PDA

View Full Version : Can you ever have too much musicality?



Cornish Pixie
3rd-December-2007, 02:07 AM
Hi peeps, this is a question more for the followers, when dancing with a lead do you ever think too much musicallity is enough. For example there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.

Sometimes though i think that my follower mite find this a bit too much, so i lead moves to a normal time ignoring bits that could be interpreted, to me this is sacrilage. so i wondered if there is a need, or is it acceptable to just go crazy and forget about doing any moves whatsoever.

I also find it hard to get the balance right between interpreting bits myself and allowing my partner a go, any tips?

(i realise these questions are largely dependant on ability but its more aimed at followers that are comfortable with interpreting the music)

cheers nick

Caro
3rd-December-2007, 10:23 AM
...there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.

Sometimes though i think that my follower mite find this a bit too much, so i lead moves to a normal time ignoring bits that could be interpreted, to me this is sacrilage. so i wondered if there is a need, or is it acceptable to just go crazy and forget about doing any moves whatsoever.


I think that's just great (well, provided your follow is comfortable with it, i.e. doesn't give you the rabbit caught in the lights look).



I also find it hard to get the balance right between interpreting bits myself and allowing my partner a go, any tips?



It's been a few months since we last danced, but from what I remember you have no problem whatsoever to adapt to your follower and give her as much space as she wants (and sometimes, she wants a lot :blush: ).
FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country :drool:

Jamie
3rd-December-2007, 12:24 PM
I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality. Noel is a good example of this, he dances nothing but what he hears in the music, I'd much rather dance with Noel than someone who prefers moves over musicality.

rubyred
3rd-December-2007, 12:36 PM
I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality.
:yeah:

Oh YES, I do moves when I am led into them, but it is so delicious to have your whole body taken by the beat of the music, such fun and a beautiful way to express yourself. My most memorable dances are ones when there are very little moves and more expression and interpretation.:waycool:

Cornish Pixie
3rd-December-2007, 01:00 PM
I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality. Noel is a good example of this, he dances nothing but what he hears in the music, I'd much rather dance with Noel than someone who prefers moves over musicality.

Yes i see your point with noel, hada a dance with him the other day, always wondered why all the ladys love dancing with him so much, now i kno,lol

Cornish Pixie
3rd-December-2007, 01:01 PM
FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country :drool:

:blush::flower:

robd
3rd-December-2007, 01:14 PM
FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country :drool:

Don't get carried away CP, she says that to all the men :rolleyes:

Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance. I want to start a thread on this topic but am still formulating it within my head. If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more. It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does. Dancing with someone of the ability of say, Cat (and yes, I know that's a pretty high comparative bar) and you can see that it is possible for someone to express what's happening within the music through their body but also not let that affect the receptiveness to the lead.

It's a bit like variations on the basics in WCS (or MJ for that matter) - if you do that variation all of the time it ceases to become a variation and loses some of its impact because of that.

Caro
3rd-December-2007, 01:27 PM
Don't get carried away CP, she says that to all the men :rolleyes:


He's just jealous CP, cause that's not true at all ;)




Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance.

Fair point. To come back to the early question of CP, i.e. is it ok to dance a whole track ignoring the beat (i.e. dancing to other things in the music), this might be an overkill... The beat is probably, at least at some points in the piece of music, the 'main' thing going so it might be pushing a little to ignore it completely to dance to the more subtle stuff all the time...



It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does.

very true... and very hard to achieve well too. There are probably stages in every dancer's development where one goes from expressing himself/herself too much, to the detriment of the partnership, before one manages to reconcile one's interpretation of the music with a partnered dance...

pjfrad
3rd-December-2007, 01:33 PM
Is it possible to have to much musicality? Short answer no, but....

It all depends on what you define as musicality. If you define musicality as using your body to highlight music, get breaks, etc... then yes it is possible to have to much because you are forgetting about your partner.

Musicality should be about the whole dance, it's about the moves you select, how you do those moves, how you fit them to the music as well as what the individuals do within these with their own bodies and style.



For example there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.


Altering timing, changing moves, getting hits, all good, however instead of thinking about interpreting everything with your body, think of how you might be able to interpret things with the followers body or how to highlight a piece of music by making the follower do something.

Peter

Lory
3rd-December-2007, 03:21 PM
If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more.

It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on'






There are probably stages in every dancer's development where one goes from expressing himself/herself too much, to the detriment of the partnership,
I couldn't agree more.. I had a wonderful dance with Marc Forster last night, it was very understated but the feeling created was just wonderful, it was just as though we were having a non-verbal conversation :drool: he listened to me and picked up on the accents I was choosing to highlight (which weren't always the 'obvious' one's) and he replied with a complimentary musical answer :worthy: and visa versa. As Jamie said, I don't think we did 'any' moves, as such! :nice:


In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me :( I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

Trouble
3rd-December-2007, 03:56 PM
In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me :( I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

I bet he is a selfish lover.. :D

Anyway, musicality really only works IMO when you have two people feeling it and connecting. There are no hard and fast rules about when to do it and how much but it only works if your both connecting and feeling each other.

I mean, we only ever give head to get it, musicality is the same, you give it in the hope to get some back and there can never be too much of it!!!!! :D:rolleyes::whistle::flower:

robd
3rd-December-2007, 06:46 PM
I bet he is a selfish lover.. :D


And a satisfied one :wink:

LilyB
3rd-December-2007, 08:28 PM
... Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance. I want to start a thread on this topic but am still formulating it within my head. If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more. It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does. Dancing with someone of the ability of say, Cat (and yes, I know that's a pretty high comparative bar) and you can see that it is possible for someone to express what's happening within the music through their body but also not let that affect the receptiveness to the lead.

It's a bit like variations on the basics in WCS (or MJ for that matter) - if you do that variation all of the time it ceases to become a variation and loses some of its impact because of that.

Totally agree with you there, Rob, especially the bits in your post that I have highlighted.:flower:

frodo
4th-December-2007, 12:36 AM
...In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me :( I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

What Marc did sounds like it requires far more skill.

Miss Flicts
4th-December-2007, 01:57 PM
I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!


So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

If he likes to do solo shines he could adopt a 'me-you' approach and offer his partner equal floor time to do her own thing too (if she wants to).

I'm with Lory - if a leader goes into a solo 'bit' I just do some body movement and step on the spot. You can't start doing your own solo moves at the same time for a few reasons:

It's polite to watch and appreciate your partner's shine/move/spin
It's difficult to establish the end of the break and reconnect if neither of you is stationary or you've lost eye contact - it's the follower's responsibility to be ready unless she's actually been offered playtime by the leader
It can look a real mess if you're both doing different shines at the same timeIt's all about give and take. I personally like dancing with guys who like to do their own thing - as long as they also give their partner a chance to the same and it's all fun and collaborative:nice:.

Gadget
4th-December-2007, 03:11 PM
So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

What Marc did sounds like it requires far more skill.
Not that much skill - just a different skill from what you are probably used to. He started "dancing" from a 'club' background - if you want to dance with someone in a club, you have to both try and read each other's movements without hand-holding.

Start by trying to step on the mirrored foot as your partner, landing yours as they land theirs - if you get a partner to practice with, do it without physical contact and get them to put in some timing variations to match the music (syncopations I think they are called, but that may be a bit narrow a term)

Once you get that, the rest should be fairly intuative.

Lory
4th-December-2007, 03:40 PM
I'm with Lory - if a leader goes into a solo 'bit' I just do some body movement and step on the spot. You can't start doing your own solo moves at the same time for a few reasons:

It's polite to watch and appreciate your partner's shine/move/spin
It's difficult to establish the end of the break and reconnect if neither of you is stationary or you've lost eye contact - it's the follower's responsibility to be ready unless she's actually been offered playtime by the leader
It can look a real mess if you're both doing different shines at the same timeIt's all about give and take. I personally like dancing with guys who like to do their own thing - as long as they also give their partner a chance to the same and it's all fun and collaborative:nice:.
Thank you, you've explained my views brilliantly!

The way he held my hand, down and still, I'd have felt like I was fighting against him, if i did anything (apart from wiggle). And as Miss Flicts said, it'd been quite rude to 'do my thang' when he was clearly, showing me, 'his thang' :whistle:

I can't explain it very well at all I'm afraid, but he gave me very little to do at all really, whilst he did loads of spins and turns infront of me and a couple of times he broke hold and walked off, did some dramtic lunge thing and then came back to me again. As I said, he was a good dancer and he'd have probably made a beginner feel great but I doubt by the end of the dance, he could have known if I was a good dancer or not?

David Bailey
4th-December-2007, 04:01 PM
I can't explain it very well at all I'm afraid, but he gave me very little to do at all really, whilst he did loads of spins and turns infront of me and a couple of times he broke hold and walked off, did some dramtic lunge thing and then came back to me again. As I said, he was a good dancer and he'd have probably made a beginner feel great but I doubt by the end of the dance, he could have known if I was a good dancer or not?
I bet every male forumite there is now wondering "Was that me?" :rofl:

Andreas
5th-December-2007, 01:56 PM
(well, provided your follow is comfortable with it, i.e. doesn't give you the rabbit caught in the lights look)

This is exactly the point when it is too much. If it completely throws the other person then musical interpretation can be very destructive.

Miss Flicts
6th-December-2007, 03:17 PM
This is exactly the point when it is too much. If it completely throws the other person then musical interpretation can be very destructive.

I agree - I think the whole thing depends on who you are dancing with and how well you know their style. It just requires a bit of common sense on the part of the leader.

If you dance with someone often or you've seen them confidently enjoying solo playtime on the dancefloor, then you know they like it.

If you've not danced much with someone and haven't seen them doing any solo bits with anyone else, then don't put them on the spot. Simple!

tanjive
3rd-January-2008, 01:03 AM
I think by definition in the question you can have "too much" as the question has an implicit "just right" amount. Having said that I think it is very rare to find it. If you took 100 people who walked into a MJ event (not just your fav mates/dancers) probably 75+ would show little or no musicality beyond keeping to the beat. Of the other 25, 20 may only recognise breaks. That just leaves 5 who really add and play with multiple parts of the music. It would take a big population of these to find one who probably does "too much".

Perhaps others might suggest other numbers, mine were abit arbitrary. Lots of averaging and no accounting for mood or music. I was trying to use the MJ population as a whole with no regard to how many might be new beginners or long in the tooth. I also made no division of lead or follow.

gebandemuishond
3rd-January-2008, 12:44 PM
I think you can have too much musicality in a certain sense. That sense being when you have a lead whose definition of musicality is simply "hitting the breaks", and sets up the entire dance so as to do a lingering comb or whatever everytime the drums fall away. So I guess too much bad musicality is a bad thing, although to be fair most people don't even try that (oooh get me, I think I'm turning into a jive snob :really:)

Dan

straycat
3rd-January-2008, 01:18 PM
I think you can have too much musicality in a certain sense. That sense being when you have a lead whose definition of musicality is simply "hitting the breaks", and sets up the entire dance so as to do a lingering comb or whatever everytime the drums fall away.

Perhaps... although it's quite likely that someone doing this is someone who is beginning to develop their dancing in more musical directions, but is still getting to grips with it - I'm pretty sure that after the first couple of musicality workshops I took, I had more than a few dances where I was doing something like this. For many it can be quite scary to go 'beyond the beat', or beyond standard moves - I certainly found it so - and what you describe is a fairly 'safe' first step.

I think someone doing this should be (gently) encouraged to play around and experiment more... which will help them improve their musicality skills further. As you rightly say, there's not enough leaders out there who really dance musically, so it's well worth encouraging those that are starting to explore those directions.

gebandemuishond
3rd-January-2008, 01:48 PM
Perhaps... although it's quite likely that someone doing this is someone who is beginning to develop their dancing in more musical directions, but is still getting to grips with it - I'm pretty sure that after the first couple of musicality workshops I took, I had more than a few dances where I was doing something like this. For many it can be quite scary to go 'beyond the beat', or beyond standard moves - I certainly found it so - and what you describe is a fairly 'safe' first step.

I think someone doing this should be (gently) encouraged to play around and experiment more... which will help them improve their musicality skills further. As you rightly say, there's not enough leaders out there who really dance musically, so it's well worth encouraging those that are starting to explore those directions.


Definately, I completely agree. I didn't mean to sound discouraging to leaders who are doing this, getting your moves to reflect the music is really tricky at first, and a good way to start is to get your moves to coincide with the music, e.g. landing the comb at the right moment. But in answer to the original question, I think that yes, from the point of view of the dance (as opposed to the dancers), you can have too much musicality.

Dan

David Franklin
3rd-January-2008, 03:20 PM
I think you can have too much musicality in a certain sense. That sense being when you have a lead whose definition of musicality is simply "hitting the breaks", and sets up the entire dance so as to do a lingering comb or whatever everytime the drums fall away.Seems this is more a problem of having too little musicality, to be honest.

gebandemuishond
3rd-January-2008, 07:29 PM
Seems this is more a problem of having too little musicality, to be honest.

Good point.

Dan

karlhudds
4th-January-2008, 12:39 PM
i recon you can have too much musicality if your dancing with yourself rather than the lead that your dancing with. its great for a follow to do something you didnt exspect but when its getting to the point that your trying to keep up with them rather than leading them into a none move point then its getting silly

TA Guy
4th-January-2008, 01:25 PM
Difficult to answer.
I don't think musicality (as mean't in this thread) really counts as one of the basics of the dance (MJ). Therefore, any musicality which interferes with something that happens to be a basic of the dance, is to much. This includes lead and follow etc. Of course, this changes depending on how well your partner can match/cope/compensate. Not surprizingly, since this is a partner dance, your partner becomes an issue when deciding what is too much as well.

I've seen a few dancers at weekenders who I would class as in the 'too much musicality' bracket. They split into two groups... one or two weren't really dancing MJ and at that point, I defer to their greater knowledge of whatever dance they were performing :) The larger group probably fall into the 'two muggle dancers who happen to be holding hands' category. Seen that a few times at weekenders. Again tho, whilst it may not be strictly MJ, everybody seemed to having fun...

The only dancer I would say for certain I've seen with too much musicality is actually a local dancer who dances with a lot of musicality, all good and always slotted, but it includes absolutely freezing at virtually every accent. It makes the dance stuttering IMO, but then again, you could equally just say her style is just a bit unusual and nobody, to my knowledge, comes off from a dance with her moaning. So who's to say? :)