.. sometimes or often tells me what I should be doing with my feet.
.. never tells me what my feet should be doing.
.. says "there is no footwork".
But there's only one beat (half a count) between the eighth beat (count '8') and the first beat. At least in the version that Andy's been decrying, there's two beats, because 8 comes on the 7.
As an aside, my favoured lead-in is the Lindy standard '5 6 7 8' on the last four beats of an eight beat mini-phrase. Which has several advantages, one of which is that you're actually counting with the music. But then - I don't (and wouldn't) teach MJ.
I think that we all get it wrong sometimes. Remember that the person who never made a mistake never made anything.
I think that Todd has confused the beat count and what some people call the "dancing count" or even the "Ceroc Count"*. The other thing I think Todd has confused is a weight transfer with a step and a step-in-place weight transfer. Consider a rock-step, there is only one step, but there's two weight tranfers, one on each beat with the front foot stepping in place.
There is no "Count" at Ceroc: just a Lord...
.. of Darkness![]()
Maybe I should say 'weight transfer every beat'. Anyway, the video is hopefully easier to understand.
Hopefully is also obvious why by always rocking back on my left, and the follower on her right, we automatically end up in the mirrored 'back on the outside foot' position almost universally taught.
To repeat: I'm not suggesting you have to dance Modern Jive with this footwork, just that its the easiest and most usefull pattern to teach initially.
Was teaching a workshop yesterday where we covered a lot of footwork issues, and I had occasion to think about this some more.
I don't think the marching issue is caused by footwork timing (eg stepping on every beat) - I think it's just down to how people step. Here's something to try.
Stand in front of a mirror. Pick up one foot. Put it down. Pick up the other. Put it down. Keep doing this in time to a steady rhythm, with little or no body movement. You'll look, chances are, like you're marching.
Now for something slightly different. Make sure you're standing with your feet hip-width apart, weight slightly forward, toward the balls of your feet. Relax your knees / hips / ankles a little to sink a couple of inches down into the floor. Weight on the right leg, and straighten it - which will raise the left foot off the floor. Relax down with the right, to put the left down. Straighten the left to pick the right up. Do that to a steady rhythm, keeping it smooth.
So ... assuming I've conveyed this well enough, you now have two different ways of stepping, to the same simple beat, which look completely different from each other - and the latter technique (which forms the basis for the Lindy 'bounce') won't look remotely like marching - try imagining that on a parade ground....
This is why I prefer to start with 'how', and move on to when & where. If you get the initial technique right (or, at least, the initial foundations thereof), when & where become much easier. If you teach when & where without that initial technique, people get invested in their own 'how', and find it much harder to put that technique in later.
I was also teaching a workshop yesterday - although it didn't get me thinking any more. Of course it's about the way you do it.
The workshop I taught yesterday was about the basics of MJ. Once I've discussed the music with people I get them walking around the room to the beat using correct MJ basic footwork as I teach it. The surprising thing is how many people do a sort of kick on the beat instead of a step on the beat. I fix this by getting them to stamp on every beat and then change this to a stamp on the 1 - which also helps them to find the 1. Then I tell them not to stamp when they're dancing and just walk to the beat or step in place.
Just because you walk it doesn't mean you have to march. Otherwise we'd see people marching through Tesco!
Look at Amir's video. Catriona is transferring her weight on every beat in the open hold. She's not marching.
No indeed. But put newcomers into what they feel is a 'dance' context, and ask them to do the simplest thing (eg walk around the room in time to some music), and they are very unlikely to walk the way they normally do - they'll try to 'dance' it somehow. I've seen it, you've seen it - in fact, I'm sure I've seen you comment on the phenomenon on here before - and we've probably most of us done it when we were new to dance. If you ask them to step on the spot in time to music, you're very likely to see some kind of marching look.
There's many ways to overcome this - you've outlined your way, and I've outlined a very specific exercise which I use to teach a lot of Lindy footwork. I was simply illustrating to todd that the 'marching' phenomenon isn't a product of timing or placement, but of technique.
I think I missed the part where anyone suggested she was...
However - she's not 'just' walking, either. There's a lot of technique hidden in that slinky glide of hers...
I think that there was a suggestion that stepping or changing weight on every beat is marching.
You are right. There's years of training required to be able to stand like Catriona, let alone walk like her. The good news is that anybody attempting to copy that movement is very unlikely to be accused of "marching".
Firstly, I'd like to thank everyone for taking the time to post and try to put me straight..!
Secondly, I'd like to apologise!
I've just been through (physically, counting & to music) what I do (in the warm up) and taken time to think about the timing that I do week in week out (in comparison to what I posted the other day) and have now realised that I managed to totally confuse myself!!!
For some reason I was thinking about the step back (every other beat) but completely ignored the fact that there is a following step forward. IE a step on every beat (with associated weight transfer, etc)...
And there was me thinking you guys were trying to over complicate a very simple thing![]()
Ah I shouldn't even get involved but....
I've been finding recently that sometimes, sometracks are very well suited to stepping on ever beat.
And some are just really, really not.
Unless your going to restrict the musical tempo or phrase of modern jive music, i'm not sure what the merit of persribed foot work is?
Can you give some examples of tracks that are not?
I don't think the thrust of the debate has been about setting any footwork in stone.
Footwork is a crucial part of your toolkit of techniques for moving to, and interpreting music, not to mention connecting with your partner.
To my mind, the earlier one begins to gain a good grounding in that area, the easier one will find it to improve and learn new moves & techniques.
I think that the tempo of music limited in MJ. I'm not sure anybody disgrees with this. People do have a difference of opinion about where the range begins and ends, but I don't think anybody says that the tempo is unrestricted.
The "merit" of the basic footwork is simply that, it's the basic. It's what you learn when you're a beginner. After that you can have any variations that you can lead and that the lady can follow.
However, I have observed that most ladies stick with the basic, no matter how long they've been dancing.
Ok last two songs I down loaded.
Alica keys try sleeping with a broken heart.
And
Keri hillson - I like
I think these are jiveable anyway, I haven't actually tried.
Both tracks have fairly 'broken' beats.
I mean you could 'walk through them'. But stepping on them might feel a little 'odd'.
Now LL cool J -Pheomenon
You can walk around to all day.
Try this - calvin harris - you used to hold me (nero remix).
Again I've don't know if this is actually jiveable, but just try walking to it as an exercise.
It's just uncomfortable fast or uncomfortable slow. You really got to get up on your toes to make it work.
I'm not anti foot work. I'm just making an observation.
jim
you're first 2 selections are lovely tracks to dance to
to be honest, I got bored with the other two - neither made it past about 30 seconds, which is probably how long it would take to empty a dance floor (IMHO)
What dance are you doing?
83bpm
125bpm
Both tracks are performed at different speeds. The beat is never "broken", whatever that means. It keeps going so you could dance to it so long as you chose a dance that suited the speed of the track.
The Alica Keys track, at 83bpm is too slow for MJ. Therefore you will have trouble doing the basic MJ footwork. I would have no problem with dancing MJ to the Keri Hillson track - however, there is a bit where the drum stops beating to mark the beat that might confuse beginners. Of course the beat is still there, it's just that the drum stops beating it out.
105bpm - Still a bit slow for main-stream MJ, but a danceable speed for MJ. Speaking personally I like the interesting bit of the music to be the melody, not the meaning of the lyrics. For me this kind of music is like street poetry to a beat and a bit of a tune. Who wants to dance to the beat of poetry?
130bpm but over 6 mins long and a bit repetitive. You could jive to it but I can't see why you'd want to.
The problem in ballroom is 'how' takes years to learn and you can't really split out the how from the where... for example, to learn a simple waltz step, you have to know the footwork pattern before you can start to learn how to roll your weight over your foot to create the rise and fall.
Both tracks use a bit of syncopation and one of them uses a rest to emphasise a beat (I think it's the 3, but I wasn't listening that closely). This is musical variation, that has nothing to do with the structure of the song.
All four follow a simple pop beat and structure - which makes them like 99% of all ceroc songs. As Andy pointed out, there may be some issues with the tempo of some tracks.
I suspect there may be a confusion between the basic beat and structure of the song with the musical variation that happens within that structure. The point of a basic pattern in a dance is to fit with the basic beat and structure. The basic patterns people have referred to here all work with a simple 4/4 beat - which all of those tracks have.
Musicality starts with the beat. But the next step is to find and dance to the structure of the song (4 sets of 8 for most pop songs - including your examples). Then you have dancing to the musical and lyrical variations. But all of this starts with dancing to the beat and a basic footwork pattern in MJ lays that foundation.
I'm afraid I call "Smooth Jive" by it's proper name. That name is Modern Jive. The reason some people use "smooth" is to differentiate it from Modern Jive done badly in a jerky, frame-breaky, bouncy kinda way.
I don't think you can do basic Modern Jive to a track that's 83 bpm. And you'd have a real problem doing the LeRoc variation of MJ to a track that's 83bpm. Stepping on every second beat would mean you'd be changing your weight at 41.5bpm - who remembers the opening sequence to "Six Million Dollar Man"?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks