It's just a rhythmic change, from a mechanical standpoint not any different from playing dotted 8th-16th figures or the quarter note triplet-8th note triplet rhythms, which are certainly playable on strings. I think it's probably more of a factor of enculturation. String players who focus on playing classical music don't listen to swing music enough to have it feel natural to them. Of course this also happens with other instruments as well, there are some great trombonists that can't swing too.

In my opinion, which only counts in my world, unmarked quarter notes should be 3/4 to 7/8 length, long but articulated - in other words differently from staccato or tenuto.. Of all the horn players I've hired for my own gigs rhere have only been one or two I had to ask to play longer quarters.

Interesting. You write your own arrangements mostly, right?



Out of curiosity, how would you play those unmarked quarter notes? According to my understanding, they should be played short (even though they are marked with a slur over the phrase, which I would personally not use there). Do you recognize the excerpt?



I imagine that the sheet music the Basie band was playing from is different from the published arrangement, but they played it short.

[Wilktone]

While I'm at it, here is an example of tenuto quarter notes, to be played full value.





Can anyone think of or find an example of big band writing or recording where the quarter notes aren't meant to be played short or long, but somewhere in between? One non-specific example I can think of now would be to have the quarter note with a marking above stating the note should be played "fat."

[Mamaposaune]

Back in the days when I was playing in a British-style brass band, our British-born and raised conductor said that over there, tenuto markings over the notes are meant to be played long and slightly accented. First time I had ever heard that, but if course we did as instructed!

[Doug Elliott]

The line with a slur over it I would play long except the 1st note with the ^ over it. If I transcribed that Basie recording I would put dots over the quarters. To me, a slur indicates both phrasing and style - so the quarters aren't "unmarked."

But mayne that's my classical background talking.

[robcat2075]

In the defence of string players, modern bows, with their concave curve and weighted tip, are physically designed to play as even as possible, with as little difference in articulation and note length between downbows and upbows as possible.

And so it should not have caused any great panic to give my my little bowing experiment a try.

Swinging requires fighting against the physics of the instrument (on top of going against the strong emphasis on evenness in their modern classical training). Go back to short, light, tapered bows, and uneven 8ths become the default.

Modern string players have been drilled on more unnatural rhythmic and accenting oddities than "swing".

I think the problem, when there is one, is more that they are not seriously familiar with what they are trying to sound like than a limitation of the axe. They've heard it but not noticed it.

[AndrewMeronek]

Can anyone think of or find an example of big band writing or recording where the quarter notes aren't meant to be played short or long, but somewhere in between?

Hmmm, there might be some of that going on here, but I've never actually seen what the Kenton band was reading:



It can also sometimes be tough with the Kenton recordings to really hear note lengths because they liked to overload the recordings with reverb. Which I don't like.

A while ago I attempted a transcription of this and now listening again . . . yeah, I did some glaring errors. I guess (at least) I've gotten better at it over the years. I think.

[EriKon]

It's not on YouTube but I think some of the late Bob Brookmeyer stuff is played quite long but not full value. This is also what I learned back when I played in national/local youth bigbands. (edit: in terms of how to play Brookmeyer charts)

This would be the best example that comes to mind to me at the moment:
Bob Brookmeyer - Dance For Life https://share.google/84UNIax1lGyf9cVUr

[Wilktone]

Can anyone think of or find an example of big band writing or recording where the quarter notes aren't meant to be played short or long, but somewhere in between?

Hmmm, there might be some of that going on here, but I've never actually seen what the Kenton band was reading:

It can also sometimes be tough with the Kenton recordings to really hear note lengths because they liked to overload the recordings with reverb. Which I don't like.

A while ago I attempted a transcription of this and now listening again . . . yeah, I did some glaring errors. I guess (at least) I've gotten better at it over the years. I think.

I hear what you're talking about in that, but also agree that it's dripping with reverb and that makes it harder to hear. It probably also needs to be interpreted in the context of the time period, who the arranger was, etc.

With some Kenton charts the length of quarter notes seem to me more distinctly long or short.





There's a couple of excerpts from Limehouse Blues, arranged by Bill Holman.

It's not on YouTube but I think some of the late Bob Brookmeyer stuff is played quite long but not full value. This is also what I learned back when I played in national/local youth bigbands. (edit: in terms of how to play Brookmeyer charts)

This would be the best example that comes to mind to me at the moment:
Bob Brookmeyer - Dance For Life https://share.google/84UNIax1lGyf9cVUr

That reminded me of Brookmeyer's arrangement of Skylark. There's one moment in there where the quarter notes start short and soft and get progressively louder and a touch longer, without going full tenuto. This is how it is notated in the published chart.



Here's that moment.

And so it should not have caused any great panic to give my little bowing experiment a try.

If there is enough time to experiment with the group, it's nice to have your original idea and your corrected music both there to see which works better. That said, it's usually a good idea to take what a string player says about idiomatic string writing seriously. Have you ever had a chance to ask a string player to try bowing like you were asking for, just to hear what the results are?

The line with a slur over it I would play long except the 1st note with the ^ over it. If I transcribed that Basie recording I would put dots over the quarters. To me, a slur indicates both phrasing and style - so the quarters aren't "unmarked."

But mayne that's my classical background talking.

Right, I agree with you about the slur. I would probably use ^ instead of dots over the quarter notes personally. I don't know why the publisher (or Sammy Nestico) put a slur over that phrase, it really doesn't do anything for the way the performers will play it. I guess if you're sight reading this chart and don't already know it (what rock would you be living under?) you'd have to pick up the articulation from context clues and following the rest of the section.

The Limehouse Blues excerpt above is how I prefer to use slurs, when the quarter notes are meant to be played connected.

To return to the original question, I can't think of any particular example where a tenuto mark is meant to be played less than full value.

[JTeagarden]

Since when is an unmarked quarter note short?

In a dance band/big band setting, I think Alan Raph would have said the default is that unmarked quarter notes are to be played short:

Alan Raph Rules.png

I checked out this "quarter notes short" rule against original charts to say 1950, and it seemed to hold true most of the time, but this began to break down as a universal rule for charts writeen later.

[AndrewMeronek]

That Alan Raph page says "dance band music" but I'd say even for period music that is specifically for medium-to-fast tempo swing music. Dance bands often cover many more styles than that. It's part of the challenge of getting good at being a dance band: knowing all the different stylistic quirks.

Polkas? Probably also obey the "unmarked quarter = short" rule.
Bossa Novas? Unmarked quarters may very well be longer.
Jazz "belt buckle rubbing" ballads? Unmarked quarters are definitely long.

Good dance bands will spend the time to mark up parts so subs have a better shot at correct reading. Tenuto markings included!

[harrisonreed]

Since when is an unmarked quarter note short?

Implied short (and accented) if quarter notes are off beats in swing, right? The dang eighth note will be longer than the quarters. For example:

20250806_102402.jpg

I would play all those short in a big band chart, given no articulation otherwise.

The question from the OP is loaded. A tenuto in an orchestral excerpt is different from a tenuto in a march, which is different from a tenuto in a big band chart, which is different from the tenuto marks in a method book trying to teach legato.

[Wilktone]

The question from the OP is loaded. A tenuto in an orchestral excerpt is different from a tenuto in a march, which is different from a tenuto in a big band chart, which is different from the tenuto marks in a method book trying to teach legato.

Sure, we did cover this briefly before we went down this tangent about unmarked quarter notes in big band.

But just to turn it around, Harrison, which of the examples you mentioned would the tenuto NOT be played full value?

While I can think of examples where composers/arrangers/editors intended a tenuto to be played with some accents, I can't think of any examples where the length of the note would be anything other than full value.

[harrisonreed]

A tenuto with a staccato under it would not be played full value. Even though the definition says, full value but with separation from the following note. That's just a conflict of interests. If there is separation, it's not full value.



Still one of the most confusing articulations I've seen, and I do understand what it means.

[AtomicClock]

And a tenuto under a slur would be ... more than full value?

[tbdana]

Sticking with the big band thread drift, while it's canon that swing/funk/rock/latin quarter notes are played short unless otherwise marked, I think the better practice is to mark every quarter note you write to avoid exactly the kind of argument going on in this thread. Clarity is the goal, right? Mark the damn quarter notes.

That said, most of the time the context will dictate length to anyone with big band experience. It's those occasional "wobblers" that could go either way that really need clarification.

Otherwise, tenuto is tenuto. Playing notes too long is far less of a problem in the real world than playing notes too short.

[tbdana]

And a tenuto under a slur would be ... more than full value?

Ha! No, it would be full value played as a phrase. In that instance the "slur" is more of a phrase marking than an instruction not to tongue.

[Wilktone]

A tenuto with a staccato under it would not be played full value.

That's not strictly considered a tenuto, that's portato. Maybe. It probably depends on who you ask.

There is, in fact, a specific notation that is different from tenuto that means long but separated: portato.

I haven't been able to find much online about how articulations came to be what they are, but I recall hearing that many articulations were written to indicate a specific bowing technique. For example, portato would be played by keeping the bow direction the same, but pulsing slightly on the beginning of the note. So the string portato might be more accurately described as "connected but with a gentle attack."

Implied short (and accented) if quarter notes are off beats in swing, right? The dang eighth note will be longer than the quarters. For example:

20250806_102402.jpg

Oh man, I hate seeing things written out this way. It goes against what I expect to read.

Personally, I prefer to see the middle of the measure. The tied note across the bar line is also problematic, since it can read on first glance as if it should be a longer note. In the concert I mentioned above (which happened last Sunday) there was one composer who wanted offbeat short notes but he wrote them as two 8th notes tied together. Even with the ^ accent he put over the note the band was still playing the note too long, it took rehearsal time to fix it.

Personally, I think I would probably notate it like the first measure in this example, but the other two measure also work pretty well, I think. I might change the ^ to > accents over 8th notes followed by a rest, but I believe that the ^ accent is considered the standard big band way.

For clarity, I'm assuming swing style, big band context. If in a symphonic context there's a different standard practice that would affect how it probably should be written.

I'm curious, out of the original example posted by Harrison and the three alternate ways to notate this figure, which do you all prefer?

[ithinknot]

I'm curious, out of the original example posted by Harrison and the three alternate ways to notate this figure, which do you all prefer?

If the premise is that D/C/B/A are the same articulation/length, then your number 1 is good, Harrison's is less so but comprehensible in the light of convention, and 2 and 3 are intolerable.

[Wilktone]

I think the better practice is to mark every quarter note you write to avoid exactly the kind of argument going on in this thread. Clarity is the goal, right? Mark the damn quarter notes.

Amen! Please tell all my big band composer friends about this so they stop writing this...



...

When they want this...



Here's another one I recently had to play.



Medium swing tune. The composer wanted the quarter notes full value.

Here's another one.



This one is problematic because in a swing context this sort of figure might be separated or they might be full value. Or "portato," not quite short not quite full value.

In my humble opinion, even with great big band players arrangers take a risk of having the articulations played differently by different people in the section, at least during the initial reading.

*steps off soap box*

[Wilktone]

If the premise is that D/C/Bb/A are the same articulation/length, then your number 1 is good, Harrison's is less so but comprehensible in the light of convention, and 2 and 3 are intolerable.

What makes 2 and 3 intolerable for you? If it's because the ^ marked quarter notes imply a longer pitch than the 8th note, I do agree with you that it's less clear (which is why I prefer the first measure that I posted). That said, it is the big band convention that a quarter note and 8th note both marked with a short articulation (whether it's a dot or ^) are to be played a similar length. In big band, this is a common figure:



The Evan Rogers resource I link to above comments for a bit on this rhythm. He wrote, "You’d expect the 1/4 note to be held for full length in most other styles, but here, following the long-short rule, the 1/4 note is played short. There is no need for a staccato dot on the 1/4 note, and no need to write it as an 8th note instead."

But I tend to agree with you there, ithinknot.

Dave

[ithinknot]

As a standalone gesture (eighth/quarter/eighth), it's pretty unproblematic. But when we're talking about four in a row of the same length, the alternation is visually annoying. That being said, I'll backtrack far enough to say that your option 3 wouldn't be disturbing encountered in the wild and the intention is entirely clear (but, given the choice, 1 is obviously better). I might even allow that 3 is preferable to Harrison's because the middle of the bar stays visible, though there's not much in it either way.

2 definitely stinks, though - it's not obviously four of the same thing, and the repeated alternation is misleading at first glance (you start thinking about pairs).

[Savio]

I have not read all the above comments, just the examples. It means full value yes. But some styles, composers or genre can vary. Even bands, symphony orchestra, conductors vary. When I see all the examples above I would say one thing. We adopt to the musical environment where we play in the moment.

I think all the other markings are more subjective like marcato or Staccatissimo , even more when there are no markings. What about legato?

But tenuto means full value yes.

Leif

[Doug Elliott]

I don't ever want to see 8th note 8th rest if a quarter with a dot will suffice. The rule about splitting a bar in the middle doesn't count if it's something as obvious as eighth quarter quarter quarter eighth. And without dots I would play the quarters long. If you want them short put dots on them. Housetops generally mean short AND accented, but I prefer to see both a ^ and a dot if that's what's intended.

In a big band, follow what the lead trumpet does.

I want consistency - that stuff about quarters short but anything longer is full value is BS.

[harrisonreed]

A tenuto with a staccato under it would not be played full value.

That's not strictly considered a tenuto, that's portato. Maybe. It probably depends on who you ask.

Implied short (and accented) if quarter notes are off beats in swing, right? The dang eighth note will be longer than the quarters. For example:

20250806_102402.jpg

Oh man, I hate seeing things written out this way. It goes against what I expect to read.

Personally, I prefer to see the middle of the measure. The tied note across the bar line is also problematic, since it can read on first glance as if it should be a longer note. In the concert I mentioned above (which happened last Sunday) there was one composer who wanted offbeat short notes but he wrote them as two 8th notes tied together. Even with the ^ accent he put over the note the band was still playing the note too long, it took rehearsal time to fix it.

Personally, I think I would probably notate it like the first measure in this example, but the other two measure also work pretty well, I think. I might change the ^ to > accents over 8th notes followed by a rest, but I believe that the ^ accent is considered the standard big band way.

For clarity, I'm assuming swing style, big band context. If in a symphonic context there's a different standard practice that would affect how it probably should be written.

I'm curious, out of the original example posted by Harrison and the three alternate ways to notate this figure, which do you all prefer?

Portato, tomato. It definitely looks like a tenuto mark is there somewhere. You asked, I delivered!

As for the short quarters on up beats in big band charts ... Sometimes you get a nice ^ accent. But sometimes not. I used to not like it, but then I got used to it.

What you have in the quoted image, with the 8th rests, is counterintuitive to the style of writing. It's not right. It's also in the wrong engraving font, so it will trick people into playing like squares. 2 and 3 are out completely for me.

[harrisonreed]

Here's another one.



This one is problematic because in a swing context this sort of figure might be separated or they might be full value. Or "portato," not quite short not quite full value.

In my humble opinion, even with great big band players arrangers take a risk of having the articulations played differently by different people in the section, at least during the initial reading.

*steps off soap box*

The one with the accent is the only full value quarter there.

[Doug Elliott]

That's just stupid writing.

[tbdana]

I don't ever want to see 8th note 8th rest if a quarter with a dot will suffice. The rule about splitting a bar in the middle doesn't count if it's something as obvious as eighth quarter quarter quarter eighth. And without dots I would play the quarters long. If you want them short put dots on them. Housetops generally mean short AND accented, but I prefer to see both a ^ and a dot if that's what's intended.

In a big band, follow what the lead trumpet does.

[TomInME]

Gah... Maybe some understanding of the historical traditions and writing/reading conventions would be useful before any attempts at composing "in the style of"?

The big band players I know wouldn't know what you meant by the word "tenuto". "Oh, you mean that line over the note? Yeah, lines are long, man."

[TomInME]

Btw: not-formally-trained jazz composers writing for legit groups are usually smart enough to write in 12/8. The reverse is less often true.

[TomInME]

Here's another one.



This one is problematic because in a swing context this sort of figure might be separated or they might be full value. Or "portato," not quite short not quite full value.

In my humble opinion, even with great big band players arrangers take a risk of having the articulations played differently by different people in the section, at least during the initial reading.

*steps off soap box*

The one with the accent is the only full value quarter there.

Maybe. Some writers use the sideways accent for short quarters. But most writers don't, which is what makes it bad.

As far as the length of all the other quarters, context and the overall feel of the piece are really informative. Gentle latin? Those are all long, and the accented note might actually be shorter. Up-tempo swing? Quite short. Slow, hard swing? Those are fat.

[TomInME]

Wouldn't that line be played differently if it was Bach vs Bruckner? Same idea. Big bands don't play a single style any more than orchestras do.

[Doug Elliott]

At some point there has to be standardization.

In big band wtiting > means long, not short.

[harrisonreed]

At some point there has to be standardization.

In big band wtiting > means long, not short.

^^^

Yessir.

This whole thread gives me pause especially since nearly all of the examples are not written in the correct font. That screams "arranger/writer has no idea what genre they are in or how to write for it".

Sure, I've heard that on the studio scene a lot of studio charts are not put in the correct font lately ... But those are not the examples we are seeing here.

Conventions (such as > meaning "long") don't stop being conventions just because you've never played real big band charts or learned the conventions.

[AndrewMeronek]

Adding that another convention that can clarify for some people who don't understand what "full value" means even if they connect that idea to tenuto markings: writing "-2" or "-3" (or etc.) after a note to make crystal clear that the note is held and cut off on the beginning of beat 2 (or 3 or etc.). This works when a full value note leads into a rest. But it doesn't help people who get confused and play with separation on a sequence of notes with tenuto markings . . .