Creative ways to count rhythms, the most primal thing we do

[tonefingers]

From simple to hard

How do rhythms get understood and second nature.

I'll start

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 -

Please expand on this, rhythm masters.

[brad347]

this is a very broad and interesting topic.

In India, there are a whole set of syllables for different patterns.

I don't know many, but I do remember one, tiki tiki gamela, that conveys 7/8 (2+2+3) very well.

Vocalizing (with syllables) tricky patterns has always helped me to internalize them.

[Austinrocks]

7/8 for me ends up being 1 2 3 4 1 2 3, thats just how I hear it so thats how I play it, or I can not count to 7.

Lila's Dance has 20/8 and 14/8 times. but it works to 4/8 3/8 4/8 3/8 and 4/8 3/8 4/8 3/8 4/8, there I go with that stupid 7/8 count. I remember seeing some thing by John Mclaughlin on how he breaks ups the song ryhthms.

[gennation]

There a great vid on youtube of a crazy drummer doing a tutorial on odd time sigs. Mclaughlin's got it down. I find myself counting to his music everyday going into work. There's some great ones.

Dance of the Maya, some count the 10/8 as, 3/8 3/8 1/8 3/8. I like 3/8 3/8 3/8 1/8.

John has a chapter on his DVD lessons specifically for odd time sigs. He only deals with 7/8, 9/8 and 11/8 if I recall right. Basically he explains it has counting them in 4/8...so he would always be accenting the 1 and the 5 and the 9 when appropriate.

I like how he breaks things up based on the phrases, and the feel, which makes the most sense too. 12/8 into 6/8 or 8/8 & 4/8. Or 15/8 into 8/8 & 7/8, this one is like Just So Only More from Industrial Zen, it's almost like it could be two completely different time sigs for the length of the phrases.

He does it so flawlessly too. The second song on Industrial Zen is in 15/8 also and has Eric Johnson as a guest soloist. His solo is great, but when John comes in it's like "ah, the Masters in the house".

That stuff on Project Z's Lincoln Memorial is out there too. Sometimes I don't even know where "1" on that. Kind of like Mahavishnu Jr., Jimmy plays pretty effortlessly over it too, still not like John who's been doing it over half a century now!

Spend some time working through these charts: http://www.italway.it/morrone/WBTG-scores.htm

Those will MAKE you count.

[KRosser]

this is a very broad and interesting topic.

In India, there are a whole set of syllables for different patterns.

I don't know many, but I do remember one, tiki tiki gamela, that conveys 7/8 (2+2+3) very well.

Vocalizing (with syllables) tricky patterns has always helped me to internalize them.

And of course, every Frank Zappa fan knows "five" is counted by chanting "Guacamole Queen"

[tonefingers]

How about some of that slow 12/8 Hendrix type
blues.

I have this 'Red House' study

like 5 or 6 different versions transcribed.

Most this stuff just looks scary as hell.

What with ratios and 32nd note triplets
connected to some.16th note dotted crazyness
then more ratios. One bar would span the whole
page width

Steve Vai transcribed some Zappa when he was a teen.
The writing was extreemly detailed. Looked like the Hendrix stuff.
True with all the fast greats. Shawn Lane, Mclaughlin. Forget it.
I really don't benifit from these complicated rhythms.
I'm talking single note lines not Chord Melody.
I know in 12/8 the 4 against 3 thing is used.
Would that be written as a ratio?
How do you read those damn |-11:2-|
What are all those devices used to write 'sqeezed in' notes.
How about that slow blues writing?

Do people really read that stuff?

It would be easier using my ear with the recording than trying to bring these crazy rhythms to life.

Any thoughts on simplifying this 12/8 nightmare?
Ken? Brad? Kimock? gennation? Austinrocks? 57tele? anyone? Splatt? Stevieraveon?
or anyone else who I can't remember.




.

[brad347]

How about some of that slow 12/8 Hendrix type
blues.

I have this 'Red House' study

like 5 or 6 different versions transcribed.

Most this stuff just looks scary as hell.

What with ratios and 32nd note triplets
connected to some.16th note dotted crazyness
then more ratios. One bar would span the whole
page width

Steve Vai transcribed some Zappa when he was a teen.
The writing was extreemly detailed. Looked like the Hendrix stuff.
True with all the fast greats. Shawn Lane, Mclaughlin. Forget it.
I really don't benifit from these complicated rhythms.
I'm talking single note lines not Chord Melody.
I know in 12/8 the 4 against 3 thing is used.
Would that be written as a ratio?
How do you read those damn |-11:2-|
What are all those devices used to write 'sqeezed in' notes.
How about that slow blues writing?

Do people really read that stuff?

It would be easier using my ear with the recording than trying to bring these crazy rhythms to life.

Any thoughts on simplifying this 12/8 nightmare?
Ken? Brad? Kimock? gennation? Austinrocks? 57tele? anyone? Splatt? Stevieraveon?
or anyone else who I can't remember.




.


Think of this:

most of that stuff was improvised.

Barlines, tuplets, etc., for all practical purposes, do not exist in real life. We can't 'hear' barlines, technically. They are there for visual reference. They help us to read things that are written down. So it is with our note values, the way we group notes, etc.

Think of this experiment:

On a piece of graph paper (or staff paper, if you don't have any graph paper handy) draw a picture of a cloud.

Each place the cloud crosses over a line, put a dot at the intersection.

Then take a piece of tracing paper and place it over the cloud drawing, and reproduce those dots on the tracing paper.

You could then 'connect the dots' as in the childrens' activity, and have something that somewhat resembles the cloud.

You could even go back to the graph paper and plot out the coordinates of each intersection and come up with some sort of equation that would represent an approximation of the cloud.

It would be a very complex problem. A complex equation. It would probably require some sort of computer program to devise or solve efficiently, unless you're way slicker at calculus etc. than I am.

That mathematical system of graphing/drawing things would be much more efficient for something such as a simple perfect circle, ellipse, parabola, etc.; but it probably wouldn't be the first choice for something artistic like a cloud. It's hard to draw a perfect circle freehand. It's hard to plot an equation for a cloud-drawing.

***

Reading/writing music is sort of a mathematical, geometric, algebraic sort of thing in that sense. There is a formula that we use to reproduce shapes. For certain types of shapes (i.e. baroque inventions) the formula works very very well. For certain other types of shapes (i.e. Hendrix solos) the formula is not very efficient or elegant.

Hendrix wasn't painting inside the lines. He was drawing clouds. He was playing within the time, but also floating over the time; supremely aware of the pulse but not bound by it. Our centuries-old Western system of standard notation does not 'understand' this approach very well. It wasn't designed for it.

After a point, the system starts to break down and has limited utility.

It's a fun exercise to transcribe all that stuff exactly, but its real-world utility is compromised by the fact that most musicians don't see notation that looks like that (16th note 37-tuplets over the barline, etc) very often, and are therefore less equipped to read it very well, unless they are very very freakishly good readers.

For most, just learning it off the record would be a MUCH faster way to assimilate the idea, than to try and decipher the complex math-problems of a notation system at the edge of breakdown.

In other words, Jimi was just drawing clouds. Sometimes it's more productive to just look at the cloud and reproduce it freehand, rather than look up the equation that lets you plot the points on graph paper...

Unless you just want to learn to plot the points on graph paper. Then have at it... for fun.

You know?

Again I ramble incoherently...

[dkaplowitz]

I figure Carnatic musicians, or Indian musicians in general might have a better rhythm conception than us Westerners with our old theory books that don't acknowledge tuplets that aren't triplets. So I stumbled onto this, which I've heard sung in real performances (with some variations, depending on the musician).

http://www02.homepage.villanova.edu/david.kaplowitz/rhythm-syllables.pdf

Hope it helps someone.

[brad347]

I figure Carnatic musicians, or Indian musicians in general might have a better rhythm conception than us Westerners with our old theory books that don't acknowledge tuplets that aren't triplets. So I stumbled onto this, which I've heard sung in real performances (with some variations, depending on the musician).

http://www02.homepage.villanova.edu/david.kaplowitz/rhythm-syllables.pdf

Hope it helps someone.

that's what i'm talkin bout!

[brad347]

something that is a fun exercise to get all groupings of rhythms more comfortable and second-nature:

Don't move the metronome!

When practicing scales and technique, I've had my metronome set on quarter note equals 75 for the last 3 months.

Instead of moving the metronome incrementally to add a new level of challenge to a familiar pattern or exercise, change the subdivision.

Daily, I take a different scale and start with eighth notes. Then 8th note quintuplets. Then 8th note triplets. Then 8th note septuplets. Then sixteenths. Then sixteenth note quintuplets, etc etc etc.

Moving from one subdivision like that to the next is very incremental in 'speed,' and very manageable. The next subdivision up isn't that much faster than the previous one, when you use ALL of the odd subdivisions as well as the 2- and 3- subdivisions. You know?

5 and 7 will quickly become as ingrained and second-nature as 2- 3- and 4. Then you will be much freer, rhythmically.

[tonefingers]

I figure Carnatic musicians, or Indian musicians in general might have a better rhythm conception than us Westerners with our old theory books that don't acknowledge tuplets that aren't triplets. So I stumbled onto this, which I've heard sung in real performances (with some variations, depending on the musician).

http://www02.homepage.villanova.edu/david.kaplowitz/rhythm-syllables.pdf

Hope it helps someone.
Wow, this is a great chart

Here's the first part for all to see

thanks
-------------------

Rhythmic Syllables
1 = Ta
2 = Taka
3 = Takita
4 = Takadimi
5 = Taka Taki ta (2+3)
6 = Takita Takita (3+3)
7 = Takadimi Takita (4+3)
8 = Takadimi Takadimi (4+4)
9 = Takadimi Taka Takita ( 4+2+3)
Notes from a lesson with Dr. Karraikudi
Subramaniam, May 14, 2002.
While clapping the tala, count from (1) to (9)
then back down to (1), allowing one cycle of adi
tala (8 beats) for every change in gati. Watch for
breath control and precise transitions.

[dkaplowitz]

something that is a fun exercise to get all groupings of rhythms more comfortable and second-nature:

Don't move the metronome!

When practicing scales and technique, I've had my metronome set on quarter note equals 75 for the last 3 months.

Instead of moving the metronome incrementally to add a new level of challenge to a familiar pattern or exercise, change the subdivision.

Daily, I take a different scale and start with eighth notes. Then 8th note quintuplets. Then 8th note triplets. Then 8th note septuplets. Then sixteenths. Then sixteenth note quintuplets, etc etc etc.

Moving from one subdivision like that to the next is very incremental in 'speed,' and very manageable. The next subdivision up isn't that much faster than the previous one, when you use ALL of the odd subdivisions as well as the 2- and 3- subdivisions. You know?

5 and 7 will quickly become as ingrained and second-nature as 2- 3- and 4. Then you will be much freer, rhythmically.
Great exercises! Esp. if you're playing stuff like a pattern of 4 repeating notes in a quintuplet rhythm or vice versa. Very challenging, very freeing rhythmically. Great prep for metric modulation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_modulation). Dig any books/DVD by Gavin Harrison for that stuff out the wazoo! Very trippy rhythmic illusions.

[phallout]

the vocalizing thing could work at times, but you dont really want to back yourself into a corner.

Taking a hint from Krosser here tho on the Zappa thought- Frank was always so sarcastic with the timing of his timing (make sense) and his melodic phrasing that it is almost second nature for anyone with a sense for sarcasm in the slightest detail to be able to recognize the timings eventually. when he was writing the stuff and traslating it to other guys/girls in the band, im sure the time signature, or counting thing, was taken into account.. but live- no way. I work with someone from the zappa musical family- this is NOT the way things worked- it was about the FEEL.

Now apply that to whatever tune you are trying to learn, write or what have you. There are so many different nuances in a 'groove' that just counting the straight 1-2-3-4 will leave you stranded in the tune. the drummer doesnt just play 1-2-3-4 etc- hes playing all sorts of deeper rhythms inside that 4/4 timing. THAT is what you need to focus on when playing an indepth rhythmic tune... at least thats what helps me pull the best from the tune- especially when soloing over an odd time/overlapping signature or a poly/hybrid rythem.

Counting is good to know how to do, and understanding the time signature is very important.. but if you really think guys like john mclaughlin or frank zappa really took the time and effort away from their playing on stage to think in their head '1-2-3-4' or tiki tiki gamma or whatever the heck- id say alot of you guys are missing the point...

[dkaplowitz]

Counting is good to know how to do, and understanding the time signature is very important.. but if you really think guys like john mclaughlin or frank zappa really took the time and effort away from their playing on stage to think in their head '1-2-3-4' or tiki tiki gamma or whatever the heck- id say alot of you guys are missing the point...
And I'd say you're taking liberties with assumptions. I always thought the goal was to count until you didn't need to count anymore (e.g. until the pulse, whatever that may be) became 2nd nature and "getting lost" was a veritable impossibility. But I thought that was assumed. My bad for assuming that.

Cool that you're doing Zappa stuff (or working with an ex-Zappa/alumnus). Who is it, and what kinda' stuff are you doing?

[gennation]

This is from John Mclaughlins myspace site. He's releasing a DVD instructional on:

"John McLaughlin has just finished recording the upcoming dvd on Konakkol, the Indian Rhythm System with percussionist V. Selvaganesh. This DVD is scheduled to launch in September 2007 in USA on Abstractlogix (http://wwww.abstractlogix.com/) and Mediastarz (http://www.mediastarz.com/)in Europe."

If you're are familiar with the vocal rhythms of John's Trio and Shakti you'll know get a chance to learn how it works/is done. This will be very interesting.

[phallout]

And I'd say you're taking liberties with assumptions. I always thought the goal was to count until you didn't need to count anymore (e.g. until the pulse, whatever that may be) became 2nd nature and "getting lost" was a veritable impossibility. But I thought that was assumed. My bad for assuming that.

Cool that you're doing Zappa stuff (or working with an ex-Zappa/alumnus). Who is it, and what kinda' stuff are you doing?


I understand where you are coming from.. but isnt the goal more about feeling the groove in the music as apposed to counting until you dont need to count anymore? counting beats, or quarter notes isnt the entire depth of the rhythm... thats my argument. id say a vast majority of the musicians i play with would more get lost counting quarter notes the whole time than they would finding that groove of the tune.. counting its a great strength and a great weakness when it comes to performance- im just playing devils advocate here.. :Devil

[dkaplowitz]

I understand where you are coming from.. but isnt the goal more about feeling the groove in the music as apposed to counting until you dont need to count anymore? counting beats, or quarter notes isnt the entire depth of the rhythm... thats my argument. id say a vast majority of the musicians i play with would more get lost counting quarter notes the whole time than they would finding that groove of the tune.. counting its a great strength and a great weakness when it comes to performance- im just playing devils advocate here.. :Devil
Fair enough. Then tell me how do you instruct a beginner to play a song in 13/8? How do you tell a beginner to feel septuplets? I really want to know your method.

Maybe you have a way where they can feel it right away. For me it took me a while of counting/enunciating lower subdivisions until I could integrate it and didn't have to think about the meter.

And that tala thing I posted above gets pretty advanced. It's the singing you can hear on some of those McLaughlin/Shakti recordings. I don't think it's purely academic, but I'm not an expert in East Indian music either --I Just know it's a lot more rhythmically advanced than most of the stuff our Western ears are used to hearing.

[Bryan T]

http://www02.homepage.villanova.edu/david.kaplowitz/rhythm-syllables.pdf

Hope it helps someone.

In college I attended a tabla clinic and the tabla player (his name escapes me) discussed these rhythms. It was all done orally and at a blistering pace - it ended up sounding more like a tongue twister than anything. Seeing it written out makes things a lot clearer to me.

The Indian way of counting seems like it will make tuplets a lot easier to count for me, as I currently don't have a good way to count a septuplet, for example. I do count the meter of the piece by subdividing. I might count a 9/8 as three groups of two and one group of three.


The next layer of rhythm is interjecting different feels into these tuplets. I'm not very good at that, but I think the Indian way of counting will help me with that.

Bryan

[dkaplowitz]

P.S. Probably one of the best books for practical odd time stuff:

http://www.amazon.com/Odd-Time-Reading-Text-Instruments/dp/0769233724/ref=sr_1_3/002-5259738-4956844?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179515787&sr=1-3

Just exercises, no hand holding.

Presupposes you're pretty good with this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Reading-Text-All-Instruments/dp/0769233775/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-5259738-4956844?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179515787&sr=1-1

Then, if you're into polyrhythms, this one is really good:

http://www.amazon.com/Musicians-Guide-Polyrhythms-Book-Cassette/dp/0793521246

Comes with a CD, but I couldn't find the CD edition quickly.

Pete Magadini released a very '70s fusion sounding album where he demonstrates tons of polyrhythms, odd times and metric modulation. Here's that: http://cdbaby.com/cd/magadini

I'll reiterate any books and the DVD by Gavin Harrison for further metric modulation studies.

[phallout]

Fair enough. Then tell me how do you instruct a beginner to play a song in 13/8? How do you tell a beginner to feel septuplets? I really want to know your method.

Maybe you have a way where they can feel it right away. For me it took me a while of counting/enunciating lower subdivisions until I could integrate it and didn't have to think about the meter.

And that tala thing I posted above gets pretty advanced. It's the singing you can hear on some of those McLaughlin/Shakti recordings. I don't think it's purely academic, but I'm not an expert in East Indian music either --I Just know it's a lot more rhythmically advanced than most of the stuff our Western ears are used to hearing.


come on man, were not here to fight about elementry things such as counting... the title of the darn thread is 'creative ways to count...', not 'how do i teach my 6 year old student to count rhythm'

a creative way to count is to not count at all... feel the vibe, the groove, the whole thing that makes you attracted to the music in the first place. If I am wrong for bringing that up maybe we should all go become doctors....:o















oopps.. hope i didnt strike a nerve there :nono you are a doctor... arnt you? or do you work for the weather channel?

[lhallam]

come on man, were not here to fight about elementry things such as counting... the title of the darn thread is 'creative ways to count...', not 'how do i teach my 6 year old student to count rhythm'

a creative way to count is to not count at all... feel the vibe, the groove, the whole thing that makes you attracted to the music in the first place. If I am wrong for bringing that up maybe we should all go become doctors....:o


I've been reading music & counting for over 40 yrs so I'm not a 6 yr old.

I use counting when reading music, if there is a particular rough passage or if I have long rests or held notes.

For example we played a piece that held a chord thru a bar of 3/8 then another chord for a bar of 5/8 then a bar of 7/8 then 4/8, then 3/8 again.

There we also sections where I would tacit for 9 bars. If everyone in the band didn't count, we could not do it tight.

When I was playing in an orchestra pit, counting was a necessity.

If you can do it by feel without getting lost more power to you. I find most humans need something to aid in getting it right.

Then again, while playing "Louie Louie" one can probably dispense with the counting.

[dkaplowitz]

come on man, were not here to fight about elementry things such as counting... the title of the darn thread is 'creative ways to count...', not 'how do i teach my 6 year old student to count rhythm'

a creative way to count is to not count at all... feel the vibe, the groove, the whole thing that makes you attracted to the music in the first place.
Weak!

Anyway, I stand by what I've said in this thread (by offering helpful info based on my years playing/studying this stuff). You, however, what have you offered to help anyone (6 years old or 60)?

P.S.

If I am wrong for bringing that up maybe we should all go become doctors....:o















oopps.. hope i didnt strike a nerve there :nono you are a doctor... arnt you? or do you work for the weather channel?
WTF are you on about? I have no idea. I was much too much of an underachiever to become anything like a doctor. I took the ultimate slacker's route and went to school to be a musician.

[tonefingers]

We can definately feel the difference between straight, swing
latin, 12|8 time

But how do you feel your way through new charts and tunes. You
have to read the stuff. In a big band you follow the conductor as well.
That is far from feeling it, at least at first for me.

But then again, how do you play those Jimi slow blues
without totally feeling it. The reading is crazy. Having the recording is
a must. That becomes cheating on the reading. the reading becomes a reference only.

I think you guys are talking about two different situations. Just my guess.

[dkaplowitz]

I think you guys are talking about two different situations. Just my guess.
Taking the queue of your thread title, I'm personally talking about how you first learn to play (any) rhythms you're not accustomed to. I believe that this is the first step to feeling that which does not come natural to you. This typically starts with counting/enunciating. This approach is also a good way to interpret/translate that which you hear in your head, which will allow you to communicate, verbally or in written form, that which you hear in your head to other musicians.

When it gets advanced like Zappa tunes, or The Mahavishnu Orchestra, there's no way anyone "just feels it". That's a total misnomer. One person in 2 billion (maybe) can feel 21/8 or 19/16 without first thinking about it. We're talking about Vinny Colaiuta level stuff --and that guy sure as shit worked his ass off to "just feel" the shit the way he did (as I assume did Zappa and Johnny Mac). Same goes for all the shifting sigs in Le Sacre du Printemps. The ballerinas and other dancers had to practice that shit, as did the performers. Or did Pierre Monteux just tell all the musicians to "just feel" that music for the performance of it that caused a riot? Meh.

Anyway, are you sight reading Jimi Hendrix? I wouldn't want to read that. It'd be like reading The Frank Zappa Guitar Book. I'd much rather sit with something that would allow me to vary the tempo some and pick it off note for note. Plus, you could loop problematic sections, or sections you want to cop the feel from. Screw reading something as expressive as that, esp. if you have the recording.

[DejavuDave]

When it gets advanced like Zappa tunes, or The Mahavishnu Orchestra, there's no way anyone "just feels it". That's a total misnomer. One person in 2 billion (maybe) can feel 21/8 or 19/16 without first thinking about it.

Gotta respectfully disagree. :YinYang "Feel" and understanding are mutually exclusive qualities. Sometimes, in fact, one can diminish the intensity of the other. I think you're right that some are not as intuitive as others --- but one in two billion!? I know plenty of musicians who can fall into just about any rhythm or time you want to throw at them. I'm not bad myself and I don't consider myself as rare as one in two billion.

Many years ago a friend noticed a behavior of mine that I was unaware of. While jamming together on some Mahavishnu stuff he noticed my jaw clenching and moving in rhythm with the music. He asked if I did that intentionally. I replied that I did not. I guess that's been my unconscious physical mechanism for keeping time --- and why my teeth are powder and my dentist is rich. :cool:

[brad347]

there's no shame in counting.

We all gotta start somewhere.

It is great to 'feel' and internalize complex patterns, and in the musical 'real world, for me anyway, it is indeed easiest to 'feel it' (rather than count it) in the end. But how do you get there?

The greatest teacher in the world is 'humility.' If one thinks 'counting is lame, I gotta just FEEL it,' then they are less likely to admit to themselves "Well, its seems that I can't 'just feel' it." But if one can humble themselves to count first, then practice to the point of internalization... good things might happen (if they are that style of learner.) The wisdom of generations of musicians in some of the most rhythmically sophisticated music in the world might deserve one's consideration.

People learn all different ways.

In any case, phallout, as you pointed out, the thread is called "creative ways to count..." Since that is the case, might not it be a good idea to just leave the discussion to 'counting?' Contribution is voluntary. :) It's very unlikely that one will "save the world" by setting people 'on the right path' from a post on an internet forum. It's not terribly more likely that one will, through a post on an internet forum, impress the world with their profound wisdom and insight. :) I have learned both things through experience!

Please be aware that there are some great musicians and experienced teachers on this forum, and for many of them, saying "you have to feel rhythm rather than count it" is sort of an insult to their intelligence. Maybe everyone alread knows that and just has some curiosity about counting?

I don't think the internet needs another place where opinionated people debate 'right' or 'wrong' in music. Thanks for your contribution, though.

[dkaplowitz]

Heya DejavuDave. Sorry if I wasn't clear I guess I meant 1 in 2 bn people who haven't already done a lot of the hard work understanding/playing music, or 1 in 2bn beginners. I would hope someone who's even moderately skilled with jamming/improvising but who's only ever played in 4 and 3 would be able to hear other odd time stuff and feel it (without even counting). Maybe that's why I'm disagreeing with rubber neck ;) up there -- perhaps he's assuming we're all at that level too, where I was assuming some people aren't.

It's funny how long it took me to hear 5s and 7s when I was a beginner. It was only after a while of counting and tapping groupings that they started to pop out of recordings I'd been listening to all along. But perhaps I'm severely less intuitive than most. heh. So sometimes I approach explaining things like someone's as un-naturally inclined as I am.

Anyway, rock on with your prog selves... :dude

[brad347]

Gotta respectfully disagree. :YinYang "Feel" and understanding are mutually exclusive qualities. Sometimes, in fact, one can diminish the intensity of the other.

This is interesting, because in my own musical journey this has not been the case at all.

On my own particular path, "feel" is a type of understanding that, while perhaps decidedly non-intellectual, is as deep as any other type of understanding (perhaps deeper).

And in any case, I certainly don't see them as 'mutually exclusive.' John Coltrane is a shining example of that for me. He had 'head' and he had 'heart' and he had 'outer space,' and all coexisted to make some of the most beautiful music I've ever heard.

[gennation]

Actually the guys in the Mahavishnu Orchestra have stated many times (especially Laird and Goodman) that they would have to count on practically every tune through a whole tour. And that the last tours tunes didn't get easier until they were touring for the NEXT album, because learning/remembering the new tunes was much harder than playing the stuff that had grown on them (albeit, over a long time).

There's many times counting certain parts of songs is an extension of "the groove" aspect, it's like it puts you in the center of the universe that's passing by note by note. Counting can connect with everything spinning around it, and you are at the core, counting the fundamental point. Sure I don't count for everything, but sometimes when I do, it open up a lot more I didn't see just by "feeling it". And visa versa too.

Plus, counting while transcribing is a must.

[DejavuDave]

This is interesting, because in my own musical journey this has not been the case at all.

On my own particular path, "feel" is a type of understanding that, while perhaps decidedly non-intellectual, is as deep as any other type of understanding (perhaps deeper).

And in any case, I certainly don't see them as 'mutually exclusive.' John Coltrane is a shining example of that for me. He had 'head' and he had 'heart' and he had 'outer space,' and all coexisted to make some of the most beautiful music I've ever heard.

That's cool but we may be talking about two different things when we speak of "feel." We can get into a big discussion about consciousness and how it is not a required component of learning (or conditioning), yet can be a useful tool to that end. When I speak of understanding I mean conscious understanding, something formalized and structured that can be recalled (like some of the mnemonic tools already mentioned for keeping time), introspected upon, and communicated without actually executing the thing --- a method, a formula, a concept. When I speak of feel I mean we are conscious of experiencing the rhythm and participating in it but we are not necessarily aware of the time. If we consciously count the time then we are focused more on the concept rather than the experience. There's a little of both going on but we've shifted the balance away from the experience. That's ok; the experience as a whole is a personal thing. Counting certainly helps us to familiarize ourselves with time and get us through rough spots. But once familiarity is established I don't think most of us would choose to continue counting consciously unless we've woven it into the experience and derive a particular satisfaction from it. Do we remain conscious of the notes we play? What about our technique? What happens when a concert pianist suddenly concerns himself with what every finger is doing at any moment? An entangled mess is likely to ensue. This is what I mean by the contradictory coexisting/competitive nature of the two qualities. What I mean by being mutually exclusive is that neither quality relies on the other. I believe some players do not need to count it to feel it, nor do they need to feel it before they can count it. Anyway, this is my current view. (My views have been known to be light, flitting things...) :)

By the way, I recommend "The Origin of Conscious In the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes to anybody interested in the subject of consciousness.

[DejavuDave]

There's many times counting certain parts of songs is an extension of "the groove" aspect, it's like it puts you in the center of the universe that's passing by note by note. Counting can connect with everything spinning around it, and you are at the core, counting the fundamental point. Sure I don't count for everything, but sometimes when I do, it open up a lot more I didn't see just by "feeling it". And visa versa too.

Plus, counting while transcribing is a must.

Good points, gennation. We use what we have and what enriches our experience.

[Aj_rocker]

i use the belsrum book , hes a drummer, who wrote a book with just rhythems in it. 82 pages. I try to get get 20 mins on this a day. I click the metrome to 40 bpm and start reading, repeating any i get wrong. It will sort you out and alot of the pro do that too.


Aj

[wcin]

I count almost all of the time. Playing with a Big Band, always. Blues jams rarely. Contemporary "classical" guitar pieces always when learning, most of the time while playing.

On the Zappa topic, I can't imagine not counting "Envelopes" no matter how unbelievably good the band was at that time. I'd be counting even if I was the one playing squeezy duck.

Now, interesting ways to count. I like to make up mnenomics for polyrhythms after I figure them out rhythmically. So for 3:4 (not 3/4) I use "Please pass the gosh darn butter". I can't remember who showed me this but it works great for me. Bold letters are the beats. That way if I want to interject a polyrhythm into a solo over say a drummer's 4/4, I just recite my line and play along, and I don't get pulled off by what others are doing.

Lastly, after having studied alot of contemporary "classical" guitar, I've found it better to work with the natural phrasings of the music when dividing up complex time. Try to remain true to say 7/4 when breaking it up into 4/4 + 3/4 because they're theoretically different and it's easy to fall back to 1,2,3,4, 1,2,3; The 2 1's shouldn't be the same strength if we're talking 7/4, right? So, I also try working on a bar at a time as a 7/4 phrasing, from the first beat or the first upbeat whichever is more appropriate for the specific phasing to the first beat of the next bar.

[proreverb68]

Here is an idea...

If you speak or write in english...(lets assume we all do on this board or we wouldn't be reading this)

In sticking to this posts question about creative ways to work with time...
I think there are some incredible points and insights on these posts and most of it can be integrated into a whole.

We can probably agree that one creative way to speak is to just let it flow and watch whatever comes
out with no controls, inhibition, censors and just let it fly...you could say its a form of improvisation or flow...right?
Even speech has a timing, and a good rhythm to it. A flow of a good book or a good joke definitely can be ruined or brought home with good time
-ing.

It can be argued that to speak or play music freely you have to just let go and feel the music/words and just let them go... AND I would agree as you cant think and plan everything your going to say or play at the same time you are engageing in conversation or music ( if you want a lively breathing, engaging conversation or show)

This same thought, related to counting time just translates simply into..."I find it difficult to count every thing and expect to be focused enough on music (in a performance) to reach that free flow place while my mind is busy going 1 n ah 2 n ah 3 n ah so on..
On the other hand that does not negate the value of counting at all.

Im all about building a vocabulary both time wise and chord wise beforehand.I try to practice things until its just natural and operates without conscious effort. (sort of like knowing when a blues change is coming up...YOU just..."feel it" or "KNow it"
Intuitively. That didn't just happen..you heard it a million times in your life ..ok..maybe less.

nobody I've ever met with can improvise the english language in a meaningful soulful speaking form without having spent ALOT of time learning the language first...whether you picked it up by ear...or studied it like a madman in school.

THere is a natural order in learning anything...
No shame in counting to begin with or not. Eventually...yeh..hopefully you leave it and just "feel it"

I think this is a similar trap that people fall into who think music school or theory is going to ruin a players feel etc... counting in order to aid with a feel is fine...Or maybe a better way to say it is... practicing a rhythm or feel whether your counting it or not beforehand is a great way to get better at a natural feel when you need it live.

In the carnatic way of teaching tabla...the students do not even get to touch the drum until they can sing and say rhythmic cycles and talas by heart and without much mind getting in the way. THey start at an early early age.
The hands are used as a mirror of the cycle, so while they are counting or speaking tala the body is in action as well and the body and hands and voice often times too. YOu actually feel the beat on your hands with your fingers. It is PRetty integrative...and I think thats what may be needed here.
An integrative view that takes counting, feeling, learning, letting it go and improvising at a pro level as something that usually happens in steps.

I think there is a confusion that gets added to a conversation about feel or study, stiffness in time vs freeness in time when the method to arrive at that point is confused with the end result.

THE road to free time might be very unfree indeed.