quick-quick-slow OR slow-quick-quick? Why?

[hyh]

No worries. In all fairness, there is not a single person on here that I have spoken to about learning on2 that no longer wants to dance on1. I think we just want to be more versatile dancers hence that thread and the sharing of knowledge/experience.

Anyway, what do you reckon? quick-quick-slow or slow-quick-quick?

Hasn't it been established already?

In any case, it should be quick-quick-slow. I think that's the case for On1-LA, On2-ET and On2-Palladium and probably for most if not all other styles - the difference is on which beat it starts.

 

[Flujo]

Anyway, what do you reckon? quick-quick-slow or slow-quick-quick?

Hasn't it been established already?

In any case, it should be quick-quick-slow. I think that's the case for On1-LA, On2-ET and On2-Palladium and probably for most if not all other styles - the difference is on which beat it starts.

Ok. So am I wrong in assuming that if the quick-quick-slow starts on bar two then in relation to the actual count (i.e. 123 567) it goes
1_____2_____3 5_____6_____7
slow-quick-quick slow-quick-quick

? HELP!
:doh: lol

Actually, just found the answer: - (through the magical wonder of search)

Yeah, but you can steal the time from either the pause-beat behind or the one ahead.

You can steal the front of the 8 to extend your 7, or the back of the 8 to extend your 1.

Likewise you can steal the front of the 4 to extend your 3, or the back of the 4 to extend your 5.

If you always steal the front of the pause beat, you get quick-quick-slow.

If you always steal the back of the pause beat, you get slow-quick-quick.

Can do this on either timing but I agree that on2 there was a tendency to steal from the back of the 8 to extend the 1, whereas on1 there was a tendency to steal from the front of the 4 to extend the 3. Not sure why, might be a dance-culture thing again.

And I definitely agree with rjoe that grinding into the 2 and 6 is a big part of the feel of the on2 basic. Somehow I can't grind into the 1 and 5 with the same amount of oomph; might be just me though.

Thanks noobster. That explains it! Can finally stop tearing my imaginary hair out.

 

[terence]

QQS is the rhythm ( speed ) of the alotted time given to each bar of music in the octave-- it is consistently so, unless changed as in syncopations within the framework .

The value-slow=2 beats -quick= 1 beat --- total 4 beats==1 bar

 

[chr]

QQS is the rhythm ( speed ) of the alotted time given to each bar of music in the octave-- it is consistently so, unless changed as in syncopations within the framework .

The value-slow=2 beats -quick= 1 beat --- total 4 beats==1 bar

That would be the mathematically correct answer.

OTOH, the hard to grasp (for me) part is to create an feel of "slow-quick-quick" for ET2, which is according to all of my instructors is the only correct way. I got independently corrected by different private instructors, telling me that my feel is way too "QQS" rather than the anticipated "SQQ".

After several months I still have a problem reproducing that feel, but I can feel it once I am becklead and can keep it consistently during that song and it is definitely not on 3, since my break step accents the first "PA" in the "uhmm PA pa" of the clave.

 

[terence]

QQS is the rhythm ( speed ) of the alotted time given to each bar of music in the octave-- it is consistently so, unless changed as in syncopations within the framework .

The value-slow=2 beats -quick= 1 beat --- total 4 beats==1 bar

That would be the mathematically correct answer.

OTOH, the hard to grasp (for me) part is to create an feel of "slow-quick-quick" for ET2, which is according to all of my instructors is the only correct way. I got independently corrected by different private instructors, telling me that my feel is way too "QQS" rather than the anticipated "SQQ"

The interpretation of music is purely an individual taste-- but when teaching ,we have to have a guide line--- this is standard in ALL forms of dance.
you are still applying the " break" action on a Q Q-- whether you get there early late or otherwise, you have to stay within that time frame--or-- be out of sync. with the music-- ya know-- off time

 

[hyh]

Come on people! This should not be hard!

QQS is the rhythm ( speed ) of the alotted time given to each bar of music in the octave-- it is consistently so, unless changed as in syncopations within the framework .

The value-slow=2 beats -quick= 1 beat --- total 4 beats==1 bar

See above! There it is! That's your answer! Q=1 beat and S=2 beats.

On1
1 Q. 2 Q. 3 S. -- 5 Q. 6 Q. 7 S.

On2 ET
1 Q. 2 Q. 3 S. -- 5 Q. 6 Q. 7 S.

The difference between On1 and On2-ET is feet positioning. e.g. when you're pausing during beats 4 and 8.

On2 Palladium

2 Q. 3 Q. 4 S. -- 6 Q. 7 Q. 8 S.

Palladium/POW2 starts and ends 1 beat later.

You're not dancing on something like 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 <- that would be SQQ! I won't get into fractions/decimals (syncopations).

 

[Flujo]

QQS is the rhythm ( speed ) of the alotted time given to each bar of music in the octave-- it is consistently so, unless changed as in syncopations within the framework .

The value-slow=2 beats -quick= 1 beat --- total 4 beats==1 bar

That would be the mathematically correct answer.

OTOH, the hard to grasp (for me) part is to create an feel of "slow-quick-quick" for ET2, which is according to all of my instructors is the only correct way. I got independently corrected by different private instructors, telling me that my feel is way too "QQS" rather than the anticipated "SQQ".

After several months I still have a problem reproducing that feel, but I can feel it once I am becklead and can keep it consistently during that song and it is definitely not on 3, since my break step accents the first "PA" in the "uhmm PA pa" of the clave.

Thanks Terrence! This has been driving me nuts. Now I have two answers to the same question. QQS relates to the number of counts the steps take up within the structure of the bar and is a constant that spans the different styles. Now I understand what you were trying to tell me before. SQQ is about trying to communicate a way of working around the QQS structure to add a different spin or feeling, in a sense breaking or at the very least bending the rules.

@chr I'm so glad you chimed in on this one. When smiling started this thread I assumed it was the same 'feel of the steps' he was talking about. Ya see, this is what these forums are all about. You sometimes disagree with each other on certain things, get a little worked up, then come out the other side a more knowledgeable people.
Speaking of that. Come on smiling...you got anything out of these recent posts?

In regards to getting the feel try this:
Instead of stepping precisely on the 1 and 5 counts, try stepping on the 4& and 8& counts (a half beat early) or you could try one beat early depending on the track. That should give you the SQQ feeling of ET2 your instructors were talking about. Can anyone else put this a better way? Is that clear?

Come on people! This should not be hard!

Shouldn't it? I must be slow then. No wonder it took 3 weeks to learn the cross body lead all those months ago.

 

[chr]

In regards to getting the feel try this:
Instead of stepping precisely on the 1 and 5 counts, try stepping on the 4& and 8& counts (a half beat early) or you could try one beat early depending on the track. That should give you the SQQ feeling of ET2 your instructors were talking about. Can anyone else put this a better way? Is that clear?

I have heard that suggestion several times, but mathematically it could explain only "slow-quick-slow" not "slow-quick-quick".

When I asked one of my private instructors, whether I should hurry the 1 or delay the 2 to get the SQQ feel she said neither. Still, I would not be surprised if she would have a somewhat fuzzy timing for the "1" step.

I am much more inclined to think that the difference mostly due to the way the steps are made: the 1 step being soft and fuzzy, while the 2 and 3 snappier, making them feel more like quick-quick. Still, the 3 should not be as snappy as the 2, so again, it is unclear to me why should it feel "SQQ" rather than "SQS".

Still, again, when I dance with a good partner, I can't dany that ET2 has this "SQQ" feel and also that I can change my way of dancing in a way that it will feel QQS to both of us, so there seems to be an objective reality to it, but it is hard to put my finger on the cause of it.

 

[terence]

".

Still, again, when I dance with a good partner, I can't dany that ET2 has this "SQQ" feel and also that I can change my way of dancing in a way that it will feel QQS to both of us, so there seems to be an objective reality to it, but it is hard to put my finger on the cause of it.

Heres the reason why-- You PREP your start with a slow count-- thats ONLY the introduction .
When you get more confident in your timing, try commencing break on a Q ( R foot back ) this will set up your qqs sequence.

Or-- start fwd break on your left foot on a q ( 2nd bar )

 

[hyh]

Come on people! This should not be hard!

Shouldn't it? I must be slow then. No wonder it took 3 weeks to learn the cross body lead all those months ago.

It took me more than 3 weeks to learn the cross body.

All I'm saying is that Q=1 beat, S=2 beats is a basic definition/assumption in dance lexicon - although I suppose I don't think any instructor (ballroom uses Q and S all the time, Salsa not very much) would explicitly state this unless asked directly. If you know that definition of Q and S, then that basic step in Salsa/Mambo should be done QQS should be as easy as 2+2=4... unless your definition of 4 and 5 are switched in which case 2+2=5. The problem I guess occurs if you don't know what is meant by S or Q and what is meant by QQS for dancing in a 4-beat per measure music.

But now that you know, you must admit that it IS very simple - simpler than learning cross body lead. A lot of people were thinking that it was much more complicated than what it really is.

 

[Flujo]

But now that you know, you must admit that it IS very simple - simpler than learning cross body lead. A lot of people were thinking that it was much more complicated than what it really is.

Indeed.

 

[chr]

Heres the reason why-- You PREP your start with a slow count-- thats ONLY the introduction .
When you get more confident in your timing, try commencing break on a Q ( R foot back ) this will set up your qqs sequence.

Or-- start fwd break on your left foot on a q ( 2nd bar )

I don't see any relation here to my previous post. Actually, I most typically start stepping (after a few weight changes) with the break forward step on 6, but this is a completely independent issue.

When I wrote "start dancing" I meant a lot of bars and possibly the whole song. Meaning that if my partner is right and I get lucky, I get the SQQ feel right even though stepping on 1-2-3. I can also easily change my way of dancing to create a QQS feel (in fact, it is easier for me), but both me and my partner would realize this, so it is an objective reality even though the actual rhythm is, as far as I can tell, the same.

 

[hyh]

Heres the reason why-- You PREP your start with a slow count-- thats ONLY the introduction .
When you get more confident in your timing, try commencing break on a Q ( R foot back ) this will set up your qqs sequence.

Or-- start fwd break on your left foot on a q ( 2nd bar )

I don't see any relation here to my previous post. Actually, I most typically start stepping (after a few weight changes) with the break forward step on 6, but this is a completely independent issue.

When I wrote "start dancing" I meant a lot of bars and possibly the whole song. Meaning that if my partner is right and I get lucky, I get the SQQ feel right even though stepping on 1-2-3. I can also easily change my way of dancing to create a QQS feel (in fact, it is easier for me), but both me and my partner would realize this, so it is an objective reality even though the actual rhythm is, as far as I can tell, the same.

Oh great. I think what we have here is an attempt to make a new definition of QQS, SQQ - think language mutations - like bad becoming to mean good (This car is bad!) or a lot (I love you so bad!). Or use my previous example of 2+2=5.

What you're saying is that the way you step (or the quality of how your feet makes contact with the ground and press against the ground) is different on beat 1 compared to the way you step on beat 2 or beat 3 and that this difference is how you're defining Quick and Slow - and that time (i.e. 1 beat versus 2 beats) doesn't come in to play in your definition (or the definition you were given - since I suspect you're not claiming originality) of Slow and Quick. Am I right?

How you step on different beats is your choice I suppose, but I'm a bit speechless about ignoring common definition of what is meant by quick and slow in well-established world of dance and appropriating it to make it mean something very different. It brings a whole new definition to the word street-dance or should I call it urban- or ghetto-dance? Jive anyone?

 

[peachexploration]

In regards to getting the feel try this:
Instead of stepping precisely on the 1 and 5 counts, try stepping on the 4& and 8& counts (a half beat early) or you could try one beat early depending on the track. That should give you the SQQ feeling of ET2 your instructors were talking about. Can anyone else put this a better way? Is that clear?

Yes, quite clear.
Try this:
____[4]__[8] <-Just leave the 4 & 8 up in the air as you step or just ignore them completely for this discussion.
1.. 23 5.. 67
S..QQ S..QQ

 

[chr]

Oh great. I think what we have here is an attempt to make a new definition of QQS, SQQ - think language mutations - like bad becoming to mean good (This car is bad!) or a lot (I love you so bad!).

This is not my terminology, I was completely perplexed when I heard it first. But then I was told the same by excellent instructors completely independently using the exact same words.

If you read my first post in the other topic, you can see that my reaction was exactly that of yours: slow quick quick, (slow on 1) must mean "on 3". It is not rocket science to translate quick to one beat and slow to 2 beats.

Still, almost all instructors keep on asking for that "SQQ" feel I have such a hard time to grasp in an abstract manner.

 

[terence]

[quote When I wrote "start dancing" I meant a lot of bars and possibly the whole song.
.

Then you should have said ---" WHILST " I am dancing--2 different meanings--

 

[Flujo]

Oh great. I think what we have here is an attempt to make a new definition of QQS, SQQ - think language mutations - like bad becoming to mean good (This car is bad!) or a lot (I love you so bad!).

This is not my terminology, I was completely perplexed when I heard it first. But then I was told the same by excellent instructors completely independently using the exact same words.

If you read my first post in the other topic, you can see that my reaction was exactly that of yours: slow quick quick, (slow on 1) must mean "on 3". It is not rocket science to translate quick to one beat and slow to 2 beats.

Still, almost all instructors keep on asking for that "SQQ" feel I have such a hard time to grasp in an abstract manner.

I understand what you are talking about chr.
It's what happens on beat 4 and 8 that gives the deceptive SQQ 'feel'. The 'slow feel' carries over beats 1 and 5 and is still part of the established QQS structure as the On2 count warps the 1 and the 5 (see below). If you are coming from On1 then that could be confusing in regards to the QQS vs SQQ thing. Certainly was for me. If you don't know that Q = 1 beat and S = 2 beats then you 'will' be confused! @hyh - yes, it really is that simple. Perhaps a lot of people aren't taught this in class?

P = the first step on the 1 that settles you into the On2 basic before you adjust the timing slightly
<> = not precise timing - count could be a 1/2 beat behind the actual beat it's referring too.
1____2____3____4____5____6____7____8____1____2 - beats in bar

P____Q____Q____S-------------Q____Q____S--------------Q - On2 (ET2) in relation to QQS

P____2____3____<5>______6____7____<1>______2 - instructors count.
(Thanks Peach)

When instructors count 1 2 3 -- 5 6 7 On2 and stretch out the numbers, the 5 count really lands on the 4 or 4& beat within the bar and the 1 count lands on the 8 or 8& beat.
The foundation is still QQS, it's just shifted in time by 1 beat in reference to On1. If any of the above isn't quite on beat (bad pun - heh) then I look forward to being corrected.

P.S
Sitting at a computer typing out step diagrams. Don't you just love it!
Hmmm. :eyebrow:

 

[terence]

). If you are coming from On1 then that could be confusing in regards to the QQS vs SQQ thing. Certainly was for me. If you don't know that Q = 1 beat and S = 2 beats then you 'will' be confused! @hyh - yes, it really is that simple.


Perhaps a lot of people aren't taught this in class?--

NOW youre getting down to the culprit


:

Whether or not you count QQS or SQQ-- most all seem to "lose " the 4th beat in the bar-- the confusion arises primarily to the incorrect counting of the music bar-- there are FOUR of em !!

 

[hyh]

In regards to getting the feel try this:
Instead of stepping precisely on the 1 and 5 counts, try stepping on the 4& and 8& counts (a half beat early) or you could try one beat early depending on the track. That should give you the SQQ feeling of ET2 your instructors were talking about. Can anyone else put this a better way? Is that clear?

Yes, quite clear.
Try this:
____[4]__[8] <-Just leave the 4 & 8 up in the air as you step or just ignore them completely for this discussion.
1.. 23 5.. 67
S..QQ S..QQ

Let's try this again. See what I highlighted by bold above. Instead of stepping on 1 and 5, step on the 4& and 8& counts.

This means you're stepping on count 2,3 to start with ... then 4&, 6, 7 ... then 8&, 2, 3 and 4&, 6, 7 (and making this the basic instead of 1,2,3,5,6,7).

Between 8& and 2, you have 1 1/2 beats.
Between 2 and 3, you have 1 beat.
Between 3 and 4&, you have 1 1/2 beats.

So to make something out of this using QQS/SQQ system, you might want to invent a new term - call it Medium or M for 1 1/2 beats.

That would make this ... QMM?

Call me stupid, but I don't see how this would be considered clear.

Stepping on 4 and 8 instead of 1 and 5 would still be QQS within 4 beats in a bar musical structure. Start the sequence of QQS, etc at the first step made at or after the beat 1 and finish it before the start of next beat 1 (or in common Salsa counting system beat 5 to avoid duplication i.e. QQS-QQS). This should be about how the steps are made in relationship to the structure of the music (this does not require discussion of any particular instruments such as clave by the way).

Let's not get into bizarro scenarios - stepping on 4 and three quarters, etc. - which I suppose would give you Quick - Slightly Slow (1 3/4 beats) - Slightly Quick (1 1/4 beats) or some such.

If you want to talk about On1 people trying to learn On2-ET rushing their step on beat 1, etc., that's a different story altogether. However, I think trying to make up a term "SQQ feel" to fix this rushing tendency is fuzzy at best and confusing overall.

 

[hyh]

P = step that settles you into the On2 basic
<> = timing varies depending on instructor/music
1____2____3____4____5____6____7____8____1____2 - and so on.

P____Q____Q____S-------------Q____Q____S--------------Q

P____2____3____<>5______6____7____<>1______2 - instructors count.
(Thanks Peach)

To me, this makes no sense.

Are you stepping on beats 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 2? If P=pause, then I would take this diagram for On2 Palladium, not On2 ET.

The last line labelled instructors count and <> is especially troubling. Is the instructor changing the length of beats for beat 4 and 8? Is this because they're incompetent? Time warp maybe?

Quick means you have one beat between the step you just made and the next step you should land. Slow means you have two beats between the step you just made and the next step you should land.