I have a situation where some people I play with do not have a good sense of rhythm and often rush and play very fast and it doesn't sound very clear.
1. When the music sounds garbled and it's hard to tell what someone's playing, is it just that the person is playing too fast or without rhythm, or are there other factors?
2. Any good suggestions for improving someone's rhythm without them being aware of it? Do you guys think people who believe they play good would be offended in someone told them their rhythm was bad, or is that way too hypothetical to ask?
3. Have any of you ever used a metronome when playing or practicing with others?
I know these are complicated questions, so I don't expect a lot. I am mainly looking to see if anyone has any bright ideas I can try.
1. could be lots of stuff.
2. get really secure in your own rhythm, so you can soldier on serenely. Or get new friends to play with. People can get p*ssed off at any number of things, who knows?
3. yes.
I use a metronome while practicing; it helps me learn the tunes faster, and have better rhythm out at sessions. If someone is playing too fast, I just try to keep up with them or not play with them. I would actually like it if someone told me I was playing out of rhythm; it would make me work harder at it. I also tap my foot pretty loud to keep the rhythm if somebody is having trouble with it; they usually catch on, and it is telling them in a nice way to keep the beat steady. I hope that helps.
It's basic session etiquette that a tune should be played at the speed set by the player who starts the tune (you?). If the other players go galloping off at a rate of knots then perhaps you could just stop playing and let the resulting train crash take place (now there's an interesting mix of metaphors!).
The message might get through to the miscreants , or, on the other hand, it might not
1. if someone is playing fast and with good rhythm, you can always tell what it is. if they are rushing, they do not keep time. time and rhythm are inexorably linked. thus if they rush, they dont keep time, dont have rhythm.
2. they must be aware of it. the only reason their rhythm might not be good is because they are not aware of it.
3. playing, yes. with others? no. but i dont see why not.
there are several things you can do. play with a metronome. learn how to tap your foot right--james kelly told me that if you watch people who rush, the beat is usually on the apex of the foot tap (i.e. when their foot is on the highest part). people who lag behind, their beat is when the foot hits the ground. people who play in time have their beat right in the middle, while the foot is travelling.
counting out rhythms is important. if you cant listen to a piece of music (reel, for example) and sing 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4 for the entire piece, and have your counting be in time, your playing is probably out of time too.
One good trick for practicing with a metronome is to bring it in the car and sing the tunes along with the beat of the metronome (unless, of course, you are navigating the challenging streets of my beloved Boston...)
It's all about people playing too fast for their ability. Just get 'em to slow it down, right down.
Playing faster than your ability is the most common cause of murder in this music. You should never play faster than your ability. There's a common thing in sessions where good players might start a set at a fair lick, and the not so stronger players join in and kind of keep up. The not so stronger players think it is upping their game playing fast with these better players, but it's not. I never understand why people think they can play faster than their ability just because they are playing with someone else.
Just hang off and after, just say, "Phew, that was too fast for me." And if needs be, follow it with, "And it was pretty clear that it was too fast for you guys too."
Metronomes: If you have uneven phrasing, a metronome will make it worse. The usual cause for uneven phrasing is stumbling over a "difficult bit". What happens is you either slow down or rush the difficult bit because you are playing too fast. A metronome isn't going to suddenly make you be able to play the difficult bit better, but what it will do is make you slow down or rush the following phrase - a phrase that before the metronome you could probably play fine - to catch up.
Oh dear, I find myself agreeing with Ilig, does that mean I'm turning into a cranky old fart?
I was taught many years ago to practise counting everything except music, by which I mean by all means listen to a metronome, count your footsteps whilst walking etc etc, but rely on instinct while playing. A metronome can only get in the road whilst playing.
It is my pet theory that all tunes have a "born" tempo, too fast or slow and they just don't come out right. A good technique for dropping the hint in a session is to "nail" the first beat of the bar.
' ..... what it will do is make you slow down or rush the following phrase - a phrase that before the metronome you could probably play fine - to catch up'.
Michael, could you try to explain how this works in your experience, because I never noticed that myself.
To answer enirethac's question no. 3: I work with a metronome sometimes - not very often - and even used it for duo playing, taking a speed that was * far* below 'concert speed'. If you can play togethether at ridiculously low speed, while still keeping - or at least trying to keep - phrasing and swing intact, higher speeds are no threat.
This is one of the rare situations where I think you're wrong, llig. Agreed, some people stumble over difficult parts and it messes up their rhythm. Metronomes will do exactly what you say for them. (unless they slow down, right down and use a metronome to help)
I tend to have tempos I'm used to playing at because I've always played at them (I still have a lot of trouble with session speed - still too fast for me to play with any musicality). It's a kind of "tempo gravity well". Any slower and I can't stay steady. Any faster and I speed up to my "maximum speed". A metronome helps me stay consistent.
Then, of course, you have to progressively get rid of the metronome as it's potentially a worse crutch than outrigger wheels for bicycles.
Our session is getting more and more popular because it's known that when we start a tune with a certain tempo, we keep it quite nicely... and maybe I'm getting old, but I like more and more not too fast tempos, where you can here everything. I just stop playing when it's too fast and wait...
I do practice with a metronome, ever since I found out that my foot tapping wasn't correct (it tended to follow the acceleration, rather than steadying it !) : you can use it in a lot of ways : very slow on every note : makes you feel where you are accelerating... and then on every beat. And the last straw - I said already in another thread : on beats 2 and 4 : gives you a nice steady rythm.
In the session, if you're starting a set, try to keep your tempo whatever happens...
and keep in moind Michael's advice : learn slow !
Some tunes seem to prefer a specific tempo, but the best are more flexible. Part of the art of playing the music well is getting any tune to sound perfect at any tempo. This means teasing different aspects out of tunes, exploring them. Matt Molloy's Drowsie Maggie is a fine example.
A metronome will give you a finite amount of time to play two phrases. If you stumble over the first phrase, for any reason, the metronome will make you speed up the next phrase to catch up ... so you and the metronome can finish together.
What's worse, playing one out of two phrases wrong? Or being forced to play both wrong?
In itself, the metronome will not help your stumbling. The only thing that can help is to take your speed down to where ever you can play that phrase well. Then play the whole tune at that tempo. You might find this difficult at first, you might find you want to rush the bits you could play fine at the faster tempo. But you must persevere until you can play well at this slower speed before moving up.
You absolutely have to be able to hear for yourself where you are speeding up or slowing down. It's no good having the metronome tell you. You have to hear it for yourself otherwise you will never ever be able to understand the more subtle aspects of phrasing.
In my experience the times we play too fast is when accompanying set dancers or when a tune is led off by a player new to the tradition. The first is one we must grin and bear as that's what dancers want and in any case the rhythm is normally maintained. However, with the latter unless there are sufficient experienced players present to try and keep things on track one does end up with the runaway train syndrome.
I have to agree with earlier posters the most tunes have a personality and an ideal tempo and rhythm that good players instinctively use. If we attempt to put all tunes into a strait jacket (a reel is a reel is a reel) then I think we'd lose a lot of what makes the tradition what it is. The best solution to good sessions is listening to each other and in particular the most experienced musicians present. I think that this would obviate the need for a metronome.
I know what you mean Rambler. If I have a sweet or gum in my mouth when I'm playing, I have to either just suck it, or chew it in time to the music. I certainly can't chew at a different rhythm to the music!
Bit like talking & playing. I have to talk in time to the tune.
Jig time: I need a DRINK can you GET me a PINT!
Reel time: I am feel ing VER y thirst y CAN i have a PINT of be..er
It's okay, Chris. I discovered I can't count and do anything musical simultaneously either. Years ago, long before I ever started playing Irish music (which was like discovering the Holy Grail since everything is in 4/4, 6/8, or 9/8). It was at that time I developed a phobia of music with weird time signatures. I remember being in choir and being handed new music for the semester and feeling this awful sense of dread when my choir director gleefully announced, "This one's in 7/32!"
"A metronome will give you a finite amount of time to play two phrases. If you stumble over the first phrase, for any reason, the metronome will make you speed up the next phrase to catch up ... so you and the metronome can finish together."
well as llig has said he cant play with a metronome I wonder where this bit of nonsense comes from? his imagination no doubt. Its clear he doesnt know how to use a metronome, has no experience and is merely repeating a myth.
chris try singing and playing fiddle or banjo at the same time ,,, just takes practice like anything else.
Some people like this bit of gear some not.. no more than personal taste. However if the entire world of music bar a few odd cases recomend the metronome as an invaluable tool then I for one would go with the metronome.
Even top ranking fiddlers use it both for recording and basic practice, a fact. In fact anyone who cant play with one without problem IMO is a poor musician, especially for dance music.
I found it an invaluable learning experience especially for keeping a solid pulse going, I highly recomend it to all. It is a hard task master but fair.
>chris try singing and playing fiddle or banjo at the same time
My family have never me ou, Ionannas, nor thave they read this message. But deep down in the bottom of their souls, unbeknown to themselves, an intense hatred has been born for the mysterious stranger know only as "Ionannas".
That two such things should be wished simultaneously on the innocent!
If a phrase is causing you to stumble then it's usually a question of technique. As has been said, take the speed down to where you can play it well.
This is where a metronome can help.
Isolate that phrase, play it slowly as mentioned then use the metronome to measure that tempo. When you and the metronome are bang on together make a note of the metronome setting. When you are ready to try a little faster, increase the speed of the metronome by say just one step and play that phrase again till you can play it well and in time. Repeat the exercise, increasing the tempo each time. If you stumble at any of the increased tempi stop and go back to the tempo where you could play the phrase well. Only increase the tempo when you've got it nailed at the tempo you're at.
The point of this is only to give metronomic values to the exercise so that you can measure your progress as you deal with whatever technical difficulty that was causing the stumble in the first place.
It's an aid to improving technique in order to play fluently. Once you've sorted out your gummy fingers you can get back to playing the music unhampered and certainly without the metronome.
The only use I can see for a metronome is to set a speed (I'm referring to learning) and then switch it off before you start playing. This is what my piano teacher did when I was a child - it was used as a means to gradually increase the speed over a period of weeks from dead slow up to what the composer wanted, and it was NEVER used as a metrical background for the music while playing. .
Someone mentioned about playing for set dancing. Yes, it is faster than most session playing, but it is manageable. The trick I find is to watch the dancers, their feet in particular. This keeps your mind off the technical aspects of your playing, and you'll find that the faster pace is an irrelevance and that you're doing it without realising. Just keep a weather eye on the band leader for cues about tune changes or when the dance is coming to an end. And, obviously, listen to what the other players are doing.
7/32 - That doesn't surprise me (even if it was made up!). In my orchestral playing I've come across strange bar sequences like 3/8 - 1/16 - 5/8 - 3/4, which is what you get when a composer tries to force an inherently unnotatable musical phrase into the strait-jacket of standard notation. It might be better in such situations to dispense with bar-lines entirely (as the pianist-composer Erik Satie often did).
One way to slow others down if they're pulling ahead of you is to play more quietly, and look around as you lower the volume to see who's listening and who's not -- this doesn't always work, especially in a large session, but when it does it's a great way of cleaning up the sound.
I use a met for playing slowly or at medium tempo. The met can show where you might be going off tempo because of a complex phrase or ornament, for example. Without the met, and without slowing the entire tune down, you might not realize you're doing it.
Also, something to try with a met: when going slowly, play the tune as well as you can, and put your one-beat not just on the click, but in the exact center of the click. After a while, this will have a nice effect on your listening, and on helping you find and feel the groove of the tune.
Would your point about the metronome also be related to this point made in a discussion by WillCPT?
I.e.,
"In any case, it's usually not about locking into just a downbeat pulse or a backbeat pulse the way bluegrass, old timey, or rock does. In Irish trad, it's about being free to emphasize any of those four beats, either strongly or weakly, to best serve the melody."
Now, reading the above in relation to what you said about the drawbacks of using a metronome, I'm guessing that what you're saying also is ...or implying...is that a metronome artificially rushes or slows down the ability to *play* with the phrasing? So, if you're phrasing isn't quite right to begin with, you're never going to: 1. get it sorted out 2. realize the different ways to play with that phrasing [by exploring] because you'll be a slave to the tick tock ....
WillCPT also said, as did you Michael that:
"if you *want* to play with a smoother pulse, try emphasizing only the first beat of eachmeasure or phrase. Miss McLeod's is a good tune for this "
Now, as you said in another earlier post about "carving a tune" all you need to do is keep mindful of that beat which falls mainly on the 1 [first beat] and "point the tune downhill" keeping a moderate speed, or slowly at first and "play it straight on the nose striaght through"
IF one does that I'm guessing you don't much need a metronome...a foot will do.
And, Michael, you added this great example by Kelly who, as you point out, (although he's motoring along quite nicely) is playing mainly on the "one"....an approach that probably doesn't require a metronome to train you to do that....it's more a case of listening closely to youself and using your ears.
Listen. You can't play music decently if you can't listen to yourself and others. Anyone whose timing and rhythm is all screwed up and they don't notice it, isn't listening to the sound they are making, so that would be their first problem.
Slow down. Dance. Anyone who can tap their foot can dance. Anyone who can dance and play music (not at the same time), doesn't need a metrognome. Just hop from foot to foot by yourself, in the privacy of your own home, you’re just tapping your foot while standing without playing. How hard can that be? ONE two three four ONE two three four. ONE two three FOUR five six. There. Your goal is now to play as evenly as you hop or tap. Internalize it.
People get all whiny with me on here when I remind them that this is dance music, but guess what? It is. Whether or not someone is dancing to it, it’s still dance music. Accepting and understanding this would probably solve a lot of rhythm issues. That’s MO, YRMV.
Also, on the long runs of notes on reels I notice folks often playing the runs too fast, this is a natural place to accelerate it seems, in particular for learners with windy instruments. They ZOOM through the phrases too quickly, which leads them to play the next phrase quicker, thus leading to playing the speeding up phrase quicker, and so on and so on until…CRASH!
Good thread. I agree with Ilig...actually I am following his much earlier advice (or maybe it was teasing) to slow down...even to the ridiculous maximous. It is very hard to play slow....but you hear the detail so you can 'burn it in' as it were.
God knows I am still on the upside of the learning curve, but that is where I think I make progress.
Which is where the metronome comes in. Ilig is sort of right. If you use the metronome and are uneven in passages...the metronome is of little use... However. If you use it, your messing up a passage and getting out of sync is a great signal to stop, either slow down or shurt off the metronome and work through that problem passage slowly.
My teacher is big on that. Focus on the problem passages and get them perfect...and do that slowly.
Greg's advice on metronome use is something I have also found successful. Someonelse here (as well as my teacher) says you must sing the song to really burn it in. In Fact, I have a 40 mile drive to my lesson via Chicago's notorious expressway system. I prepare for my lesson, especially in the early phase of getting a tune up to speed (no pun intended) running the metronome at a nice even pace and diddly deeing it while I drive.
What I would really appreciate..and ilig you seem to be the old pro on this, what are the rhythm tricks that people talk about. For things in 4s, some told me to think "alligator, alligator etc..." What are the pnemonics for jigs etc?
Sorry, SWFL fiddler, I still don't believe its dance music when played out of a dance context. But anyway.
Dance has to do with rhythm, maybe, but it doesn't help for a steady tempo. I'm a better dancer than most people will ever be (mainly because they don't bother/want to try) and yet I am very bad at sticking to a solid tempo.
The advantage of this is that unstable tempos don't bother me too much. The other advantage is that I "lean" on the music a lot when I'm dancing - which to some extent makes me a better dancer.
It's like Nikita says about foot tapping: if your foot can't tap at a steady rate, you'll end up following your foot rather than being stabilised by it.
And while I'm dubitative about metro(g)nomes, some of the best trad musicians I know have spent ages practicing to a metronome and play absolutely marvelously.
lazyhound, that is one use, but it is standard practice in many genres, though I doubt in 'classical', to record with one. Some of our favourite trad fiddlers use them specifically for that reason.
I didnt say it was essential to play with one, but for dance music it is essential 'to be able' to, even if you dont.
The dancers feet will move in time, if you cant keep that beet then you are not doing your job; putting the music under their feet.
That is one reason why all that sh!te techno music trance etc etc is so popular, the dancers KNOW the music is steady, that it will not throw them off. As both a dancer and player of trad I know that groove is essential, otherwise its undanceable.
Thanks mtodd. My high school classics went on hiatus when I decided to become an engineer.....or as my wife calls many of my freinds 'cultural illiterates' ...ouch
So how about if someone can play a few dance tunes, but not at session speed and needs to work on them at a slower tempo. And they are sometimes speeding up on the runs and not noticing it, or occasionally losing time when taking a breath, or when their motor skills are not quite up to it yet. And there is no-one around to say "do you know you are speeding up on that bit" etc.
Things suggested on previous discussions include recording oneself and listening to the playback, using a metronome sometimes, playing with recording slowed down with software, sticking to waltzes and marches etc until capable of learning and playing dance tunes at normal speed.
But all four have been argued against in discussions, the first three quite strongly.
It all comes down to being able to listen to yourself while you play.
If you can't tell when listening to someone else if their timing is off, then it's probably hopeless. Least ways, I can't think of a way to fix it. Other than put your instrument down and don't you dare touch it until you can hear if someone elses timing is off..
But if you can tell when listening to someone else if their timing is off, then I don't see the problem. Just listen to yourself, and where you go astray, fix it.
"mnemonics...from the greek goddess for Memory,
Mnemosyne, one of the Muses "
Very interesting, mtodd. Can you put me in touch with her? Does she do house calls? Expense is no object.
Oldstrings....I'll do that. She's expensive though...but as goddesses go, she's fairly reasonable.
Ah! Zip, sure, she's *your* very own goddess...but a mortal one. There are advantages. Your mortal one is less apt to kill you in a rage, etc. And she doesn't carry a lance.
Interesting point Tirno :"I still don't believe its dance music when played out of a dance context".
I would be inclined to agree with you. Although it is dance music IMO It doesn't therefore follow that it must be performed in a particular style. Just as we are free to ornament in our own fashion, we are also free to play the tunes at a pace and in a way we feel comfortable with.
But I would say this, that playing for dancers is an essential part of any trad musicians learning experience, IMO. Not that we must always play in this fashion, but that we can step up to the 'plate' when called upon. To be able to successfully support the sets there are certain essentials, correct pace {for the particular crowd} good lift swing and drive. These come from familiarity with both the dance and the music.
I have a few recordings where the players are pretty sketchy in some ways, for me it doesnt distract from the music, poor timing, is not so relevant if you are not playing for dancers and not trying to achieve a certain standard. The players I'm referring too would be older chaps, they have been there and done it countless times. There is a certain charm in these old recordings, quite likely were they in a modern warp speed session they would not fit in, but I dont think that matters. They are playing their music , in their way and for me thats enough. Its not a race or a competition.
"It all comes down to being able to listen to yourself while you play." Heard and understood. But it seems to be a skill to be worked on, something one can get better at. Maybe it improves as some other things become internalised and free up some processing capacity (which may be behind the 'stick to slower tunes until...' advice).
I can be more critical of my timing (and intonation, and phrasing etc, etc) when listening to a recording of myself than when playing. A metronome can sometimes click when I don't expect it to. At times I find each those four suggestions useful. There is a difference between a stepping stone and a crutch. How do you learn to listen ?
I agree, playing for dancers is an essential part of any trad musicians learning experience. It's a prerequisite. (and fun to boot, of course - though hard bloody work)
I also think that if you can't play with a metronome you must be pretty poor. (won't play with one is a different matter).
But being able to play with a metronome is still a long long way from being able to play. And while it's true that if you practice with one, you will get better at playing with one, if you can teach yourself to be able to play that rock steady accurately down the line merely by listening to yourself and adjusting, you will certainly be much further along the road than someone who learned to play steady by playing with the metronome
I dunno. Just by listening really. I can't see that it's that complicated.
Start with something you know like the back of your hand and play it straight, with no variations. Keep playing it and try to zen yourself out of the technique and just hear. Simply hear yourself playing. Even try recording it. Then play it back and if anything surprises you, if you hear anything in the recording that you didn't hear when you were playing. Do it again. And keep doing it until a recording of yourself gives you no surprises
Hmm, got to agree to most of that.
However I dont think that learning to play on the button without a met is any better or faster than with.
For example I played for many many years before I ever tried a metronome, my tunes were fine, no problem, but my bass playing sucked! As a part of the rhythm section the bass should IMO be precise. I wasn't. its only micro adjustments but those milliseconds make a huge difference . Playing with a met really helped sharpen up my playing.
It took me painstaking rather demoralising work for a few weeks, tedious for sure but the end result is what its all about IMO.
IMO the drive of a good player comes from riding on top of the tune, putting each note exactly where you want it to be.
So, listen when playing, review when done (the recording) better than trying to match a click ?
I'm pondering how the "rock steady acccurately down the line" without a timing reference ties in with the listening to others and not just going on ones own internal clock. *If* one is trying to stick tight on the beat how is the metronome that much worse than a dance band snare drummer (I may have asked that before). And, as an aside, would playing on the beat with a hypothetically slow dance band recording be useful stepping stone ?
Crossed with Ionannas, who's post sort of fits in with my ponderings. The tricky bit to aim for seems to be the subtlety. I can try and play close on the beat with a band recording and I know what I am trying to do. I can play along with a song trying to follow the rythym and intonation of the vocal line and I know what I am trying to do. But session playing seems to be not quite one and a long way from the other. But it sounds like the first might be preferable to what the OP is experiencing.
In actuality there is, especially in rock and jazz, the thing of playing slightly ahead of the beat, on it, or slightly behind it. Led Zepplin's drummer Bonham was a classic example of the latter. Driving or "leading" the beat is often done by jazz drummers...or rather when the drummer and bass player are in sync on that matter that's what seems to carry the group/band on a kind of rhythmic percussive wave.
Lazyhound, sometimes composers *want* those time signatures, and are totally comfortable with notating them that way. Just because you don't want to read them doesn't mean they didn't want them there!
A metronome can help you to hear how terrible your internal rhythm in a tune is, but it can't help you to stand on your own two feet rhythmically. Half the battle in improving so that you attain a rock-solid sense of rhythm is to be aware that you have a problem in the first place. Many people blithely go through life unaware of this crucial shortcoming. They have a great time whilst screwing everyone else up. The best thing is to record yourself playing your familiar stuff and listen back super-critically. This can really hurt, but unless you pinpoint the problem you'll never be able to tackle it. Longish passages with lots of notes of equal value can show up issues. Look out for speeding up in fast runs of notes (record yourself playing Harvest Home or Belfast Hornpipe for example). This is very common even in some otherwise proficient players. Get someone else to listen to your recordings as well. You need to tune in your ear to what is rock-solid, precise rhythm and what is wishy-washy all-over-the-place stuff. Listen critically to triplets and rolls - are you maintaining the rhythm of the tune before, during and after the ornament, or are you giving the ornament a tad too much time and throwing the next passage out? Try clapping along with your recorded playing to see whether you're keeping the rhythm. You can play along with CDs (like with metronomes, it's a good way of identifying the problem) but personally I think this has little value when it comes to helping you to stand on your own feet. If you know you have deficiencies in this regard the best way to improve is to play with good musicians with whom you can interact, and use your ears bigtime to listen to both them and yourself at the same time. During the learning curve you should find yourself making constant micro-adjustments all the time. When you get over the problem you'll be able to relax more in your new-found sense of rhythmic security. Once you've found it you can start to enjoy deliberately going off it here and there to add expression to your playing, but get there first.
(Speeding up on runs - tick. Giving to much time to rolls - tick. Now which tune was that , oh yes, Harvest Home. Speeding up on the runs - sorted. 'A' rolls - hmm, rate limiting factor)
"In actuality there is, especially in rock and jazz, the thing of playing slightly ahead of the beat, on it, or slightly behind it. Led Zepplin's drummer Bonham was a classic example of the latter. Driving or "leading" the beat is often done by jazz drummers...or rather when the drummer and bass player are in sync on that matter that's what seems to carry the group/band on a kind of rhythmic percussive wave."
--In jazz, at least when you're listening to the bop and hard bop groups, the interplay is more with the bass player playing on the front edge of the beat, the drummer keeping time dead solid on the ride cymbal, and the melody players laying back ever so slightly.
It's good practice to take a recording and really listen to where each player is placing notes in relation to the beat and how the whole interacts. Good thing to listen for on long drives ;)
"front edge of the beat, the drummer keeping time dead solid on the ride cymbal, and the melody players laying back ever so slightly."
I think what is happening is that between them they are making the beat 'bigger' . Its not like they are separate beats
IMO the thing is they all put their notes where they want them to be in relation to the other players. not necessarily consciously,
When you play alone there is not this flexibility, the main beats HAVE to be in place or it sounds scrappy, { up to you really if thats ok or not! } this allows the beat to be steady.
So even if you are playing a Strathspey, with an exaggerated skip there is still a steady beat. With these tricky rhythms, every one who is playing needs to be on the same page so to speak, if the drummer just plays a steady crotchet rhythm it dont work. Every one needs to know the tune, which of course is the same with all trad really. Alhough a good drummer will pick it up pretty quick , there could easily be twists and turns that are not obvious.
Although rhythmically ITM is perhaps more forgiving than STM in this regard this rhythmic play still an essential part of each tune, the subtle and gentle phrasing of each melody as its treated by each player.
Its times like this as described by the OP that a solid backer is so handy, they offer a foundation that can help unsure players , and those that stumble. This means that the beat goes on regardless of the mistakes made by the melody player/s. Its unlikely the listener will recognise melodic errors{unless they know the tune} or even care ,but everyone notices when the beat staggers, IMO in some way its a physical connection between the music and the people.
So I think llig had it right above when he suggest that you distance yourself from the physical aspects of playing and just listen(move?) to the music. so you can become aware of any little deviations from the pulse.
I found a metronome useful as a practice tool but I certainly respect others reluctance to use them, horrible, unforgiving machines that they are.
Maybe those fast runs are actually played at the correct speed, and the rst of the tune is wrong (no wait, that's just FRiday talking).
One of my pet hates: crystalised triplet runs in tunes, usually hornpipes e.g. Harvest Home & the Belfast Hornpipe.
They are there everytime, and turn the tune into a dead performance piece rather than a living tune. To my ears a bit of a gimmick that drags the rest of the tune down with it.
That's my subjective baseless opine for the day over with and it isn't even coffee break yet.
But getting back to the OP and Steve Shaw's post. So we the (maybe) rythmically challenged play with good players, suss that somethings not working, and that its probably us. What do they do ? Which I think is half of the question in the OP. Mcknowall suggested nailing the first beat of the bar. I'd notice that.
I didn't mention those two because they were fabulous tunes but because they contain long fast runs of notes which can highlight what it is that you need to work on. Once you've nailed those runs you can muck about with 'em if you like to make 'em sound less mechanical.. The tunes are only a pain because they get played a lot , not because they're crap!
David, what you do about it is the hard bit, but, as I suggested, it really is half the battle once you've recognised the problem. By all means work with a metronome or with CDs to play along, but that will tend to make your playing mechanical and too reliant on outside forces rather than helping you to develop your own internal ticker. But that interaction with other musicians is what works by far the best. You have to train your ear to listen to them and yourself intently as you're playing and make the little adjustments as you go. I should point out that I'm speaking from bitter experience of having had this problem myself big-time. I'm about two-thirds of the way there I reckon and I'm still working on it.
I didn't mean to be a tune snob Steve. There are plenty of old favourites that I am very fond of. I generally don't care for harvest home, although like most tunes I have occasionally enjoyed hearing it but not really playing it. The belfast Hornpipe isn't quite as bad, but is far from a favourite.
actually going in yet another OT direction (this thread has become rather web-like). I don't like to play every set of tunes in a session. I like to hear stuff I don't know, or sometimes just to listen to tunes I do know.
Some of my favourite tunes to listen to are not great favourites for playing. This can be because i think they are at their best on a particular instrument. Occasionally I put off learning a favourite tune because I enjoy simply listening to it so much. Here are some examples of tunes I love to hear on particular instruments:
> A Trip to Athlone/ fiddle (I will start this in the hope that a fiddle player will join in, but it isn't a favourite of mine for playing on the banjo)
> the hag with the money/flute
> sean sa ceo/ whistle (I can play this, but rarely join in)
> greenfields of glentown/whistle (I know this is really a fiddle tune, and mighty fine on that instrument, but hearing it on the whistle is one of my favourite moments in a session)
There are others, but those come to mind first. Of course the tunes/instruments above is in large part based on the repertiore & instrumental make up of the circles I hang out in.
Those triplets in HH are optional, not that I ever play it of course.... officer.
" your honour, the defendant before you has been charged with playing HH in a the Pickled Swan drinking establishment between the hours of 2 am and 6am.. how do you plead?"
" not guilty your honour, I can assure you I was outside having a smoke and that it wus anova banjo player your honour.. 'onest..."
Chris. Is that mainly a session phenomenon ? My little collection of recordings of Harvest Home to try to play along with includes Micho Russel not doing them on whistle and Paddy Keenan (I think) not doing them on pipes. (and some mates at a session not always doing the A triplets which gives me an option).
Steve. I am sure you are right about playing with others. I'll get there. There are some things on my hard drive that I feel I need to get comfortable with first. Like what does the novice fluter do when Micho takes one of those breaths and what to do when the fluter needs a breath and Paddy's pipes never stop. And then what happens at a session when everyone does the runs and I forget convention and don't do.
Here's a great aid for playing any music with rock-steady (as in earth not genre) time, regardless of pulse or tempo...not in session or performance space obviously, but in practice especially if keeping a rhythm is a challenge...
Walk in place, or in a big circle, or down the road, and be aware of the steady "march" pace of your feet. Slow is good but not too slow! Then clap your hands in a triplet, so that you clap the ONE at the EXACT SAME time as one (choose left or right) foot hits the ground on the ONE. You will be playing a polyrhythm of 2 against 3. Then out loud, sing the little xmas ditty, "HARK How the Bells, SWEET Silver Bells, etcetc..." so that the HARK and SWEET are in time with the ONE that both feet and hands are playing, and you will hear and feel the composite rhythm that is neither dominated by the 2-beat march, or the 3-beat triplet.
If that's too easy, sit down, and play a march pulse with one hand on one knee, and a triplet pulse with the other hand on the other knee and sing the xmas song out loud as above. Again, the HARK and SWEET are obviously the ONE and both hands must hit both knees on that ONE. You can hit your hands "toGETher, right, left, right, toGETher, right, left, right" so that the GET of together is the ONE.
Hah! It is SO much easier to do than say/write, but maybe this will make a little sense. Doing it makes a whole lot of sense 'cause when you're IN that 2 against 3 groove, your time, your sense of being ON time is very very grounded. Do this with a few other folks, so that some play the march, others play the triplet, and for fun, test yourselves against a met on the march pulse! It's surprising how solid the time can be.
I learned this from a Brazilian percussionist a bazillion years ago and about that many years of playing various percussion in Latin and African styles has shown me how valuable it is for anyone, playing any kind of music. Plus it's a total gas...
Yes, that three over two, or three over four thing is very useful to get nailed. I like to do it by playing jig versions of reels over the top of people playing the reels. It's great sound.
Yes, that three over two, or three over four thing is very useful to get nailed. I like to do it by playing jig versions of reels over the top of people playing the reels. It's great sound.
But how do people playing reels like it? My guess is it would just muddy up the waters. Never tried it though.
I popped it into the mix here not so much to suggest using it in a particular setting, 'cause it's very African in flavour and certainly could muddy a clean reel or even a jig. But it's a personal or group training tool that, once you're IN the groove of it, you have the sense of the tempo being immovable, like a train that you're riding. You also get just a bit of distance from what you're DOING, and thus you tend to listen and feel more...the rhythm is taking care of itself.
That said, as a double-strung harp player with 8 fingers on 2 sets of strings to fool around with, I improvise often with this, letting one hand play the 2, and the other play the 3. Fun stuff, especially when the 2 sets of strings are tuned a little differently; melodies have a way of just popping into existence purely out of the rhythmic pattern. Great finger warm up!
You can only do the jig on top of the reel thing with really strong players, otherwise, yes, it is a bit muddy. And, if someone has not heard it before, they get confused and try and follow you. You have to be aware of that and be ready to instantly nip back to playing 4s. But among people who know, it's great, not muddy at all. And it does what you say about making the tempo really solid. And it is like riding a train. And I love it when people start swapping between the two at unexpected moments. You might get a few phrases where everyone is playing the jig. It's great.
(not so good layering a reel version on to a jig though. With the jig on a reel at a normal reel tempo, you get a jig that's a little slower than normal. So you are layering something with an easy feel on top of the slightly more manic reel. But if you do the reel on to a jig at standard jig tempo, you get a fairly racy reel, which can dominate the jig a little too much. Can be done though, if the jig players are strong enough and you play the faster reel very delicately. I like it this may round playing the reel on the viola, against 4 or 5 fiddles playing the jig.)
I've also found in purely percussion sessions (ye olde drum circles...great way to learn how NOT to play with others! for others that is, never applies to moi!) that you can layer the 2 on top of the 3 with much greater ease and simplicity than layering the 3 on top of the 2. I believe that's cause the 3 (jig or waltz) is so physical; your body (mine anyway) wants to move in a lilting fashion with it, so putting the 2 on top of it is relatively effortless, from the percussion sense. In ITD I would imagine it's more a function of the melodic structure and phrasing...I'm tapping the table as I write (sorta!) and find that a 2 over the 3 (4 over 6 really) of Morrison's Jig, for example, is quite cool! But putting a 3 over Are Ye Sleepin Maggie? I cawn't do it solo!
Very interesting what you say about the jigs and reels here, Ilig...I play with an excellent guitar/bazouki/mandolin player, it's time to test it out!
But to clarify...a jig in 6 would have 4 beats layering onto it. Actually playing a 4 over 3 (or 3 over 4) I have found to be much more difficult than 2 over 3 (or 3 over 2). The phrasing sounds like "pass the g** d*** butter, pass the g** d*** butter!" and I can do that as the composite, but not by thinking 4 against 3.
If anyone is interested in a page or 2 of percussion "box"notations of various polyrhythms like this, send me an email off line and I'd be happy to share..
the jig on the reel is (ignoring twiddly bits) putting 6 notes onto 8. So it gives it the feel of grounding it, putting the brakes on, Though without slowing down of course.
The reel onto the jig is putting 8 onto 6. Which has the opposite effect.
Neither are actually harder, for thay are the same thing.
hmmm...singing/counting Morrison's Jig, playing the 2 triplets in the right hand (total of 6 beats per bar), I still get 4 beats per bar (rather than 8) layered with the left hand...boiling down to simplest integers of 3 and 2. Well actually, both (4 & 8) are possible against the 6 of course, but for one person 2 over 3 is a whole lot easier to do than 4 over 3. More than one player = more complexity!
As for "not harder (6 on 8 vs 8 on 6)", is that true in practice? It is in theory of course, but personally, as I mentioned, I find it much easier to bring in the 2 over the 3 rather than the other way around.
Again, it would be a very different thing to do these with more than one person!
Most people tap their foot twice per bar in a reel ... one tap per four notes. And it's the same foot tap for a jig ... twice per bar, one tap per three notes. This is the basis of why the jig/reel, reel/jig thing works.
Try taping your right toe on the standard first and fifth beat of the reel and bring your heal into the third and seventh beat. Easy peasy. Then sing a jig over it. Easy peasy.
Now try to bring your left foot into tapping the toe on two and the heal on six. So you have:
ONE: right toe
two: left toe
three: right heel
four: left heel
FIVE: right toe
six: left toe
seven: right heel
eight: left heel
This is still easy. Sing a reel as you do it.
Now try just concentrating on the ONE and FIVE, the right toe tap, and let the rest go on auto.
Then sing a jig with the right toe tapping the first beet in each triplet.
riiiiiiiiiight...got that...3 against 4, never had it so easy, thanks! Now to see if I can manage that musically...it'll take some practice but it seems doable, between the two hands.
Cool stuff! I never expected so much! Thanks. I know my fiddler teacher has told me that my phrasing seems okay, but sometimes the ends of my phrases I speed up. I play with a metronome for practice to help with an even rhythm. I like the idea and really listening and being able to tell when you're speeding up . I think really listening and playing with good players helps with the rhythm issue.
I just figured out that with the people I mentioned before, phrasing is absent. It's just a string of notes.. well maybe not that bad. Thus, it's hard to follow the tune. It's a little difficult because my timing isn't the greatest, but I think working on stronger, steady timing will help. I like the tapping ideas and will see how they go.
Rhythm teaching
Rhythm teaching
I have a situation where some people I play with do not have a good sense of rhythm and often rush and play very fast and it doesn't sound very clear.
1. When the music sounds garbled and it's hard to tell what someone's playing, is it just that the person is playing too fast or without rhythm, or are there other factors?
2. Any good suggestions for improving someone's rhythm without them being aware of it? Do you guys think people who believe they play good would be offended in someone told them their rhythm was bad, or is that way too hypothetical to ask?
3. Have any of you ever used a metronome when playing or practicing with others?
I know these are complicated questions, so I don't expect a lot. I am mainly looking to see if anyone has any bright ideas I can try.
Thanks.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by enirehtac
Re: Rhythm teaching
1. could be lots of stuff.
2. get really secure in your own rhythm, so you can soldier on serenely. Or get new friends to play with. People can get p*ssed off at any number of things, who knows?
3. yes.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by reenactor
Re: Rhythm teaching
I use a metronome while practicing; it helps me learn the tunes faster, and have better rhythm out at sessions. If someone is playing too fast, I just try to keep up with them or not play with them. I would actually like it if someone told me I was playing out of rhythm; it would make me work harder at it. I also tap my foot pretty loud to keep the rhythm if somebody is having trouble with it; they usually catch on, and it is telling them in a nice way to keep the beat steady. I hope that helps.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by pipersgrip
Re: Rhythm teaching
Thanks. I will try the ideas.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by enirehtac
Re: Rhythm teaching
It's basic session etiquette that a tune should be played at the speed set by the player who starts the tune (you?). If the other players go galloping off at a rate of knots then perhaps you could just stop playing and let the resulting train crash take place (now there's an interesting mix of metaphors!).
, or, on the other hand, it might not 
The message might get through to the miscreants
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Rhythm teaching
1. if someone is playing fast and with good rhythm, you can always tell what it is. if they are rushing, they do not keep time. time and rhythm are inexorably linked. thus if they rush, they dont keep time, dont have rhythm.
2. they must be aware of it. the only reason their rhythm might not be good is because they are not aware of it.
3. playing, yes. with others? no. but i dont see why not.
there are several things you can do. play with a metronome. learn how to tap your foot right--james kelly told me that if you watch people who rush, the beat is usually on the apex of the foot tap (i.e. when their foot is on the highest part). people who lag behind, their beat is when the foot hits the ground. people who play in time have their beat right in the middle, while the foot is travelling.
counting out rhythms is important. if you cant listen to a piece of music (reel, for example) and sing 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4 for the entire piece, and have your counting be in time, your playing is probably out of time too.
listening to yourself helps a lot, as well.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by daiv
Re: Rhythm teaching
One good trick for practicing with a metronome is to bring it in the car and sing the tunes along with the beat of the metronome (unless, of course, you are navigating the challenging streets of my beloved Boston...)
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Greg the Piano Tuner
Re: Rhythm teaching
Learn to set dance
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by bazouki dave
Re: Rhythm teaching
It's all about people playing too fast for their ability. Just get 'em to slow it down, right down.
Playing faster than your ability is the most common cause of murder in this music. You should never play faster than your ability. There's a common thing in sessions where good players might start a set at a fair lick, and the not so stronger players join in and kind of keep up. The not so stronger players think it is upping their game playing fast with these better players, but it's not. I never understand why people think they can play faster than their ability just because they are playing with someone else.
Just hang off and after, just say, "Phew, that was too fast for me." And if needs be, follow it with, "And it was pretty clear that it was too fast for you guys too."
Metronomes: If you have uneven phrasing, a metronome will make it worse. The usual cause for uneven phrasing is stumbling over a "difficult bit". What happens is you either slow down or rush the difficult bit because you are playing too fast. A metronome isn't going to suddenly make you be able to play the difficult bit better, but what it will do is make you slow down or rush the following phrase - a phrase that before the metronome you could probably play fine - to catch up.
Again, the answer is to slow down.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
Oh dear, I find myself agreeing with Ilig, does that mean I'm turning into a cranky old fart?
I was taught many years ago to practise counting everything except music, by which I mean by all means listen to a metronome, count your footsteps whilst walking etc etc, but rely on instinct while playing. A metronome can only get in the road whilst playing.
It is my pet theory that all tunes have a "born" tempo, too fast or slow and they just don't come out right. A good technique for dropping the hint in a session is to "nail" the first beat of the bar.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by mcknowall
Re: Rhythm teaching
' ..... what it will do is make you slow down or rush the following phrase - a phrase that before the metronome you could probably play fine - to catch up'.
Michael, could you try to explain how this works in your experience, because I never noticed that myself.
To answer enirethac's question no. 3: I work with a metronome sometimes - not very often - and even used it for duo playing, taking a speed that was * far* below 'concert speed'. If you can play togethether at ridiculously low speed, while still keeping - or at least trying to keep - phrasing and swing intact, higher speeds are no threat.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Henk Bos
Re: Rhythm teaching
This is one of the rare situations where I think you're wrong, llig. Agreed, some people stumble over difficult parts and it messes up their rhythm. Metronomes will do exactly what you say for them. (unless they slow down, right down and use a metronome to help)
I tend to have tempos I'm used to playing at because I've always played at them (I still have a lot of trouble with session speed - still too fast for me to play with any musicality). It's a kind of "tempo gravity well". Any slower and I can't stay steady. Any faster and I speed up to my "maximum speed". A metronome helps me stay consistent.
Then, of course, you have to progressively get rid of the metronome as it's potentially a worse crutch than outrigger wheels for bicycles.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Tirno
Re: Rhythm teaching
Our session is getting more and more popular because it's known that when we start a tune with a certain tempo, we keep it quite nicely... and maybe I'm getting old, but I like more and more not too fast tempos, where you can here everything. I just stop playing when it's too fast and wait...
I do practice with a metronome, ever since I found out that my foot tapping wasn't correct (it tended to follow the acceleration, rather than steadying it !) : you can use it in a lot of ways : very slow on every note : makes you feel where you are accelerating... and then on every beat. And the last straw - I said already in another thread : on beats 2 and 4 : gives you a nice steady rythm.
In the session, if you're starting a set, try to keep your tempo whatever happens...
and keep in moind Michael's advice : learn slow !
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Nikita Pfister
Re: Rhythm teaching
Some tunes seem to prefer a specific tempo, but the best are more flexible. Part of the art of playing the music well is getting any tune to sound perfect at any tempo. This means teasing different aspects out of tunes, exploring them. Matt Molloy's Drowsie Maggie is a fine example.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
A metronome will give you a finite amount of time to play two phrases. If you stumble over the first phrase, for any reason, the metronome will make you speed up the next phrase to catch up ... so you and the metronome can finish together.
What's worse, playing one out of two phrases wrong? Or being forced to play both wrong?
In itself, the metronome will not help your stumbling. The only thing that can help is to take your speed down to where ever you can play that phrase well. Then play the whole tune at that tempo. You might find this difficult at first, you might find you want to rush the bits you could play fine at the faster tempo. But you must persevere until you can play well at this slower speed before moving up.
You absolutely have to be able to hear for yourself where you are speeding up or slowing down. It's no good having the metronome tell you. You have to hear it for yourself otherwise you will never ever be able to understand the more subtle aspects of phrasing.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
In my experience the times we play too fast is when accompanying set dancers or when a tune is led off by a player new to the tradition. The first is one we must grin and bear as that's what dancers want and in any case the rhythm is normally maintained. However, with the latter unless there are sufficient experienced players present to try and keep things on track one does end up with the runaway train syndrome.
I have to agree with earlier posters the most tunes have a personality and an ideal tempo and rhythm that good players instinctively use. If we attempt to put all tunes into a strait jacket (a reel is a reel is a reel) then I think we'd lose a lot of what makes the tradition what it is. The best solution to good sessions is listening to each other and in particular the most experienced musicians present. I think that this would obviate the need for a metronome.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Bannerman
Re: Rhythm teaching
I don't know how people can count & play at the same time.
I find it akin to patting my head whilst rubbing my tummy.
I can just haer anyone who knows me and is reading this saying "righhht"
- chris
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
I know what you mean Rambler. If I have a sweet or gum in my mouth when I'm playing, I have to either just suck it, or chew it in time to the music. I certainly can't chew at a different rhythm to the music!
Bit like talking & playing. I have to talk in time to the tune.
Jig time: I need a DRINK can you GET me a PINT!
Reel time: I am feel ing VER y thirst y CAN i have a PINT of be..er
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Ptarmigan
Re: Rhythm teaching
It's okay, Chris. I discovered I can't count and do anything musical simultaneously either. Years ago, long before I ever started playing Irish music (which was like discovering the Holy Grail since everything is in 4/4, 6/8, or 9/8). It was at that time I developed a phobia of music with weird time signatures. I remember being in choir and being handed new music for the semester and feeling this awful sense of dread when my choir director gleefully announced, "This one's in 7/32!"
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Rhythm teaching
"A metronome will give you a finite amount of time to play two phrases. If you stumble over the first phrase, for any reason, the metronome will make you speed up the next phrase to catch up ... so you and the metronome can finish together."
well as llig has said he cant play with a metronome I wonder where this bit of nonsense comes from? his imagination no doubt. Its clear he doesnt know how to use a metronome, has no experience and is merely repeating a myth.
chris try singing and playing fiddle or banjo at the same time ,,, just takes practice like anything else.
Some people like this bit of gear some not.. no more than personal taste. However if the entire world of music bar a few odd cases recomend the metronome as an invaluable tool then I for one would go with the metronome.
Even top ranking fiddlers use it both for recording and basic practice, a fact. In fact anyone who cant play with one without problem IMO is a poor musician, especially for dance music.
I found it an invaluable learning experience especially for keeping a solid pulse going, I highly recomend it to all. It is a hard task master but fair.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
Ionannas advised:
>chris try singing and playing fiddle or banjo at the same time
My family have never me ou, Ionannas, nor thave they read this message. But deep down in the bottom of their souls, unbeknown to themselves, an intense hatred has been born for the mysterious stranger know only as "Ionannas".
That two such things should be wished simultaneously on the innocent!
is there a smiley for "horrified!"?
- chris
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
"never met you", that would be. Although I'm pretty sure thay have also never "me ou", at least to the mest of my knowlege.
And silver spear "7/32"? Ouch.
- Chris
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
Aye, that is an ancient time signature I just made up.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Rhythm teaching
If a phrase is causing you to stumble then it's usually a question of technique. As has been said, take the speed down to where you can play it well.
This is where a metronome can help.
Isolate that phrase, play it slowly as mentioned then use the metronome to measure that tempo. When you and the metronome are bang on together make a note of the metronome setting. When you are ready to try a little faster, increase the speed of the metronome by say just one step and play that phrase again till you can play it well and in time. Repeat the exercise, increasing the tempo each time. If you stumble at any of the increased tempi stop and go back to the tempo where you could play the phrase well. Only increase the tempo when you've got it nailed at the tempo you're at.
The point of this is only to give metronomic values to the exercise so that you can measure your progress as you deal with whatever technical difficulty that was causing the stumble in the first place.
It's an aid to improving technique in order to play fluently. Once you've sorted out your gummy fingers you can get back to playing the music unhampered and certainly without the metronome.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Gran Cassa
Re: Rhythm teaching
The only use I can see for a metronome is to set a speed (I'm referring to learning) and then switch it off before you start playing. This is what my piano teacher did when I was a child - it was used as a means to gradually increase the speed over a period of weeks from dead slow up to what the composer wanted, and it was NEVER used as a metrical background for the music while playing. .
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Rhythm teaching
Someone mentioned about playing for set dancing. Yes, it is faster than most session playing, but it is manageable. The trick I find is to watch the dancers, their feet in particular. This keeps your mind off the technical aspects of your playing, and you'll find that the faster pace is an irrelevance and that you're doing it without realising. Just keep a weather eye on the band leader for cues about tune changes or when the dance is coming to an end. And, obviously, listen to what the other players are doing.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Rhythm teaching
7/32 - That doesn't surprise me (even if it was made up!). In my orchestral playing I've come across strange bar sequences like 3/8 - 1/16 - 5/8 - 3/4, which is what you get when a composer tries to force an inherently unnotatable musical phrase into the strait-jacket of standard notation. It might be better in such situations to dispense with bar-lines entirely (as the pianist-composer Erik Satie often did).
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Rhythm teaching
One way to slow others down if they're pulling ahead of you is to play more quietly, and look around as you lower the volume to see who's listening and who's not -- this doesn't always work, especially in a large session, but when it does it's a great way of cleaning up the sound.
I use a met for playing slowly or at medium tempo. The met can show where you might be going off tempo because of a complex phrase or ornament, for example. Without the met, and without slowing the entire tune down, you might not realize you're doing it.
Also, something to try with a met: when going slowly, play the tune as well as you can, and put your one-beat not just on the click, but in the exact center of the click. After a while, this will have a nice effect on your listening, and on helping you find and feel the groove of the tune.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Jmbu
Re: Rhythm teaching
Michael:
Would your point about the metronome also be related to this point made in a discussion by WillCPT?
I.e.,
"In any case, it's usually not about locking into just a downbeat pulse or a backbeat pulse the way bluegrass, old timey, or rock does. In Irish trad, it's about being free to emphasize any of those four beats, either strongly or weakly, to best serve the melody."
Now, reading the above in relation to what you said about the drawbacks of using a metronome, I'm guessing that what you're saying also is ...or implying...is that a metronome artificially rushes or slows down the ability to *play* with the phrasing? So, if you're phrasing isn't quite right to begin with, you're never going to: 1. get it sorted out 2. realize the different ways to play with that phrasing [by exploring] because you'll be a slave to the tick tock ....
WillCPT also said, as did you Michael that:
"if you *want* to play with a smoother pulse, try emphasizing only the first beat of eachmeasure or phrase. Miss McLeod's is a good tune for this "
Now, as you said in another earlier post about "carving a tune" all you need to do is keep mindful of that beat which falls mainly on the 1 [first beat] and "point the tune downhill" keeping a moderate speed, or slowly at first and "play it straight on the nose striaght through"
IF one does that I'm guessing you don't much need a metronome...a foot will do.
Have I got that right Michael?
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
And, Michael, you added this great example by Kelly who, as you point out, (although he's motoring along quite nicely) is playing mainly on the "one"....an approach that probably doesn't require a metronome to train you to do that....it's more a case of listening closely to youself and using your ears.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1K5BCtLY8
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
Listen. You can't play music decently if you can't listen to yourself and others. Anyone whose timing and rhythm is all screwed up and they don't notice it, isn't listening to the sound they are making, so that would be their first problem.
Slow down. Dance. Anyone who can tap their foot can dance. Anyone who can dance and play music (not at the same time), doesn't need a metrognome. Just hop from foot to foot by yourself, in the privacy of your own home, you’re just tapping your foot while standing without playing. How hard can that be? ONE two three four ONE two three four. ONE two three FOUR five six. There. Your goal is now to play as evenly as you hop or tap. Internalize it.
People get all whiny with me on here when I remind them that this is dance music, but guess what? It is. Whether or not someone is dancing to it, it’s still dance music. Accepting and understanding this would probably solve a lot of rhythm issues. That’s MO, YRMV.
Also, on the long runs of notes on reels I notice folks often playing the runs too fast, this is a natural place to accelerate it seems, in particular for learners with windy instruments. They ZOOM through the phrases too quickly, which leads them to play the next phrase quicker, thus leading to playing the speeding up phrase quicker, and so on and so on until…CRASH!
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Rhythm teaching
Speeding up when playing runs and when playing louder happens in other types of music if it isn't well controlled.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Rhythm teaching
Good thread. I agree with Ilig...actually I am following his much earlier advice (or maybe it was teasing) to slow down...even to the ridiculous maximous. It is very hard to play slow....but you hear the detail so you can 'burn it in' as it were.
God knows I am still on the upside of the learning curve, but that is where I think I make progress.
Which is where the metronome comes in. Ilig is sort of right. If you use the metronome and are uneven in passages...the metronome is of little use... However. If you use it, your messing up a passage and getting out of sync is a great signal to stop, either slow down or shurt off the metronome and work through that problem passage slowly.
My teacher is big on that. Focus on the problem passages and get them perfect...and do that slowly.
Greg's advice on metronome use is something I have also found successful. Someonelse here (as well as my teacher) says you must sing the song to really burn it in. In Fact, I have a 40 mile drive to my lesson via Chicago's notorious expressway system. I prepare for my lesson, especially in the early phase of getting a tune up to speed (no pun intended) running the metronome at a nice even pace and diddly deeing it while I drive.
What I would really appreciate..and ilig you seem to be the old pro on this, what are the rhythm tricks that people talk about. For things in 4s, some told me to think "alligator, alligator etc..." What are the pnemonics for jigs etc?
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by zippydw
Re: Rhythm teaching
I know I screwed up pnemonics. Is it nmonics? I went to engineering school..not for fine arts....I am lucky to string six words into a sentence.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by zippydw
Re: Rhythm teaching
mnemonics...from the greek goddess for Memory,
Mnemosyne, one of the Muses ;)
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
Sorry, SWFL fiddler, I still don't believe its dance music when played out of a dance context. But anyway.
Dance has to do with rhythm, maybe, but it doesn't help for a steady tempo. I'm a better dancer than most people will ever be (mainly because they don't bother/want to try) and yet I am very bad at sticking to a solid tempo.
The advantage of this is that unstable tempos don't bother me too much. The other advantage is that I "lean" on the music a lot when I'm dancing - which to some extent makes me a better dancer.
It's like Nikita says about foot tapping: if your foot can't tap at a steady rate, you'll end up following your foot rather than being stabilised by it.
And while I'm dubitative about metro(g)nomes, some of the best trad musicians I know have spent ages practicing to a metronome and play absolutely marvelously.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Tirno
Re: Rhythm teaching
lazyhound, that is one use, but it is standard practice in many genres, though I doubt in 'classical', to record with one. Some of our favourite trad fiddlers use them specifically for that reason.
I didnt say it was essential to play with one, but for dance music it is essential 'to be able' to, even if you dont.
The dancers feet will move in time, if you cant keep that beet then you are not doing your job; putting the music under their feet.
That is one reason why all that sh!te techno music trance etc etc is so popular, the dancers KNOW the music is steady, that it will not throw them off. As both a dancer and player of trad I know that groove is essential, otherwise its undanceable.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
Thanks mtodd. My high school classics went on hiatus when I decided to become an engineer.....or as my wife calls many of my freinds 'cultural illiterates' ...ouch
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by zippydw
Re: Rhythm teaching
You're welcome Zip. Guess it was that Introduction to Greek Literature and Thought that did it...along with a wonderful prof at the time.
Is your wife related to Athena by any chance? I picture her with a lance and shield.... ;)
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
So how about if someone can play a few dance tunes, but not at session speed and needs to work on them at a slower tempo. And they are sometimes speeding up on the runs and not noticing it, or occasionally losing time when taking a breath, or when their motor skills are not quite up to it yet. And there is no-one around to say "do you know you are speeding up on that bit" etc.
Things suggested on previous discussions include recording oneself and listening to the playback, using a metronome sometimes, playing with recording slowed down with software, sticking to waltzes and marches etc until capable of learning and playing dance tunes at normal speed.
But all four have been argued against in discussions, the first three quite strongly.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
It all comes down to being able to listen to yourself while you play.
If you can't tell when listening to someone else if their timing is off, then it's probably hopeless. Least ways, I can't think of a way to fix it. Other than put your instrument down and don't you dare touch it until you can hear if someone elses timing is off..
But if you can tell when listening to someone else if their timing is off, then I don't see the problem. Just listen to yourself, and where you go astray, fix it.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
mtodd- Not an Athena spear and shield.....An fine Irish red headed lass with heritage in Donegal and Mayo.
I shall say no more. She has put up with me for near 35 years!
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by zippydw
Re: Rhythm teaching
"mnemonics...from the greek goddess for Memory,
Mnemosyne, one of the Muses "
Very interesting, mtodd. Can you put me in touch with her? Does she do house calls? Expense is no object.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by oldstrings
Re: Rhythm teaching
Oldstrings....I'll do that. She's expensive though...but as goddesses go, she's fairly reasonable.
Ah! Zip, sure, she's *your* very own goddess...but a mortal one. There are advantages. Your mortal one is less apt to kill you in a rage, etc. And she doesn't carry a lance.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
Interesting point Tirno :"I still don't believe its dance music when played out of a dance context".
I would be inclined to agree with you. Although it is dance music IMO It doesn't therefore follow that it must be performed in a particular style. Just as we are free to ornament in our own fashion, we are also free to play the tunes at a pace and in a way we feel comfortable with.
But I would say this, that playing for dancers is an essential part of any trad musicians learning experience, IMO. Not that we must always play in this fashion, but that we can step up to the 'plate' when called upon. To be able to successfully support the sets there are certain essentials, correct pace {for the particular crowd} good lift swing and drive. These come from familiarity with both the dance and the music.
I have a few recordings where the players are pretty sketchy in some ways, for me it doesnt distract from the music, poor timing, is not so relevant if you are not playing for dancers and not trying to achieve a certain standard. The players I'm referring too would be older chaps, they have been there and done it countless times. There is a certain charm in these old recordings, quite likely were they in a modern warp speed session they would not fit in, but I dont think that matters. They are playing their music , in their way and for me thats enough. Its not a race or a competition.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
"It all comes down to being able to listen to yourself while you play." Heard and understood. But it seems to be a skill to be worked on, something one can get better at. Maybe it improves as some other things become internalised and free up some processing capacity (which may be behind the 'stick to slower tunes until...' advice).
I can be more critical of my timing (and intonation, and phrasing etc, etc) when listening to a recording of myself than when playing. A metronome can sometimes click when I don't expect it to. At times I find each those four suggestions useful. There is a difference between a stepping stone and a crutch. How do you learn to listen ?
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
I agree, playing for dancers is an essential part of any trad musicians learning experience. It's a prerequisite. (and fun to boot, of course - though hard bloody work)
I also think that if you can't play with a metronome you must be pretty poor. (won't play with one is a different matter).
But being able to play with a metronome is still a long long way from being able to play. And while it's true that if you practice with one, you will get better at playing with one, if you can teach yourself to be able to play that rock steady accurately down the line merely by listening to yourself and adjusting, you will certainly be much further along the road than someone who learned to play steady by playing with the metronome
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
"How do you learn to listen?"
I dunno. Just by listening really. I can't see that it's that complicated.
Start with something you know like the back of your hand and play it straight, with no variations. Keep playing it and try to zen yourself out of the technique and just hear. Simply hear yourself playing. Even try recording it. Then play it back and if anything surprises you, if you hear anything in the recording that you didn't hear when you were playing. Do it again. And keep doing it until a recording of yourself gives you no surprises
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
Hmm, got to agree to most of that.
As a part of the rhythm section the bass should IMO be precise. I wasn't. its only micro adjustments but those milliseconds make a huge difference . Playing with a met really helped sharpen up my playing.
However I dont think that learning to play on the button without a met is any better or faster than with.
For example I played for many many years before I ever tried a metronome, my tunes were fine, no problem, but my bass playing sucked!
It took me painstaking rather demoralising work for a few weeks, tedious for sure but the end result is what its all about IMO.
IMO the drive of a good player comes from riding on top of the tune, putting each note exactly where you want it to be.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
So, listen when playing, review when done (the recording) better than trying to match a click ?
I'm pondering how the "rock steady acccurately down the line" without a timing reference ties in with the listening to others and not just going on ones own internal clock. *If* one is trying to stick tight on the beat how is the metronome that much worse than a dance band snare drummer (I may have asked that before). And, as an aside, would playing on the beat with a hypothetically slow dance band recording be useful stepping stone ?
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
Crossed with Ionannas, who's post sort of fits in with my ponderings. The tricky bit to aim for seems to be the subtlety. I can try and play close on the beat with a band recording and I know what I am trying to do. I can play along with a song trying to follow the rythym and intonation of the vocal line and I know what I am trying to do. But session playing seems to be not quite one and a long way from the other. But it sounds like the first might be preferable to what the OP is experiencing.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
In actuality there is, especially in rock and jazz, the thing of playing slightly ahead of the beat, on it, or slightly behind it. Led Zepplin's drummer Bonham was a classic example of the latter. Driving or "leading" the beat is often done by jazz drummers...or rather when the drummer and bass player are in sync on that matter that's what seems to carry the group/band on a kind of rhythmic percussive wave.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by skin&bow
Re: Rhythm teaching
Lazyhound, sometimes composers *want* those time signatures, and are totally comfortable with notating them that way. Just because you don't want to read them doesn't mean they didn't want them there!
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by reenactor
Re: Rhythm teaching
A metronome can help you to hear how terrible your internal rhythm in a tune is, but it can't help you to stand on your own two feet rhythmically. Half the battle in improving so that you attain a rock-solid sense of rhythm is to be aware that you have a problem in the first place. Many people blithely go through life unaware of this crucial shortcoming. They have a great time whilst screwing everyone else up. The best thing is to record yourself playing your familiar stuff and listen back super-critically. This can really hurt, but unless you pinpoint the problem you'll never be able to tackle it. Longish passages with lots of notes of equal value can show up issues. Look out for speeding up in fast runs of notes (record yourself playing Harvest Home or Belfast Hornpipe for example). This is very common even in some otherwise proficient players. Get someone else to listen to your recordings as well. You need to tune in your ear to what is rock-solid, precise rhythm and what is wishy-washy all-over-the-place stuff. Listen critically to triplets and rolls - are you maintaining the rhythm of the tune before, during and after the ornament, or are you giving the ornament a tad too much time and throwing the next passage out? Try clapping along with your recorded playing to see whether you're keeping the rhythm. You can play along with CDs (like with metronomes, it's a good way of identifying the problem) but personally I think this has little value when it comes to helping you to stand on your own feet. If you know you have deficiencies in this regard the best way to improve is to play with good musicians with whom you can interact, and use your ears bigtime to listen to both them and yourself at the same time. During the learning curve you should find yourself making constant micro-adjustments all the time. When you get over the problem you'll be able to relax more in your new-found sense of rhythmic security. Once you've found it you can start to enjoy deliberately going off it here and there to add expression to your playing, but get there first.
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: Rhythm teaching
Mtodd
I don't know about that. Red headed lasses seem to be blessed with tempers to match the hair color!
She may not have the spear and shield, but I have had to duck from an airborne tea tin once.......
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by zippydw
Re: Rhythm teaching
That makes sense Steve, read it several times.
(Speeding up on runs - tick. Giving to much time to rolls - tick. Now which tune was that , oh yes, Harvest Home. Speeding up on the runs - sorted. 'A' rolls - hmm, rate limiting factor)
# Posted on February 12th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
"In actuality there is, especially in rock and jazz, the thing of playing slightly ahead of the beat, on it, or slightly behind it. Led Zepplin's drummer Bonham was a classic example of the latter. Driving or "leading" the beat is often done by jazz drummers...or rather when the drummer and bass player are in sync on that matter that's what seems to carry the group/band on a kind of rhythmic percussive wave."
--In jazz, at least when you're listening to the bop and hard bop groups, the interplay is more with the bass player playing on the front edge of the beat, the drummer keeping time dead solid on the ride cymbal, and the melody players laying back ever so slightly.
It's good practice to take a recording and really listen to where each player is placing notes in relation to the beat and how the whole interacts. Good thing to listen for on long drives ;)
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by dr_funkenstein
Re: Rhythm teaching
Mr. Shaw: "...speeding up in fast runs of notes..."
This is where it usually takes place, listen and pay attention to those, simple as that, like Llig said. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Tirno, despite the divorce between the music and dancing some of us semantic fiends and romantics still hold out hope for a reconciliation of sorts.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Rhythm teaching
"front edge of the beat, the drummer keeping time dead solid on the ride cymbal, and the melody players laying back ever so slightly."
I think what is happening is that between them they are making the beat 'bigger' . Its not like they are separate beats
IMO the thing is they all put their notes where they want them to be in relation to the other players. not necessarily consciously,
When you play alone there is not this flexibility, the main beats HAVE to be in place or it sounds scrappy, { up to you really if thats ok or not! } this allows the beat to be steady.
So even if you are playing a Strathspey, with an exaggerated skip there is still a steady beat. With these tricky rhythms, every one who is playing needs to be on the same page so to speak, if the drummer just plays a steady crotchet rhythm it dont work. Every one needs to know the tune, which of course is the same with all trad really. Alhough a good drummer will pick it up pretty quick , there could easily be twists and turns that are not obvious.
Although rhythmically ITM is perhaps more forgiving than STM in this regard this rhythmic play still an essential part of each tune, the subtle and gentle phrasing of each melody as its treated by each player.
Its times like this as described by the OP that a solid backer is so handy, they offer a foundation that can help unsure players , and those that stumble. This means that the beat goes on regardless of the mistakes made by the melody player/s. Its unlikely the listener will recognise melodic errors{unless they know the tune} or even care ,but everyone notices when the beat staggers, IMO in some way its a physical connection between the music and the people.
So I think llig had it right above when he suggest that you distance yourself from the physical aspects of playing and just listen(move?) to the music. so you can become aware of any little deviations from the pulse.
I found a metronome useful as a practice tool but I certainly respect others reluctance to use them, horrible, unforgiving machines that they are.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
Since we're on the greek myths.
If you are a flute player never challenge the harper to a musical contest.
Things might go well at first, but onc ehe starts singing you'll be skinned (in both the vernacular & literal senses).
You have been warned. You're oracle for today has been "Chris". Thank you for travelling air Pitchfork
- Chris, in a kind of Friday mood. Wonder how long that will last.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
Maybe those fast runs are actually played at the correct speed, and the rst of the tune is wrong (no wait, that's just FRiday talking).
One of my pet hates: crystalised triplet runs in tunes, usually hornpipes e.g. Harvest Home & the Belfast Hornpipe.
They are there everytime, and turn the tune into a dead performance piece rather than a living tune. To my ears a bit of a gimmick that drags the rest of the tune down with it.
That's my subjective baseless opine for the day over with and it isn't even coffee break yet.
Why has no-one else come into work yet?
Is it a holiday and they forgot to tell me?
Why does no-body tell me anything?
Matron!
- Chris
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
Go on then, what do you mean by 'crystalised triplet runs' ?
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
But getting back to the OP and Steve Shaw's post. So we the (maybe) rythmically challenged play with good players, suss that somethings not working, and that its probably us. What do they do ? Which I think is half of the question in the OP. Mcknowall suggested nailing the first beat of the bar. I'd notice that.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
I mean that they are set in stone & not improvised at the time as in Harvest Home & the last part of the Belfast Hornpipe.
I make no claim that there is any objective standard applied to my dislike of such passages. I just dislike 'em.
- Chris
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
I didn't mention those two because they were fabulous tunes but because they contain long fast runs of notes which can highlight what it is that you need to work on. Once you've nailed those runs you can muck about with 'em if you like to make 'em sound less mechanical.. The tunes are only a pain because they get played a lot , not because they're crap!
David, what you do about it is the hard bit, but, as I suggested, it really is half the battle once you've recognised the problem. By all means work with a metronome or with CDs to play along, but that will tend to make your playing mechanical and too reliant on outside forces rather than helping you to develop your own internal ticker. But that interaction with other musicians is what works by far the best. You have to train your ear to listen to them and yourself intently as you're playing and make the little adjustments as you go. I should point out that I'm speaking from bitter experience of having had this problem myself big-time. I'm about two-thirds of the way there I reckon and I'm still working on it.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: Rhythm teaching
I didn't mean to be a tune snob Steve. There are plenty of old favourites that I am very fond of. I generally don't care for harvest home, although like most tunes I have occasionally enjoyed hearing it but not really playing it. The belfast Hornpipe isn't quite as bad, but is far from a favourite.
actually going in yet another OT direction (this thread has become rather web-like). I don't like to play every set of tunes in a session. I like to hear stuff I don't know, or sometimes just to listen to tunes I do know.
Some of my favourite tunes to listen to are not great favourites for playing. This can be because i think they are at their best on a particular instrument. Occasionally I put off learning a favourite tune because I enjoy simply listening to it so much. Here are some examples of tunes I love to hear on particular instruments:
> A Trip to Athlone/ fiddle (I will start this in the hope that a fiddle player will join in, but it isn't a favourite of mine for playing on the banjo)
> the hag with the money/flute
> sean sa ceo/ whistle (I can play this, but rarely join in)
> greenfields of glentown/whistle (I know this is really a fiddle tune, and mighty fine on that instrument, but hearing it on the whistle is one of my favourite moments in a session)
There are others, but those come to mind first. Of course the tunes/instruments above is in large part based on the repertiore & instrumental make up of the circles I hang out in.
Cheers - Chris
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
Those triplets in HH are optional, not that I ever play it of course.... officer.
" your honour, the defendant before you has been charged with playing HH in a the Pickled Swan drinking establishment between the hours of 2 am and 6am.. how do you plead?"
" not guilty your honour, I can assure you I was outside having a smoke and that it wus anova banjo player your honour.. 'onest..."
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: Rhythm teaching
Chris. Is that mainly a session phenomenon ? My little collection of recordings of Harvest Home to try to play along with includes Micho Russel not doing them on whistle and Paddy Keenan (I think) not doing them on pipes. (and some mates at a session not always doing the A triplets which gives me an option).
Steve. I am sure you are right about playing with others. I'll get there. There are some things on my hard drive that I feel I need to get comfortable with first. Like what does the novice fluter do when Micho takes one of those breaths and what to do when the fluter needs a breath and Paddy's pipes never stop. And then what happens at a session when everyone does the runs and I forget convention and don't do.
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by David50
Re: Rhythm teaching
Maybe you are both right. I am talking mostly about in sessions.
Oh and :
>the earl's chair/ any instrument, but particularly flute for the opening phrase.
- Chris
# Posted on February 13th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: Rhythm teaching
Here's a great aid for playing any music with rock-steady (as in earth not genre) time, regardless of pulse or tempo...not in session or performance space obviously, but in practice especially if keeping a rhythm is a challenge...
Walk in place, or in a big circle, or down the road, and be aware of the steady "march" pace of your feet. Slow is good but not too slow! Then clap your hands in a triplet, so that you clap the ONE at the EXACT SAME time as one (choose left or right) foot hits the ground on the ONE. You will be playing a polyrhythm of 2 against 3. Then out loud, sing the little xmas ditty, "HARK How the Bells, SWEET Silver Bells, etcetc..." so that the HARK and SWEET are in time with the ONE that both feet and hands are playing, and you will hear and feel the composite rhythm that is neither dominated by the 2-beat march, or the 3-beat triplet.
If that's too easy, sit down, and play a march pulse with one hand on one knee, and a triplet pulse with the other hand on the other knee and sing the xmas song out loud as above. Again, the HARK and SWEET are obviously the ONE and both hands must hit both knees on that ONE. You can hit your hands "toGETher, right, left, right, toGETher, right, left, right" so that the GET of together is the ONE.
Hah! It is SO much easier to do than say/write, but maybe this will make a little sense. Doing it makes a whole lot of sense 'cause when you're IN that 2 against 3 groove, your time, your sense of being ON time is very very grounded. Do this with a few other folks, so that some play the march, others play the triplet, and for fun, test yourselves against a met on the march pulse! It's surprising how solid the time can be.
I learned this from a Brazilian percussionist a bazillion years ago and about that many years of playing various percussion in Latin and African styles has shown me how valuable it is for anyone, playing any kind of music. Plus it's a total gas...
Linda
# Posted on February 15th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
"ONE that both feet and hands are playing"...should read..."ONE that feet and hands are playing" . You won't have both feet on the ONE, obviously!
# Posted on February 15th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
Yes, that three over two, or three over four thing is very useful to get nailed. I like to do it by playing jig versions of reels over the top of people playing the reels. It's great sound.
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
Yes, that three over two, or three over four thing is very useful to get nailed. I like to do it by playing jig versions of reels over the top of people playing the reels. It's great sound.
But how do people playing reels like it? My guess is it would just muddy up the waters. Never tried it though.
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by prestonian
Re: Rhythm teaching
It's a great sound sound ... what's not to like?
(Not advisable near the stummers mind - confuses the hell out of 'em)
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
I popped it into the mix here not so much to suggest using it in a particular setting, 'cause it's very African in flavour and certainly could muddy a clean reel or even a jig. But it's a personal or group training tool that, once you're IN the groove of it, you have the sense of the tempo being immovable, like a train that you're riding. You also get just a bit of distance from what you're DOING, and thus you tend to listen and feel more...the rhythm is taking care of itself.
That said, as a double-strung harp player with 8 fingers on 2 sets of strings to fool around with, I improvise often with this, letting one hand play the 2, and the other play the 3. Fun stuff, especially when the 2 sets of strings are tuned a little differently; melodies have a way of just popping into existence purely out of the rhythmic pattern. Great finger warm up!
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
You can only do the jig on top of the reel thing with really strong players, otherwise, yes, it is a bit muddy. And, if someone has not heard it before, they get confused and try and follow you. You have to be aware of that and be ready to instantly nip back to playing 4s. But among people who know, it's great, not muddy at all. And it does what you say about making the tempo really solid. And it is like riding a train. And I love it when people start swapping between the two at unexpected moments. You might get a few phrases where everyone is playing the jig. It's great.
(not so good layering a reel version on to a jig though. With the jig on a reel at a normal reel tempo, you get a jig that's a little slower than normal. So you are layering something with an easy feel on top of the slightly more manic reel. But if you do the reel on to a jig at standard jig tempo, you get a fairly racy reel, which can dominate the jig a little too much. Can be done though, if the jig players are strong enough and you play the faster reel very delicately. I like it this may round playing the reel on the viola, against 4 or 5 fiddles playing the jig.)
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
I've also found in purely percussion sessions (ye olde drum circles...great way to learn how NOT to play with others! for others that is, never applies to moi!) that you can layer the 2 on top of the 3 with much greater ease and simplicity than layering the 3 on top of the 2. I believe that's cause the 3 (jig or waltz) is so physical; your body (mine anyway) wants to move in a lilting fashion with it, so putting the 2 on top of it is relatively effortless, from the percussion sense. In ITD I would imagine it's more a function of the melodic structure and phrasing...I'm tapping the table as I write (sorta!) and find that a 2 over the 3 (4 over 6 really) of Morrison's Jig, for example, is quite cool! But putting a 3 over Are Ye Sleepin Maggie? I cawn't do it solo!
Very interesting what you say about the jigs and reels here, Ilig...I play with an excellent guitar/bazouki/mandolin player, it's time to test it out!
But to clarify...a jig in 6 would have 4 beats layering onto it. Actually playing a 4 over 3 (or 3 over 4) I have found to be much more difficult than 2 over 3 (or 3 over 2). The phrasing sounds like "pass the g** d*** butter, pass the g** d*** butter!" and I can do that as the composite, but not by thinking 4 against 3.
If anyone is interested in a page or 2 of percussion "box"notations of various polyrhythms like this, send me an email off line and I'd be happy to share..
Linda
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
the jig on the reel is (ignoring twiddly bits) putting 6 notes onto 8. So it gives it the feel of grounding it, putting the brakes on, Though without slowing down of course.
The reel onto the jig is putting 8 onto 6. Which has the opposite effect.
Neither are actually harder, for thay are the same thing.
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
hmmm...singing/counting Morrison's Jig, playing the 2 triplets in the right hand (total of 6 beats per bar), I still get 4 beats per bar (rather than 8) layered with the left hand...boiling down to simplest integers of 3 and 2. Well actually, both (4 & 8) are possible against the 6 of course, but for one person 2 over 3 is a whole lot easier to do than 4 over 3. More than one player = more complexity!
As for "not harder (6 on 8 vs 8 on 6)", is that true in practice? It is in theory of course, but personally, as I mentioned, I find it much easier to bring in the 2 over the 3 rather than the other way around.
Again, it would be a very different thing to do these with more than one person!
# Posted on February 16th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
Most people tap their foot twice per bar in a reel ... one tap per four notes. And it's the same foot tap for a jig ... twice per bar, one tap per three notes. This is the basis of why the jig/reel, reel/jig thing works.
Try taping your right toe on the standard first and fifth beat of the reel and bring your heal into the third and seventh beat. Easy peasy. Then sing a jig over it. Easy peasy.
Now try to bring your left foot into tapping the toe on two and the heal on six. So you have:
ONE: right toe
two: left toe
three: right heel
four: left heel
FIVE: right toe
six: left toe
seven: right heel
eight: left heel
This is still easy. Sing a reel as you do it.
Now try just concentrating on the ONE and FIVE, the right toe tap, and let the rest go on auto.
Then sing a jig with the right toe tapping the first beet in each triplet.
# Posted on February 17th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Rhythm teaching
riiiiiiiiiight...got that...3 against 4, never had it so easy, thanks! Now to see if I can manage that musically...it'll take some practice but it seems doable, between the two hands.
# Posted on February 18th 2009 by khandro
Re: Rhythm teaching
Cool stuff! I never expected so much! Thanks. I know my fiddler teacher has told me that my phrasing seems okay, but sometimes the ends of my phrases I speed up. I play with a metronome for practice to help with an even rhythm. I like the idea and really listening and being able to tell when you're speeding up . I think really listening and playing with good players helps with the rhythm issue.
I just figured out that with the people I mentioned before, phrasing is absent. It's just a string of notes.. well maybe not that bad. Thus, it's hard to follow the tune. It's a little difficult because my timing isn't the greatest, but I think working on stronger, steady timing will help. I like the tapping ideas and will see how they go.
# Posted on February 26th 2009 by enirehtac