You don't need to think about numbers in order to keep a consistent rhythm
Dancing On3
- Thread starter Chris_Yannick
- Start date
I have narrated this incident before. Years ago, a regular gentleman on the scene who has probably dancing longer than many people's age at the festival posed a question. "give me a good reason why I should only dance on particular beat" he meant why should people only break on particular count. He said he doesn't subscribe to it and in his dancing never bothered about adhering to it. He was a popular dancer and was above average in his dancing skills. He didn't dance cuban.
I told him there is no logical reason if that is what he was asking me and he can surely dance on anything he wished. That it was only a convention and there wasn't much musically or dance wise that dictates on which bear he should dance.
I am sure he knew all the arguments and was baiting me
I didn't take the bait but have always thought he had a valid question.P.S. - he was adamant about not being religious about the beat when dancing within same song.
1derpalm
Son Montuno
But rhythm is time and time is metered. My point is if you take 6 steps over 8 beats in 2 bars of music, or syncopated more steps to be in time to step again with the appropriate foot on a specific beat every time it's basically the same IMO.
I would say that tapping the foot can be considered a form of counting but not exactly the same. I rather think of tapping as a form of personal expression. Everybody's tapping will be different. Some will tap and count at the same time. Some will tap and sing. Others will tap rhythms. I consider myself the latter. But I do not count numbers when I tap my foot.
For a beginner musician, learning how to read the size of the notes is useful.
I would say it also depends on the genre you play.
In classical, you stick to the counts for the most part and it's seen as normal to do so.
In Jazz, you begin to play with syncopations and you no longer count numbers (because it's too hard to count syncopated numbers) and instead you sing/tap rhythms.
I think of Salsa dancing more like Jazz music than classical.
Counting in the beginning is fine, but later on it becomes a crutch more than a tool.
Last edited:
I have a personal experience with sight reading.
I learned how to play the piano by the Suzuki method, which is learning by mimicry and not by reading. So I didn't learn how to read music but I could still play the piano well. I learned how to count of course, but it was a little bit different compared to reading sheet music. If you are able to internalize the rhythms, you can get by with minimal counting.
Once I learned how to sight read, my ability to internalize music severely diminished. I felt my creativity being hampered. I was told that it was necessary to learn how to sight read, but I think that statement is grossly exaggerated.
I think sight reading is a useful tool, but I wonder how much benefit there is for it beyond composition. I think it could actually be a crutch for someone who aspires to learn how to internalize music, which also includes being able to understand rhythms.
I loved playing Jazz for this reason. You couldn't just go strictly by the sheet music to understand Jazz rhythms. You had to learn how to "feel" it. As infuriating as that sounds to some people, it's a true statement.
A comparable analogy is that you can't learn how to swing in Jazz by counting numbers. In dance, you can't learn how to swing by counting 123, 567 either. There will be exceptions, but generally I find that counting as a way to learn rhythms is bad.
@Latinjazz, I would be interested to hear your opinion on this.
Last edited:
You are just talking semantics then... You can define having an internal sense of rhythm as "counting", sure. What I specifically was talking about in my post is that counting out the numbers (e.g., 123, 567), no need to make it a discussion whether your internal sense of rhythm counts as counting or not.
I would probably give him the answer that the beat corresponds to some instrument. Dancing to the instrument of choice is synonymous to dancing to the beat, which is clearly defined by the musician. If he wants to change that beat throughout the song because he instead chooses to follow a different instrument, then I wouldn't argue against it.
But if he is changing the beat willy-nilly without any regard to any rhythm or instrument, then I will definitely call him out on it.
Since you say his dancing is good and that he is popular, then his partners must be able to follow him well enough not to get confused. So he's probably following some standard convention of counting that everyone else subscribes to.
I always say I dance to the music, but I know that internally I'm dancing to a beat and that beat corresponds to some number. As long as I transmit that information clearly to my partner, then we won't have any problems dancing together.
Last edited:
1derpalm
Son Montuno
But even in bebop, Charlie Parker would go to Dizzy's house at 4 am and play at his door and Diz would transcribe it on Staff paper for him. So even then the notation was important. Plus Duke Ellington made all his player site read. No improve (rather, rarely). And the aforementioned Tito Puente as well.
P.s. I agree that staying hard to the counting at all times is a hindrance pater, counting in and if itself isn't inherently had because, well, musicians count.
But dancing with people with a very inconsistent step who say "I'm dancing to thd music" but they cant hold a beat are no more dancing to the music than someone who is counting the beat in their head but knows how to accent, etc., while maintaining a consistent break step.
1derpalm
Son Montuno
Logical argument. I guess for the last statement that is where my disagreement comes in. Counting helped me understand latin music and rhythm, internalize it and properly express myself to it. In so far as I can Express myself. Admittedly the proper movement for the "Swing step" and what you call the Palo step is difficult for me, because then I fall off timing, but I danced to simple dance bests for so long that without counting I couldn't do it either. Probably worse actually.
Some musicians count, some don't. What does that have to do with dancing? Two separate things.
Also, what does having an inconsistent step have to do with anything? If they can't stay on beat, they will still be inconsistent if they start counting in their head.
What you seem to be saying is basically that you need to be consistent with the rhythm. I don't think anyody disagrees with that.
1derpalm
Son Montuno
I mean that's actually my arguement. Whether you count 234 678 or say koong koong pop, you say within structure, and SHOUKD know that pop Is the second beat, so there is no difference either than just saying "I dont count, I dance to the music " which to me is the same
Yeah, sight reading/notation is required when you compose and transcribe music. Though my music teacher also taught me the importance of transcribing by ear since when you go jamming with other musicians, they won't always have sheet music and can't be bothered to write stuff down for you. This kind of ear training IMO is more useful than knowing how to sight read. But I digress.
I count the same way as a dancer as I do when I play music. I listen for patterns and rhythms. I replace all numbers with sound. It's counting but at the same time it's not.
I agree with this. If you can't hold a beat, then you're likely going to confuse your partner. A good dancer will know how to keep a beat. I don't care how they count, as long as they hold a beat.
As I stated before, I don't mind if someone wants to change the break step during a song as long as it's consistent with something. If changing the break step doesn't correspond to any cue in the music and they're just doing it for no reason, then that's wrong and is venturing into free-form dancing. Salsa music is structured, so your dancing should reflect that as well.
Last edited:
1derpalm
Son Montuno
I am of the Jiel and Maria view that you are the physical embodiment of the musicians so as such should be counting ,(or have thd underdtanding( as such.
[/QUOTE]
Also, what does having an inconsistent step have to do with anything? If they can't stay on beat, they will still be inconsistent if they start counting in their head.
[/QUOTE]
A LOF if experienced with... follows of a certain background with horrendous rhythm telling me they just dance to the music.
[/QUOTE]
What you seem to be saying is basically that you need to be consistent with the rhythm. I don't think anyody disagrees with that.
[/QUOTE]
To ne the mostceffdctive way to gave consistent rhythm. Is to understand 8t which means be able to count out the rhythm since it is metered. When you can stay consistently with 6 steps within 8 beats, then you can free up your brain to start taking liberties. It take hardly any time, it may take lots 9f time. Depends on the person.
Well then according to your definition, the Cubans and South Americans who stay on beat but do not count numbers actually DO count.
But when we say they don't count we mean they don't count numbers
1derpalm
Son Montuno
I agree with all the above statements You must admit though.. you probably counted early on. Then if you have a good teacher, they replace the counts with the corresponding sound which gives you a better relationship to the instrument
1derpalm
Son Montuno
Yes. Rather they understand the rules of 3 steps withing 4 beats.Well then according to your definition, the Cubans and South Americans who stay on beat but do not count numbers actually DO count.
But when we say they don't count we mean they don't count numbers
I did count both as a dancer and as a musician. I taught myself how to listen to the instruments. I'm still baffled as to why I still can't stay on reverse On2 for an entire song lol. I have an internal compass that directs me to go back on 2 and forward on 6 when connected with a partner.
Consequently, On3 is much easier for me to dance to.
1derpalm
Son Montuno
Interesting. I have a harder time leading on the back rock in on 2.