A rant against the current Mambo establishment

Thinking further ir seems people redefine smooth to mean what they want. The fun of on2 is syncopation /going against music. You don't want smooth, if you choose this style. You want to accent steps, be a bit jumpy, play with each others balance. For smooth you should get as circular as possible. And then basic is just timing for weight transfers. Most of mass travels without breaks.
 
granrey said:
the thing is I'm having enough fun with On1 and On2 while I can feel some differences. They dont mean much to me.

However, what really puzzles me is this. Is that ET sort of came up with a product like iPhone did to BlackBerry but by doing minor changes.


If I'm getting the story correctly by the time ET came up with the On2 sequence. What was there was On1 and Mambo. On1 and Mambo are the same sequence separated by a beat. or simply saying the pause is at opposite ends of the secuence. However, people see these two as totally different dances.

ET wanted to change the On1 sequence to have the flavor of Mambo. So he changed the location of the pause plus the starting step to be the walk step.

Such a simple change for most people seems like a brand new product or a totally different dance. They dont see the actual changes he did but somehow they see other things like: rhythm, melody, instruments, symcopations, clave 2/3, congas, they are so different as an apple to an orange, etc. Seriously, things that will not take you anywhere.....

Also learning On2 would not show me any more substantial differences. When actual famous dancers and teachers cannot say in simple words what the the differences are (because they are focusing on all the wrong things like melody, rhythm, etc). This will not help me either.

In case someone still does not understand. Let's say we do to Bachata what ET did to salsa.


I want you to think just for this example "Pause" in Salsa is the equivalent as the tap in Bachata.

So this is On1 bachata (imagine salsa on1):
heading to left: walk, walk walk, Tap.
So this is On2 Bachata (Imagine Mambo):
heading to the left: Tap, walk, walk, walk.

Notice, the difference is the Tap has changed location.


Here comes ET and says hey I want to give to Bachata On1, the Bachata On2 feeling. Let me change something:

starting to the left: walk, Tap.
then move to right: walk, walk

then when people are looking for the differences, they will start saying things like: dancing to the rhythm, the melody, syconpation, they are different as orange to an apple, etc...............
Click to expand...

Ok well you want to know what the big deal about On2 is. If you're not willing to immerse yourself in it to find out, then you obviously aren't that interested. If you are, then immerse yourself. It can't hurt?

Dance is more than just mathematics - I hope you realise that. If you're not willing to immerse yourself in On2 to find out why people like it, then my advice would be to not even bother writing these posts. The *only* reason you'd be writing them, without any willingness to immerse yourself, is to troll. Sorry for being blunt.
 
Smejmoon said:
Thinking further ir seems people redefine smooth to mean what they want. The fun of on2 is syncopation /going against music. You don't want smooth, if you choose this style. You want to accent steps, be a bit jumpy, play with each others balance. For smooth you should get as circular as possible. And then basic is just timing for weight transfers. Most of mass travels without breaks.
Click to expand...

Talking about us2 or eu2 ?
 
LarsM said:
You've also danced for 5 more years, which is pretty huge! Think there's a certain degree of conflating correlation and causation in your thought process here. I'm not advocating against branching out obviously, but I would bet any amount that you'd be able to adjust to more people with "just" dancing salsa on2 for 5 years too.
Click to expand...

That's quite possible. It's difficult to say where I'd be now if I only danced On2 these last 5 years.

The thing is - I'm logging a lot more hours on the dance floor because I dance Cuban/On1/Bachata a lot more.

If I'd only stuck with On2, I would not have exposed myself to as wide a range of partners.

I definitely think that mixing up dancing styles is good for making quick adjustments on the fly while social dancing. Had I only dance On2 and nothing else for 5 years, I would not have known what to do with a Cuban dancer. Actually, I'm sure I'd be worse at adjusting since the first time I danced Cuban was after learning On1/On2 for 6 years, then when I was finally exposed to a Cuban party, I couldn't adjust at all since I was not familiar with the way of leading/following. I still dance a hybrid style of linear/Cuban, but that's better than dancing strictly On2.
 
Jag75 said:
I hope you realise that. If you're not willing to immerse yourself in On2 to find out why people like it, then my advice would be to not even bother writing these posts.
Click to expand...

He actually is immersing himself by writing these posts. He's doing more research on the subject than anybody and has even said he tried dancing On2 recently with his gf and noticed how smoother it felt.

I'm not a mathematical person, but I appreciate the effort.

However, I do agree that he should be more open to what others are saying, especially to those with more experience.
 
terence said:
And how does one quantify that ?. The subject matter has been discussed by experts over the years.. It is NOT confined to salsa. All partnership dance's have had the same/similar discussions .

This, now, has reached the point of "Paralysis by Analysis ".
Click to expand...

Can someone please share what have the experts say? it is the same thing? or On2 is better because?


this has been discussed for years on this forum and it would be very interesting if someone share what is better

This is an expert


Even teachers and pro dancers cannot say why. Why? because most likely is a bunch of little features and each person might be drawn to On2 for one of a combination of them.

For those saying is the syconpation or certain instruments. While this might be true to some people that like On2. this cannot be the answer to most people.

As mentioned I have tried the On2 secuence without the music and still my partner liked it more than On1. Again, it's just one sample but I'm confident this can be repeated with other people.

If you compare a TV from 2018 vs a TV from 1960 and you say: "people like today's TV because of the sound".

You can mute both TVs and if people still they like the 2018 more than 1960 then there are other things more than the sound itself.

A blind person would not care if the TV has colors

A deaf person will not care about the sound.

A person without internet will not care if the TV is smart or not.

A person in a country with 2 channels will not care if the TV can infinite amount of channels.

And so on and this might be the same situation with On2 and On1.

On2 has two steps going in the same direction. On1 has only one. This has repercussions.
 
vit said:
Obviously. What granrey is trying to do is to understand some things in dancing using elementary school science and trying to convince himself and others that his direction is right, which is not, leading to much fruitless discussion about nothing
Click to expand...
lmao I just joined this forum. you guys have been the same discussion for many years basing it on music and still not getting anywhere.

Want to see the difference between On1 and On2 in another aspect of life? see this video.

If you understand this video and see the difference between the two approaches, you might understand.

 
Gumercindo said:
jeezus dude, another volleyball analogy? You sure process things in an odd way! :)
Click to expand...

you can pick anything. lol

pitcher, a quaterback, a jabline thrower, etc. According to the logic here.
these guys would do better or feel better if they do their maneuvers while being syncopated with music........or listening to the congas, cleaves, etc

Tell this to someone and see what they think.


Why do you think a teacher teaches you a move without music first? why when you want concentration or lost an address while driving people turn off the radio? why would they risk of losing the help of syconpation? or not listening to the instruments?


For instance, this is a Capoeira ginga secuence. very similar to On1 (Cumbia step) break step, step in place and walk step and it is done with music.
I repeat is not identical and is not a video from Eddie Torres.


the music on capoeira this was used as a deceit to say the fights was a dance. As fighting was prohibited when this art was invented.

You might say, why not an On2 secuence like a boxer? I speculate the ginga is done in a circle. Taking two steps forward or back does not seem prudent in regards of space plus it has to look like dancing not a fight.

Anyhow, you are saying, he cannot fight without music because he is not sincopated.

this is a video of a capoeira fighter .

Notice he still does his ginga (similar to On1 Cumbia). However, his powerful attacks typically come when he does the two step approach (On2). Again, no music is being played (he is not syncopated)



The question are these?

is there a difference between On1 and On2 on this Capoeira fighter?

Does the music plays a factor?
 
granrey said:
Why do you think a teacher teaches you a move without music first? why would they risk of losing the help of syconpation? or not listening to the instruments?
Click to expand...

Thats easy, when music runs you have to do it on time to the music or else you confuse some students ( it seems some can "dance" to a different beat even when music is audible, I get a headache) ) .
So you would need very slow music, but even then you cannot slow down a tricky part even more to add explanation. After you get the idea of the steps or whatever, music helps a lot to do it right and smooth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top