Thread: Gallop? Longa? Basic? Threes? Triplets? Worship ME? That finger cymbal rhythm! RANT

I'm a counter when I don't know the song really well. I do hear phrasing and once I get to know the song better, I can stop counting.

I agree, people only say "triplet" by mistake, I use "triples" too. That is too funny about Dolphina, you MUST be kidding!
But gallop is 4 beats so if we're really going to get precise, we'll have to call it "canter" lol
Let's stick to musical references since they are musical instruments

Originally Posted by *Shira*

There are lots of names for the basic finger cymbal rhythm that is counted as and-a-ONE, and-a-TWO, and-a-THREE, and-a-FOUR.

I think "gallop" is a good name because that rhythm kind of sounds like the gait of a horse.

I think "threes" is fine, especially if you're learning the Salimpour approach to playing cymbals that also has rolls of 5 and 7, and you're trying to distinguish between threes and opposed to fives and sevens.

I think "basic" is fine, if that's the first finger cymbal rhythm a teacher introduces to her students, and if she treats it as a building block for others.

I'm not quite as comfortable with "longa". A longa is a piece of classical music from Turkey. It's sort of a like a symphony in the sense that it contains a number of different sections, some slow and some fast, with varying rhythms. The high-energy finale of longas was widely used by belly dancers in the 1960's and 1970's, such as that of Nihavend Longa, and that's why the finger cymbal rhythm was named that. But I find it a little misleading to use the term "longa" as a rhythm name for finger cymbals because it appropriates a term that means something entirely different, and uses that term in a very limiting way.

Dolphina's "worship ME worship ME" makes me giggle.

Begin rant.

But I have a serious objection to using the term "triplet" to apply to the finger cymbal rhythm in question. There is already a musical term of "triplet" which means something ENTIRELY DIFFERENT - it refers to playing three notes across two counts. Anybody who actually knows something about music knows about the musical term and what it means. People who have had piano lessons for more than 6 months know it. People who have played in middle school bands know it. Anybody with even a modest amount of musical education knows it. So, when a belly dance teacher appropriates the term and uses it to mean something else, she exposes her total ignorance of music AND PASSES THAT IGNORANCE ON TO TRUSTING STUDENTS. Any belly dance teacher who uses the term triplet to refer to that zill pattern is basically showing me that she is a) ignorant, and b) hasn't bothered to learn enough about the topic she's trying to "teach" (in this case, playing a musical instrument known as finger cymbals) to realize that she's ignorant, and c) is passing that ignorance on to her students. She will lose credibility with students who have musical training in their backgrounds when she uses the term "triplet" in a way that is musically incorrect.

Rant over.

Although I don't think the word "triple" is anywhere close to being as incorrect as "triplet", I'd really prefer that people didn't call the move "triple" when teaching it. The reason is that it sounds too close to "triplet" - so much so that some students might think you said "triplet" and grow up teaching the wrong name to their students someday.

If you're teaching the Salimpour method of zills (ie, patterns like 3-5-5-, 3-3-7, 3-7-3, etc), you wouldn't say "triple-quintuple-quintuple" or "triple-triple-septuple" or "triple-septuple-triple" would you?

Originally Posted by *Shira*

Although I don't think the word "triple" is anywhere close to being as incorrect as "triplet", I'd really prefer that people didn't call the move "triple" when teaching it. The reason is that it sounds too close to "triplet" - so much so that some students might think you said "triplet" and grow up teaching the wrong name to their students someday.

If you're teaching the Salimpour method of zills (ie, patterns like 3-5-5-, 3-3-7, 3-7-3, etc), you wouldn't say "triple-quintuple-quintuple" or "triple-triple-septuple" or "triple-septuple-triple" would you?

No, but I don't teach exclusively that method.

I teach singles, doubles, triples, quads as shorthand. From those we build all of the rhythms and in-fills as well as the 3-5-5, 3-3-7 type patterns. I would call it as 3-5-5, but would also explain it as "a triple followed by two groups of 5 singles." For a basic filled 'beledi' I would say DDtktDtkttk and also explain as "single, single, triple, single, triple, double" and as "1 2 123 1 123 12"

I honestly don't think using triple is a bad thing in context, especially in explaining that it is not a musical triplet and in conjunction with the others.

To each their own ..g.:

The book "Rhythmic Training for Dancers" is a SUPER resource for even belly dancers, and devotes a lot of time to discussing how to "count" in different time signatures.

Typically, musicians will count the 4/4 timing as

1e&a 2e&a 3e&a 4e&a or more simply 1& 2& 3& 4&

but dancers and choreographers tend to count the same thing as

1&2& 3&4& 5&6& 7&8& or more simply 12345678


The reason for this -- in modern dance, anyway -- is to be able to "count" the upbeat before the accented downbeat. It's tricky to count syncopated steps, especially if the counted "count" is spent suspended in the air, or off balance. This makes it a little easier, or so the theory goes.

Or as Suhaila puts it, it's sometimes easier to think of the dancer's count "FOUR" rather than the musician's count of the "AND before the THREE."

Originally Posted by aziyade

The book "Rhythmic Training for Dancers" is a SUPER resource for even belly dancers, and devotes a lot of time to discussing how to "count" in different time signatures.

Typically, musicians will count the 4/4 timing as

1e&a 2e&a 3e&a 4e&a or more simply 1& 2& 3& 4&

but dancers and choreographers tend to count the same thing as

1&2& 3&4& 5&6& 7&8& or more simply 12345678


The reason for this -- in modern dance, anyway -- is to be able to "count" the upbeat before the accented downbeat. It's tricky to count syncopated steps, especially if the counted "count" is spent suspended in the air, or off balance. This makes it a little easier, or so the theory goes.

Or as Suhaila puts it, it's sometimes easier to think of the dancer's count "FOUR" rather than the musician's count of the "AND before the THREE."

Oh! THANK YOU for this reference. It sounds great and I'll definitely check it out!