PDA

View Full Version : A Five, Six, Seven, Eight...



StokeBloke
13th-July-2009, 07:43 PM
When a teacher counts a class into a "run through to music" they will often use the 5,6,7,8 count. Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place? Or doesn't it matter that the class is being counted onto the Nth beat of the phrase as long as everyone starts together?

I am trying to work out if this is ever done intentionally.

Cruella
13th-July-2009, 07:49 PM
I thought the idea of the 5,6,7,8 was to lead up to the 1 in the next phrase! So if they are starting the one in the middle of a phrase IMO it means they can't count in correctly. (It's not as easy as it looks though :sick:)

Nessiemonster
13th-July-2009, 08:02 PM
To me it 'feels' better if the count leads in to the start of the next phrase. It feels 'wrong' if it doesn't. But I guess maybe teachers are focused on teaching, rather than necessarily the musicality when they're counting? I guess for some people it would come more naturally than for others.

MarkW
13th-July-2009, 08:21 PM
I've been in classes where it is obvious that the teacher is listening intently in order to time the 5 6 7 8 so that the 1 is at the right moment.

In my experience all teachers fit the count to the music. It would feel odd to me now if that didn't happen.

NZ Monkey
13th-July-2009, 09:45 PM
When a teacher counts a class into a "run through to music" they will often use the 5,6,7,8 count. Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place? Or doesn't it matter that the class is being counted onto the Nth beat of the phrase as long as everyone starts together?

I am trying to work out if this is ever done intentionally.In my experience it depends on how aware the teacher is of the way the music is structured. Pretty much every teacher I’ve seen has used the words five, six, seven, eight to count in, but apart from that there’s been a lot of variation.

Some teachers are counting the beat, so that 5,6,7,8 lands on the 5,6,7,8 of the miniphrase. Some go as far as only counting people in for the start of a major phrase (first beat of 32 usually) while others only worry about starting on a minor phrase (first beat of 8).

Some teachers use the Ceroc count, So count 5&6&7&8&, starting on the 1 of a minor phrase in the music. They effectively count 8 beats, but still get the class starting on a 1 in a minor phrase. Unless you live in Australia that is, in which case you start on the 8 on that count, but on the other foot. Assuming there’s a correct foot to step back on in the first place of course…..

Other teachers count either way, but starting on any old downbeat (odd numbers in the miniphrase) so that the class is starting together, but not necessarily on the 1 in the music. This is the way the moves would probably happen in freestyle at least.

I’ve not seen it personally, but I’m sure there are a few teachers out there who start counting on any beat, including the even ones. This would feel worlds of wrong to me, and since I’ve not seen anyone do it yet probably everyone else as well.

Edit: I assume everyone uses 5,6,7,8 in some form or another because that's what their teacher did, even if they don't necessarily know why they did it that way.

Gadget
13th-July-2009, 10:31 PM
When a teacher counts a class into a "run through to music" they will often use the 5,6,7,8 count. Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place? Or doesn't it matter that the class is being counted onto the Nth beat of the phrase as long as everyone starts together?

I am trying to work out if this is ever done intentionally.
As long as is is on beat, then I don't think that which beat matters:
My reasoning to this as follows:
MJ has a basic building block of X moves (11?). Each has a variable number of counts to complete it before starting the next move. These moves can be extended or truncated to change the count even more.
MJ is trying to teach folk how to dance 'freestyle' rather than 'choriographed', so there is little/no emphasis on exactly where you are at any specific point in the music.
Landing the start of a move within freestyle at the start of a musical phrase is either good luck, good planning or a good improvisation. The second option is normally choriographed routines. The third option, it's normally achieved by changing the current move so that the next will start when wanted.

So while learning the moves from stage, it's not important when they start/end because in freestyle they will normally start/end at any random point within the track.

{Of course there are teachers who plan their lessons on 4/8 beat structures - for them it would be more important, but I'm not convinced that it would be important for the pupils}

straycat
13th-July-2009, 10:46 PM
When a teacher counts a class into a "run through to music" they will often use the 5,6,7,8 count. Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place? Or doesn't it matter that the class is being counted onto the Nth beat of the phrase as long as everyone starts together?

I am trying to work out if this is ever done intentionally.

Lindy hopper's perspective - personally, I think it's extremely important to be on-phrase. I usually try to go one further, and hit the start of a mini phrase (usually a group of four or six phrases, depending on the track) - but whether I do this will depend a little on context.

The reason I do this is that it helps 'condition' people to know when the phrase starts, without having to take a time out and give a long lecture on musical structure - not something that generally works at a weekly class.

ant
13th-July-2009, 11:35 PM
Originally Posted by StokeBloke http://1.2.3.10/bmi/www.cerocscotland.com/forum/images/orange/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?p=553588#post553588)
When a teacher counts a class into a "run through to music" they will often use the 5,6,7,8 count. Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place? Or doesn't it matter that the class is being counted onto the Nth beat of the phrase as long as everyone starts together?

I am trying to work out if this is ever done intentionally.




Originally Posted by Gadget
As long as is is on beat, then I don't think that which beat matters
:

I understand where Gadget is coming from but when a teacher counts in 5 6 7 8 my understanding is that the teacher is counting the class into the 1 beat.

As far as I understand that type of count is almost universally accepted as doing this. Therefore if the teacher is not counting into the 1 beat, the count is wrong.

NZ Monkey
13th-July-2009, 11:46 PM
Lindy hopper's perspective - personally, I think it's extremely important to be on-phrase. I usually try to go one further, and hit the start of a mini phrase (usually a group of four or six phrases, depending on the track) - but whether I do this will depend a little on context.

The reason I do this is that it helps 'condition' people to know when the phrase starts, without having to take a time out and give a long lecture on musical structure - not something that generally works at a weekly class.:yeah: That's exactly how we do it as well.

DavidY
14th-July-2009, 12:01 AM
I thought the idea of the 5,6,7,8 was to lead up to the 1 in the next phrase! So if they are starting the one in the middle of a phrase IMO it means they can't count in correctly. (It's not as easy as it looks though :sick:):yeah:
Sometimes the acoustics on stage are pretty awful, so the teacher can hardly hear the music and the phrasing. If the teacher misses the phrasing, I'd guess that's sometimes the reason.

DavidB
14th-July-2009, 01:39 AM
Personally I would count 5-6-7-8 so that the next move started on a '1' in the music, but wouldn't bother too much which '1'.

The speed of the count would depend on the dance - so for MJ it would be every downbeat, and for WCS every beat.

I do find counting MJ timing difficult in a class - I have to count the end of one bar to the beat myself, and then count the next bar out loud. I also sometimes find that counting out loud enough to be heard means that I can't hear the music.

Another reason for counting 5-6-7-8 is to get people to rotate quickly. Instead of waiting for everyone to rotate, get their new partner (and usually start talking), the teacher starts the 5-6-7-8 almost as soon as saying 'x ladies down'. You can usually get another one or two goes through the routine if you do it right.

I dont like teachers counting 5---6---5-6-7-8, as I find it confusing. I also don't like teachers saying 'we will show that to a count', but the count lasting only as far as '1'.

NZ Monkey
14th-July-2009, 03:24 AM
The speed of the count would depend on the dance - so for MJ it would be every downbeat, and for WCS every beat.
Does anyone know why MJ does this differently to everyone else? I'm sure there must be a reason, but I've no idea what it is.....


Is it wrong, bad, unprofessional, confusing or ignorant to form that count so the "1" that follows the "8" doesn't start at the beginning of the next phrase but at some random place?Oops! I didn't answer this....

I’d say it’s definitely unprofessional, but given that pretty much no MJ teachers are professional dancers or professional teachers that’s hardly a scathing criticism.

It might be considered wrong, but only if you’re worried about imparting some sort of respect of the music.

I think it is bad, as learning about matching your dancing to the music can only be a good thing. It isn’t like it takes a lot more effort or any more time doing this particular thing by stealth either. How bad it is depends on your goals I suppose.

Lee Bartholomew
14th-July-2009, 07:26 AM
A teacher counts in the same reason a musician does, to get everyone to start at the same time. If a teacher just said '1' then no one would start together and be prepared.

DavidB also go it right in that if done correctly it can discurrage talking and and speed people up to move along (esp those that insist on 'teaching' on the dancefloor)

Should the count always lead up to a new phase in music? Absolutly. It helps dancers understand music and if moves hit changes in music, it makes them feel like they are doing it correct.

I wouldn't say it's important to hit a new 32 beat phase unless teaching something that strictly required it.

Of course there are times when a teacher gets it wrong which can be down to not being able to hear the music properly on stage (our venue is good for that, sometimes can hear the track with a big echo on stage but it's fine on the floor) and not every teacher is actually so much as aware that there are beats in music and it has a structure :nice:

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 08:38 AM
Does anyone know why MJ does this differently to everyone else? I'm sure there must be a reason, but I've no idea what it is.....



A lot of modern jive teachers only teach modern jive. I teach a number of different styles of dance and for consistency and ease of learning other styles, I count modern jive the same way that west coast swing (and practially all other dance styles) is counted (counting every beat) as opposed to counting every down beat (counting half time).

It would be much more difficult for people to learn other styles if you count (half time)
1(down) &(up)
2(down) &(up)
3(down) &(up)
4(down) &(up)
because each of the & counts is a (up) beat. I count
1(down) 2(up)
3(down) 4(up)
5(down) 6(up)
7(down) 8(up) instead.

For people who only teach MJ this isn't reallly an issue but it makes it much more difficult for students to learn other styles if the teacher counts half time.

NZ Monkey
14th-July-2009, 09:20 AM
A lot of modern jive teachers only teach modern jive.

snip

For people who only teach MJ this isn't reallly an issue but it makes it much more difficult for students to learn other styles if the teacher counts half time.Ummmm...... sure.

But that doesn't actually answer the question. Why is it different in MJ compared to everything else?

Somebody, probably a long time ago, made a deliberate decision to count time in MJ using the somewhat strange count we're all used to hearing now. They did this instead of something a little more conventional and closely matched to the music.

I'm running on an assumption that they did this for a reason, but I've no idea what it was. My hypothesis is that it's pretty much universally accepted today in MJ due to historical inertia rather than any kind of intrinsic advantage it might hold.

straycat
14th-July-2009, 09:21 AM
To clean up on the terms I used in my earlier post (this is what comes of posting in a hurry) - what I previously called a phrase (two bars / 8 beats) is actually a mini-phrase - a phrase is usually (in swing music) four or six mini phrases. I think the majority of music used for MJ follows the same structure.


The speed of the count would depend on the dance - so for MJ it would be every downbeat, and for WCS every beat.

Would you mind clarifying the MJ count? Say we take an 8-count mini phrase to count people in, do you mean that you count the 5 on 1, the 6 on 3, the 7 on 5 & the 8 on 7?

Lindy is the same as WCS - we count for every beat.


Personally I would count 5-6-7-8 so that the next move started on a '1' in the music, but wouldn't bother too much which '1'.

I don't always try to hit the beginning of a major phrase - if we're only on the first or second eight-count, it's too long a delay, and you risk losing the class momentum. Much of the time, though, it's not so hard to finesse it, by timing rotation breaks / pacing teaching tips or other talky bits.

I don't know whether there's a benefit to doing this in MJ, although my instinct says there is - I'd defer to experienced MJ teachers for that. For Lindy though - I think it's very important, given such a close tie-in between the dance and the music... and at international workshops at more advanced levels, the knowledge can be a pre-requisite (at recent workshop I attended, the teachers didn't even bother to count us in - they just told us to begin on the next phrase. None of the leaders had the slightest trouble with this - it becomes instinctive after a while)


I dont like teachers counting 5---6---5-6-7-8, as I find it confusing.

I confess that I do do this - probably a habit that I picked up from other teachers. I do question whether the initial lead in should be '5---6---' or something else, but I believe that having that initial lead-in there in some form or other is useful. Interesting to know you find it confusing - I wonder if I should change this to something non-numeric.

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 09:47 AM
Would you mind clarifying the MJ count? Say we take an 8-count mini phrase to count people in, do you mean that you count the 5 on 1, the 6 on 3, the 7 on 5 & the 8 on 7?

Lindy is the same as WCS - we count for every beat.

I don't always try to hit the beginning of a major phrase - if we're only on the first or second eight-count, it's too long a delay, and you risk losing the class momentum. Much of the time, though, it's not so hard to finesse it, by timing rotation breaks / pacing teaching tips or other talky bits.

I don't know whether there's a benefit to doing this in MJ, although my instinct says there is - I'd defer to experienced MJ teachers for that. For Lindy though - I think it's very important, given such a close tie-in between the dance and the music... and at international workshops at more advanced levels, the knowledge can be a pre-requisite (at recent workshop I attended, the teachers didn't even bother to count us in - they just told us to begin on the next phrase. None of the leaders had the slightest trouble with this - it becomes instinctive after a while)

I confess that I do do this - probably a habit that I picked up from other teachers. I do question whether the initial lead in should be '5---6---' or something else, but I believe that having that initial lead-in there in some form or other is useful. Interesting to know you find it confusing - I wonder if I should change this to something non-numeric.

Each modern jive count is actually 2 beats of music.

Modern Jive Count
1 (down) & (up)
2 (down) & (up)
3 (down) & (up)
4 (down) & (up)
5 (down) & (up)
6 (down) & (up)
7 (down) & (up)
8 (down) & (up)

All other dances
1 (down) 2 (up)
3 (down) 4 (up)
5 (down) 6 (up)
7 (down) 8 (up)
1 (down) 2 (up)
3 (down) 4 (up)
5 (down) 6 (up)
7 (down) 8 (up)

A modern jive set of 8 is 2 mini-phrases of 8 as it is counted in (practically) all other styles of dance.

Modern Jive is counted like this more of a convention because everyone else counts it that way and that's the way it's been done for years.

In a 32 beat major phrase, you can count 4 sets of minor phrases of 8. I start counting on the 4th set of 8 on beats 5, 6, 7, 8

straycat
14th-July-2009, 10:20 AM
A modern jive set of 8 is 2 mini-phrases of 8 as it is counted in (practically) all other styles of dance.

Modern Jive is counted like this more of a convention because everyone else counts it that way and that's the way it's been done for years.

It's been a long long time since I participated in an MJ class - and in the last one I observed where I was actually paying attention, the counting was ... muddled to non-existent - so I can't recall anything like this from the classes I have done (there have been a lot of them, but not for many years) - do you know of any youtube examples of this being put into practice?

Plus - since MJ generally involves stepping on every beat, how did this convention evolve? Anyone know?



In a 32 beat major phrase, you can count 4 sets of minor phrases of 8. I start counting on the 4th set of 8 on beats 5, 6, 7, 8
Are we talking about MJ phrases / mini phrases, or musical ones?

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 10:40 AM
It's been a long long time since I participated in an MJ class - and in the last one I observed where I was actually paying attention, the counting was ... muddled to non-existent - so I can't recall anything like this from the classes I have done (there have been a lot of them, but not for many years) - do you know of any youtube examples of this being put into practice?



I'm sure there are lots of youtube examples, if I ever get around to it I might make one myself but I'm very busy for the next 2 months.

This example shows the modern jive count...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orrFxnUCxO0




Plus - since MJ generally involves stepping on every beat, how did this convention evolve? Anyone know?



I don't know how this convention evolved but for me it just doesn't seem right...that's why I changed the way I teach it.




Are we talking about MJ phrases / mini phrases, or musical ones?

To clarify...
A musical phrase is usually 32 beats (4 sets of 8 beats). (It can sometimes be 6 sets of 8 beats)
A set of 8 in modern jive is 2 sets of 8 beats
A set of 8 in (practically) all other styles of dance is 1 set of 8 beats

Gadget
14th-July-2009, 03:14 PM
But that doesn't actually answer the question. Why is it different in MJ compared to everything else?
I don't know why everything else is different to MJ, but my theory on why the "count" is not every beat is that the count marks the marching time footwork: you step on the count (base, beat, low sound) and clap on the 'half count' (snare, symbol, high sound).

In MJ, you're only interested in marking the foot falls; not every beat.

Thinking about starting on the 1 a bit more: where is the emphasis in (most, 4/4, MJ danceable) music? What does the 'start' of a move indicate? Does it matter where a move starts? Emphasis is easier to put into a move rather than at the start or end, so it could be argued that it's better for the 1 to fall on a change in direction/block within a move, therefore change the count it starts on so that this happens.... But I think that this is probably more tricky than finding the 1 in the first place.

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 03:36 PM
I don't know why everything else is different to MJ, but my theory on why the "count" is not every beat is that the count marks the marching time footwork:

you step on the count (base, beat, low sound) and



This is the "down" beat




clap on the 'half count' (snare, symbol, high sound).



This is the "up" beat




In MJ, you're only interested in marking the foot falls; not every beat.

Thinking about starting on the 1 a bit more: where is the emphasis in (most, 4/4, MJ danceable) music? What does the 'start' of a move indicate? Does it matter where a move starts? Emphasis is easier to put into a move rather than at the start or end, so it could be argued that it's better for the 1 to fall on a change in direction/block within a move, therefore change the count it starts on so that this happens.... But I think that this is probably more tricky than finding the 1 in the first place.

You lead on the "down" beat and pulse the "up" beat.

Also starting on count 1 helps with phrasing

straycat
14th-July-2009, 04:19 PM
You lead on the "down" beat and pulse the "up" beat.

Well - purely in the interests in being pedantic... no. I don't. I pulse on every beat, and my lead is not restricted to the down-beat. There was a discussion about this a while back.

Would you say that up-beat pulsing is an established MJ convention? Or is it part of what you're trying to introduce from WCS?

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 04:29 PM
Well - purely in the interests in being pedantic... no. I don't. I pulse on every beat, and my lead is not restricted to the down-beat. There was a discussion about this a while back.

Would you say that up-beat pulsing is an established MJ convention? Or is it part of what you're trying to introduce from WCS?

Every dance has a pulse, not every dance pulses the up beat, it really depends on the type of music played.

Yes, WCS pulses the up beat and Hustle also pulses the up beat

4-Count Hustle and Modern Jive share the same basic patterns, so it makes sense to pulse the up beat in Modern Jive.

In Modern Jive, most people lead on the up beat (they are dancing on the up beat).

I'll give a better description on pulsing when I go home this evening.

Dancing on the Down Beat and Pulsing raises your level of performance.

straycat
14th-July-2009, 04:48 PM
Every dance has a pulse, not every dance pulses the up beat, it really depends on the type of music played.
[snip]
I'll give a better description on pulsing when I go home this evening.

Dancing on the Down Beat and Pulsing raises your level of performance.

I'm a Lindy-hopper, remember. You don't have to sell the pulse to me - I already bought it long ago :D

I'm simply curious as to whether it's an existing concept / practice in mainstream MJ, or simply something you're hoping to introduce. Does anyone else teach it?


In Modern Jive, most people lead on the up beat
Are you quite certain of that?

Alan Doyle
14th-July-2009, 04:58 PM
I'm a Lindy-hopper, remember. You don't have to sell the pulse to me - I already bought it long ago :D

I'm simply curious as to whether it's an existing concept / practice in mainstream MJ, or simply something you're hoping to introduce. Does anyone else teach it?

Are you quite certain of that?

Yes I am certain of that according to Skippy Blair...I've had LONG discussion with Skippy about MJ.

As far as I am aware I'm the only who teaches MJ using Skippy's Universal Unit System, it's not part of mainsteam MJ but I'd like to introduce it.

StokeBloke
14th-July-2009, 05:25 PM
Yes I am certain of that according to Skippy Blair...I've had LONG discussion with Skippy about MJ.

As far as I am aware I'm the only who teaches MJ using Skippy's Universal Unit System, it's not part of mainsteam MJ but I'd like to introduce it.
Well Sir, the floor is yours. I would love to hear about Skippy's timing if you have time to dash out an explanation :)

Gadget
14th-July-2009, 06:02 PM
This is the "down" beat

This is the "up" beat
I am aware of that; but I think that in a public forum, when trying to explain things, it's better to construct posts like everyone reading is an absolute beginner - much less room for miss-interpretation.;)


You lead on the "down" beat and pulse the "up" beat. No I don't. And I can say that with confidence because I've spent a long time examining my lead and the timing of it:

I lead through both the up and down beats. Actually on the beat (if there is a change of direction or block) then there is no lead - perhaps just a maintaining of connection, but by the time the foot has hit, I should have stopped leading that bit and preparations are all set for me leading the next bit. The actual beat is where the change comes between a compression lead and a tension lead.

"Pulsing" I think I understand, and seems to lead down the road of "bouncing" in my mind - I don't need to emphasise every beat with a lead or pulse - I emphasise the music and that's what defines where I (try to) put the stops, swoop, styling or emphasis in.


Also starting on count 1 helps with phrasingWhat phrasing? It's MJ. Do you construct every move to last in units of one phrase? If not, then it's a mute point.

NZ Monkey
14th-July-2009, 07:55 PM
you step on the count (base, beat, low sound) and clap on the 'half count' (snare, symbol, high sound).

In MJ, you're only interested in marking the foot falls; not every beat.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not conventional for a step to be on every beat - in other words both the downbeats and upbeats?

That's certainly the way it's taught around these parts, and what I remember from dancing in London too.


In Modern Jive, most people lead on the up beat (they are dancing on the up beat).I don't believe this for a minute. I've found leading to be more-or-less continuous, with the "bigger" leads tending to occur on the downbeats. That's my observation across the UK, Australia and NZ.


Yes I am certain of that according to Skippy Blair...I've had LONG discussion with Skippy about MJ.
I respect Skippy a lot for her accomplishments, but what does she know about MJ? Has she ever been in a country where it is taught before? At least in the last 20 years?

Most Americans I've encountered that have heard about MJ treat with so much contempt they don't look at it in any kind of depth at all, and never get the opportunity to do so even if they wanted. I have about the same authority when talking about Salsa.

emmylou25
14th-July-2009, 08:33 PM
To clarify...
A musical phrase is usually 32 beats (4 sets of 8 beats). (It can sometimes be 6 sets of 8 beats)
A set of 8 in modern jive is 2 sets of 8 beats
A set of 8 in (practically) all other styles of dance is 1 set of 8 beats

The final part is exactly why I got glared at for suggesting that there were generally 4 beats in each bar of music that MJ is danced to: the correct answer was actually 8, but as I'm classically music trained, it's the standard musical bars I count to, not to 8.

In terms of counting 5,6,7,8, it really winds me up when teachers count the class in to the 1 when it's not on the 1st beat of a phrase. IMO, a lot of the problem people seem to have in counting or staying on a beat when dancing, is down to the fact that people no longer study music or listen and understand a beat. The statement 'I can't find the beat' is one I hate to hear most when taxiing, and is something that these people need to learn & practise (or at least listen to phrasing) if they're going to improve and dance with the music, rather than just doing moves independently of it.

StokeBloke
14th-July-2009, 09:32 PM
The statement 'I can't find the beat' is one I hate to hear most when taxiing, and is something that these people need to learn & practise (or at least listen to phrasing) if they're going to improve and dance with the music, rather than just doing moves independently of it.Have you raised this very valid concern with the teacher and venue manager where you Taxi? I am sure they wouldn't like the thought of just teaching a set of "fixed width" moves that people just plod through with no regard for the music or musicality.

David Franklin
14th-July-2009, 09:51 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not conventional for a step to be on every beat - in other words both the downbeats and upbeats?

That's certainly the way it's taught around these parts, and what I remember from dancing in London too.No you're not wrong. Anyone who doubts it need only look on YouTube - pretty much any dancer at intermediate competition level or above dances like that.

DavidY
14th-July-2009, 11:26 PM
As I'm classically music trained, it's the standard musical bars I count to, not to 8.This reminds me - most conductors (certainly the ones I've seen) will happily switch between conducting "in 2" or "in 4" (or whatever) depending on what they feel is right at the time.

It won't necessarily be what's written in the music and the people being conducted have to adapt, especially as it can change in the middle of a phrase and probably won't be the same in rehearsal as in concert. But the music will still sound pretty much the same either way.

So I don't get too hung up on how many beats are in a bar - you can still dance to it exactly the same.

frodo
15th-July-2009, 12:42 AM
The final part is exactly why I got glared at for suggesting that there were generally 4 beats in each bar of music that MJ is danced to: the correct answer was actually 8, but as I'm classically music trained, it's the standard musical bars I count to, not to 8.

In terms of counting 5,6,7,8, it really winds me up when teachers count the class in to the 1 when it's not on the 1st beat of a phrase. IMO, a lot of the problem people seem to have in counting or staying on a beat when dancing, is down to the fact that people no longer study music or listen and understand a beat. The statement 'I can't find the beat' is one I hate to hear most when taxiing, and is something that these people need to learn & practise (or at least listen to phrasing) if they're going to improve and dance with the music, rather than just doing moves independently of it.

The music teachers are part of the problem. The amount of time spent on teaching music is probably adequate - just the wrong stuff is taught.

If they hadn't taught there were 4 beats to a measure, and dance teachers /taxi dancers actually taught basic musicality rather than just assuming it is something you should know, it would all be so much easier.

Until Amir etc. started teaching (essentially making up for the music teachers teaching mostly useless stuff like musical notation and foreign words) the theory necessary to practice/listen to phrasing wasn't readily available (on a wider basis it probably still isn't).

NZ Monkey
15th-July-2009, 01:13 AM
The music teachers are part of the problem. The amount of time spent on teaching music is probably adequate - just the wrong stuff is taught.

If they hadn't taught there were 4 beats to a measure, and dance teachers /taxi dancers actually taught basic musicality rather than just assuming it is something you should know, it would all be so much easier.

Until Amir etc. started teaching (essentially making up for the music teachers teaching mostly useless stuff like musical notation and foreign words) the theory necessary to practice/listen to phrasing wasn't readily available (on a wider basis it probably still isn't).Hang on a second.

I’m assuming by music teachers you mean music teachers in schools, as those are the only ones likely to have taught anything about music to most people? If so, then it’s not surprising that what they teach isn’t necessarily too relevant to dancing. They’re teaching music after all, not dance, and notation etc is really rather important if you want to be a musician or learn about music.

There is some confusion from musicians when dancers start talking about music, because often the same terms are used in each but with a slightly different meaning. EmmyLou is correct when she says that there is only 4 beats to a bar in MJ music. It’s the dancers that group music in pairs of bars, or 8 beats. If the dancers are calling those sets bars or measures, then they’re the ones who are in the wrong on this. Or at least, they’re the ones who are wrong according to musicians (who tend to know quite a bit about music….).

That said, even though the terms are sometimes different the material is still the same. We just look at it from a different perspective because we have different goals or needs. Someone who knows a lot about music as it applies to musicians and dancers can see the parallels, and where some concepts are simplified or altered for us dancers as they’re not as important to what we do.

straycat
15th-July-2009, 08:48 AM
The music teachers are part of the problem. The amount of time spent on teaching music is probably adequate - just the wrong stuff is taught.

If they hadn't taught there were 4 beats to a measure, and dance teachers /taxi dancers actually taught basic musicality rather than just assuming it is something you should know, it would all be so much easier.

Until Amir etc. started teaching (essentially making up for the music teachers teaching mostly useless stuff like musical notation and foreign words) the theory necessary to practice/listen to phrasing wasn't readily available (on a wider basis it probably still isn't).

:rofl: Nice one. You had me going for a moment there - I took you seriously for a while, until I read it for a third time and realised this had to be a wind-up....

Alan Doyle
15th-July-2009, 09:50 AM
I'll give a better description on pulsing when I go home this evening.



So many posts...I haven't had time to read them all yet

Skippy Blair “Instead of an even 1&2 3&4 you have a stretch on 2 and 4”

Here’s an article Skippy has written on Pulsing:
http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm (http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm)



"Pulsing" I think I understand, and seems to lead down the road of "bouncing" in my mind - I don't need to emphasise every beat with a lead or pulse - I emphasise the music and that's what defines where I (try to) put the stops, swoop, styling or emphasis in.

To quote Skippy “Pulsing is not a bounce. It does not require going up on your toes or making a loud noise. It is simply the firming of the muscles around the Center Point of Balance (solar plexus) on every Upbeat, (2, 4, 6 & 8 in the music).”

To quote Mary Ann Nunez (GSDTA)...

“How you obtain pulsing”

U/A Turn in WCS...this can also be achieved in Modern Jive.

Ladies Part

Count 2) As she lands over her left foot on count 2, she presses and peals the right toe base off the floor. when she lands on 2, The important thing is that she centered over her left foot but what her right foot (or her free foot) is doing is very important, she is pressing her big toe into the floor but her centre keeps moving forward and her shoulders stay back and down

Count 4) Then on count 4, she presses and rubs the left toe base as she slides it back.
Each time she presses she is lifting the centre and pulling the muscles in the back down along with toning both legs. On 4, she’s pressing the big toe of her left foot into the floor

Count 6) When she anchors because she’s stationary on count 6, it's like your pulling a string and it's a very nice straightening of the body

Man’s Part

Count 2) On 2, he is centered over his right foot but he is going to press the free foot (left toe) into the floor on count 2 as he turns


Count 4) On count 4, he's going to press the toe of his free foot (right toe) into the floor on count 4


Count 6) When he anchors, he does the same thing, he straightens his posture, he pulls that string up and presses down


You do this on counts 2, 4, 6 of your 6 beat patterns and 2, 4, 6, 8 of your 8 beat patterns
Just a comfortable toning of the muscles is necessary
It's a great way to keep those muscles in shape
The difference is it gives it some life there.

That's how you acquire pulsing...

Gadget
15th-July-2009, 09:19 PM
~Pulsing stuff~
Why? :confused:

I just don't get what "pulsing" will add to my dancing - What are the benefits I will see in my dancing, and/or in my leading? (assuming that I took time & effort to become proficient in it.)

I can see benefits of learning the self-control and discipline that would enable me to actually do it, but I can't figure out why I would want to apply these to 'pulse'??

Alan Doyle
15th-July-2009, 09:53 PM
Why? :confused:

I just don't get what "pulsing" will add to my dancing - What are the benefits I will see in my dancing, and/or in my leading? (assuming that I took time & effort to become proficient in it.)

I can see benefits of learning the self-control and discipline that would enable me to actually do it, but I can't figure out why I would want to apply these to 'pulse'??

Pulsing is advanced technique. It sounds more difficult to do than it actually is.
Pulsing gives your dancing a different look and feel and it raises your level of dancing.
If you compete in WSDC competitions, this is one of the criteria you will be judged on.

Alan Doyle
15th-July-2009, 11:18 PM
Well Sir, the floor is yours. I would love to hear about Skippy's timing if you have time to dash out an explanation :)

In terms of timing it can be divided in it's separate elements:

Timing
- On Downbeat
- Pulsing
- Aware of Breaks
- Degree of Critical Timing (Rolling Count)

1) On the Down beat
I've already discussed dancing on the down beat and dancing on the up beat - whether you dance (lead) on the down beat or dance (lead) on the up beat. Most people lead on the up beat in Modern Jive.

Modern Jive Count
1 (down) & (up)
2 (down) & (up)
3 (down) & (up)
4 (down) & (up)
5 (down) & (up)
6 (down) & (up)
7 (down) & (up)
8 (down) & (up)

All other dances
1 (down) 2 (up)
3 (down) 4 (up)
5 (down) 6 (up)
7 (down) 8 (up)
1 (down) 2 (up)
3 (down) 4 (up)
5 (down) 6 (up)
7 (down) 8 (up)

Most modern jive teachers count in.
5 &
6 &
7 &
8 &(lead)
1 &(lead)
2 &(lead) etc.
This is dancing (leading) on the up beat

2) Pulsing, I've discussed pulsing.
Swing dancers dance on the down beat but pulse the up beat.

3) Awareness of Breaks in the music

Here's a good article on hitting the breaks:
http://www.eijkhout.net/lead_follow/hit_the_breaks.html

"Most breaks that you want to hit come at the end of verses, chorus or bridge.
Novice dancers stop during a break
Advanced dancers acknowledges the break and plays with it."

4) Degree of critical timing (using rolling count)

Modern Jive Count
1 (down) &(up)
2 (down) &(up)
3 (down) &(up)
4 (down) &(up)
5 (down) &(up)
6 (down) &(up)
7 (down) &(up)
8 (down) &(up)

Straight Count
&1(down) &2(up)
&3(down) &4(up)
&5(down) &6(up)
&7(down) &8(up)
&1(down) &2(up)
&3(down) &4(up)
&5(down) &6(up)
&7(down) &8(up)

Rolling Count
&a1(down) &a2(up)
&a3(down) &a4(up)
&a5(down) &a6(up)
&a7(down) &a8(up)
&a1(down) &a2(up)
&a3(down) &a4(up)
&a5(down) &a6(up)
&a7(down) &a8(up)

frodo
16th-July-2009, 12:32 AM
:rofl: Nice one. You had me going for a moment there - I took you seriously for a while, until I read it for a third time and realised this had to be a wind-up....

OK, so it isn't qualified/is broadly put, but I'm still trying to make some serious points.

As NZ Monkey touched on, music teacher don't teach useless stuff if you want to be a musician.


People who can count music (like music teachers) and didn't find it difficult (probably went to learn about music because they didn't find it difficult), have unrealistic ideas about how others can learn.

Because they didn't find it difficult they don't have a realistic view of what is involved in learning.

Hence the response to EmmyLou's statement.



Hang on a second.

I’m assuming by music teachers you mean music teachers in schools, as those are the only ones likely to have taught anything about music to most people? If so, then it’s not surprising that what they teach isn’t necessarily too relevant to dancing. They’re teaching music after all, not dance, and notation etc is really rather important if you want to be a musician or learn about music.
Music, but seldom popular music - stuff not relevant to most people - important only to a minority.



There is some confusion from musicians when dancers start talking about music, because often the same terms are used in each but with a slightly different meaning. EmmyLou is correct when she says that there is only 4 beats to a bar in MJ music. It’s the dancers that group music in pairs of bars, or 8 beats.
I'm not sure of it is only a dance thing that music is grouped in 8's as well as 4's. The music is grouped in 8's as well as 4's in popular music, so why shouldn't music teaching recognise that.

frodo
16th-July-2009, 12:41 AM
Here’s an article Skippy has written on Pulsing:
http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm (http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm)

Useful. I was looking on the web last night to find out what it was, but Google didn't take me straight to it.

The term doesn't seem to be that widely used/understood though. I'm wondering how widely it is practiced, and where it started. Did it start with WCS and/or Skippy and other dance forms pick it up.

straycat
16th-July-2009, 08:58 AM
Why? :confused:

I just don't get what "pulsing" will add to my dancing - What are the benefits I will see in my dancing, and/or in my leading? (assuming that I took time & effort to become proficient in it.)

OK - I don't really quite get what Alan's saying (any WCS experts want to chip in?), so I'll stick to what I know, and talk about the Lindy version, which is a bounce.

So in Lindy

You pulse / bounce on every beat..
The bounce is a smooth whole-body bounce, downward into the floor.
It's done consistently on every beat, no matter what footwork you are doing.
It's part of the bread-and-butter of the dance - Lindy just doesn't feel right without it.
A follower will feel the leader's bounce, and match it.

The reasons for it are twofold - it helps with movement, and with connection / leading.
It is, quite simply, much easier to move, transfer weight and change direction when you put the bounce in, especially at speed.
On the connection front - the bounce makes it much much easier to connect and lead - easier to demonstrate than to describe, but in essence, it provides regular moments when it becomes much easier to change your partner's direction of movement.

As to how this might relate to MJ - well - I'm open on that score. Certainly I use it, but it ties in with so much else in Lindy that I don't think it's any use in isolation. Simply adding that bounce in MJ in isolation probably doesn't serve much purpose, IMO.

straycat
16th-July-2009, 09:15 AM
People who can count music (like music teachers) and didn't find it difficult (probably went to learn about music because they didn't find it difficult), have unrealistic ideas about how others can learn.

Because they didn't find it difficult they don't have a realistic view of what is involved in learning.

Well - my partner, who is a music teacher, might have something to say on that score. Bear in mind that she's spent over twenty years teaching music to people of all ages and backgrounds, most from scratch, so I'd say that she has a much more realistic view on the difficulties of learning it than most.


Music, but seldom popular music - stuff not relevant to most people - important only to a minority.
You'd be surprised at just how much popular music and classical do have in common. I agree that far too many music teachers emphasise the learning of classical, rather than applying music theory to what is current and popular, and I agree that this is a crying shame, and probably puts a lot of people off learning music. This doesn't mean, however, that music theory doesn't apply to more accessible forms of music (pop, latin, swing, you name it.) It very much applies, and can be of huge benefit to understanding said music.


I'm not sure of it is only a dance thing that music is grouped in 8's as well as 4's. The music is grouped in 8's as well as 4's in popular music, so why shouldn't music teaching recognise that.

I'll put that one to a musician ;) Certainly - when I touch on musical structure in our classes, I usually kick off by redefining the "dancers' bar" as having eight beats, and can then pick out the musicians from the group by the faces they pull :D

straycat
16th-July-2009, 09:26 AM
Useful. I was looking on the web last night to find out what it was, but Google didn't take me straight to it.

Thanks for that. I'm still not sure I understand the point of it though...

As a lindy hopper / swing DJ though, I find her use of the term 'swing music' a little curious - presumably she means 'music used in WCS'? Is she actually redefining the term 'swing music' as well as the term 'swing dance'? Colour me perplexed...

Alan Doyle
16th-July-2009, 09:32 AM
OK - I don't really quite get what Alan's saying (any WCS experts want to chip in?), so I'll stick to what I know, and talk about the Lindy version, which is a bounce.

So in Lindy

You pulse / bounce on every beat..
The bounce is a smooth whole-body bounce, downward into the floor.
It's done consistently on every beat, no matter what footwork you are doing.
It's part of the bread-and-butter of the dance - Lindy just doesn't feel right without it.
A follower will feel the leader's bounce, and match it.
The reasons for it are twofold - it helps with movement, and with connection / leading.
It is, quite simply, much easier to move, transfer weight and change direction when you put the bounce in, especially at speed.
On the connection front - the bounce makes it much much easier to connect and lead - easier to demonstrate than to describe, but in essence, it provides regular moments when it becomes much easier to change your partner's direction of movement.

As to how this might relate to MJ - well - I'm open on that score. Certainly I use it, but it ties in with so much else in Lindy that I don't think it's any use in isolation. Simply adding that bounce in MJ in isolation probably doesn't serve much purpose, IMO.

The bounce is essential in Lindy Hop, it is part of the style and essence of the dance but it is not pulsing.


Skippy Blair “Instead of an even 1&2 3&4 you have a stretch on 2 and 4”

Here’s an article Skippy has written on Pulsing:
http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm (http://www.swingworld.com/articles/Pulsing%20Heartbeat%20of%20the%20dance.htm)

To quote Skippy “Pulsing is not a bounce. It does not require going up on your toes or making a loud noise. It is simply the firming of the muscles around the Center Point of Balance (solar plexus) on every Upbeat, (2, 4, 6 & 8 in the music).”

If you need further explanation, I'll be happy to ask Skippy when I head back over in August.

NZ Monkey
16th-July-2009, 01:17 PM
If you need further explanation, I'll be happy to ask Skippy when I head back over in August.Can you ask her to explain in concise English this time please? :stirring:

Edit: Of course, you could always try explaining it yourself :whistle:

David Franklin
16th-July-2009, 01:36 PM
Can you ask her to explain in concise English this time please? :stirring:

Edit: Of course, you could always try explaining it yourself :whistle:Heck, I'd by happy if anyone would try to actually explain it (as opposed to spending 90% of their effort hyping it).

David Franklin
16th-July-2009, 01:50 PM
Originally Posted by Alan Doyle]To quote Skippy “Pulsing is not a bounce. It does not require going up on your toes or making a loud noise. It is simply the firming of the muscles around the Center Point of Balance (solar plexus) on every Upbeat, (2, 4, 6 & 8 in the music).”
If you need further explanation, I'll be happy to ask Skippy when I head back over in August.The thing is, in the same post you quote, you also give a long, complex description (by Mary Ann Nunez) of pulsing for a single move, involving discussion of: feet positions, pressing into the floor, posture and muscles in the back.

So which description is right?

Also, could you please post in "plain text" without fancy formatting? Your posts are absolutely riddled with "color = black" and "font = verdana" tags, which makes them a complete pain in the neck to quote for other people. The font size is also too small for me to read comfortably on here.

[I'm guessing it happens when you cut-and-paste from other documents you have about WCS. You might want to take a little more care with that - to be honest, it all reminds me of when people get really into 'cultish' organizations are all ready with 'cheat sheets' to quote whenever asked to explain something. It's probably very unfair of me, but it leaves me thinking you're just parrotting stuff you don't necessarily understand yourself].

straycat
16th-July-2009, 01:54 PM
Heck, I'd by happy if anyone would try to actually explain it (as opposed to spending 90% of their effort hyping it).

Well - I've had a careful read through the article that frodo linked to, and carefully studied some youtube videos of the top WCS pros, and have come to the following conclusion.
.
.
.
I haven't the slightest clue what she's talking about.

Certainly I can see no trace of anything like what's described. OK so given the description 'simply the firming of the muscles around the solar plexus', seeing that is going to be a tough call, but since Alan contends that it's part of the competition judging criteria, it must be visible somehow. Perhaps I'm looking for the wrong thing.

It has been brought home to me recently that a little focus on keeping one's core muscles tight during a dance can do wonders to improve one's lead / follow / connection. I'm not sure what pulsing them at 50-70bpm would do, but it's got to be a great workout for your abs. Perhaps this is actually a secret recipe for a sixpack? :whistle:

David Franklin
16th-July-2009, 02:04 PM
Well - I've had a careful read through the article that frodo linked to, and carefully studied some youtube videos of the top WCS pros, and have come to the following conclusion.
.
.
.
I haven't the slightest clue what she's talking about.I know Skippy is tremendously respected in the WCS world, but this is nearly always where I'm left after reading one of her articles as well.

I've also actually done a workshop (a simple class, nothing intensive) of hers about 'critical timing', where I was left with the impression that what she was really talking about was 'accenting' the upbeats. In the class, what I felt worked for me was to think about an extra 'crispness' on the upbeats. (In some ways, it was nothing more than thinking "123&4567&8" when counting).


Certainly I can see no trace of anything like what's described. OK so given the description 'simply the firming of the muscles around the solar plexus', seeing that is going to be a tough call, but since Alan contends that it's part of the competition judging criteria, it must be visible somehow. Perhaps I'm looking for the wrong thing.I can't see it either. I'm told that if you get someone like Jordan to do the same sequence twice, with/without pulsing you can actually see a difference (but it's subtle). But I'm also slightly unconvinced how much even a pro like Jordan can "switch off" the pulsing while keeping all the other "performance" mechanics that he would normally use, so I'm not convinced it's a good way of illustrating the benefits.

Gadget
16th-July-2009, 02:15 PM
Pulsing is advanced technique. It sounds more difficult to do than it actually is.
Pulsing gives your dancing a different look and feel and it raises your level of dancing.
If you compete in WSDC competitions, this is one of the criteria you will be judged on.
OK here's where I repeat: What will it add to my dancing?
I don't want to look or feel like a WCS dancer - personally I dislikes the look of it. If I wanted to dance WCS, I would. I dance MJ; I want to dance MJ.

Stray: thanks for your thoughts - much more enlightening :cheers:
I understand how if both partners are synchronous at a specific, easily defined point in time (ie the 'bounce' in lindy or 'pulse' in WCS), then it becomes easier to lead and follow: less 'background noise' to filter out.
... but ...
I still don't get why I would want to in MJ :confused:

NZ Monkey
16th-July-2009, 07:46 PM
Generally skeptical stuff:yeah:Due to the need to get some sleep before going to work yesterday I didn't get to post as much as I'd like.

So now, Id like to thank David Franklin and Straycat for summing up my thought's and observations perfectly in the above posts and saving me the effort.

emmylou25
16th-July-2009, 08:02 PM
This reminds me - most conductors (certainly the ones I've seen) will happily switch between conducting "in 2" or "in 4" (or whatever) depending on what they feel is right at the time.

It won't necessarily be what's written in the music and the people being conducted have to adapt, especially as it can change in the middle of a phrase and probably won't be the same in rehearsal as in concert. But the music will still sound pretty much the same either way.

So I don't get too hung up on how many beats are in a bar - you can still dance to it exactly the same.

As long as everyone (whether that's the orchestra or the couple dancing) are together with the music it shouldn't matter, but it does help in being able to find the same beat (I prefer downbeat on 1, but the connection is more important). And if someone's leading to a phrase or beat that doesn't match what I'm hearing, that makes it really hard to dance with them and probably vice versa.

straycat
16th-July-2009, 08:17 PM
I still don't get why I would want to in MJ :confused:

Well - let's look at it sensibly.

1) improve your connection with the floor, and economy / speed of movement (bounce)
2) Improve your connection with your partner (bounce / pulse)
3) Firm up / tone up your abs, and get a better posture into the bargain (pulse)

1 will be good for your dancing.
3 will help with any back problems you may or may not have, or might have been heading for in the future.
2 & 3 will impress the chicks. Especially those rock-hard abs. Mmmmm.

How can you lose? :D