Quickstep - advanced

[elisedance]

ALB, I'm listening and hoping you also don't go off tempo again...

[Vagabond]

You can't dance the quickstep to a strict tempo, but 99% of ballroom dancers do.

Doesn't your observation contradict your hypothesis? Moreover how large was the sample size of the study performed and the confidence level, the number of degrees of freedom, and which statistical formulae has been applied.

[albanaich]

It's just an observatiion - if you are dancing quiickstep to 1940's, 1950,'s music you have to be aware that this music is not 'strict temp'

http://www.societies.ncl.ac.uk/swing/music.php

As an experienced Swing dancer but a  novice ballroom dancer THE biggest problem with dancing the quickstep is trying to ignore 'the Swing' - as a rule (and it is a generalisation,) ballroom dancers are not taught to listen for 'the Swing'. If they did, the quickstep would look and feel entirely different.

It's certainly a problem I had to work out (and explain to my very experienced teachers) myself.

A similar problem arises with the Argentine Tango. Most Tango music is 'polyrhythmic', that is to say layered with musicians/instruments playing at different tempo's, sometimes one tempo is dominant, somethimes another. An AT dancer is continously changing tempo within the dance - here's an example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj12nUQKrBE

Again, if you are an AT dancer, you have to ignore the music if you are to do Ballroom Tango.

We did do a 'rule of thumb' test at novice dance class a few years ago and discovered that only 1 in 5 novices dancers can hear the beat, with less than 1 in 10 able to hear the phrasing. This is in line with the observations of swing musiciians of the dance hall era.

We didn't mess around with Anovar, Kolmogorov-Smirnoff,  Kruskal-Wallis or any other parametric or non-parametric test or even pose a null hypothesis - but then neither did the swing dance musicians.

[Vagabond]

It's just an observatiion - if you are dancing quiickstep to 1940's, 1950,'s music you have to be aware that this music is not 'strict temp'

http://www.societies.ncl.ac.uk/swing/music.php

As an experienced Swing dancer but a  novice ballroom dancer THE biggest problem with dancing the quickstep is trying to ignore 'the Swing' - as a rule (and it is a generalisation,) ballroom dancers are not taught to listen for 'the Swing'. If they did, the quickstep would look and feel entirely different.

It's certainly a problem I had to work out (and explain to my very experienced teachers) myself.

A similar problem arises with the Argentine Tango. Most Tango music is 'polyrhythmic', that is to say layered with musicians/instruments playing at different tempo's, sometimes one tempo is dominant, somethimes another. An AT dancer is continously changing tempo within the dance - here's an example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj12nUQKrBE

Again, if you are an AT dancer, you have to ignore the music if you are to do Ballroom Tango.

We did do a 'rule of thumb' test at novice dance class a few years ago and discovered that only 1 in 5 novices dancers can hear the beat, with less than 1 in 10 able to hear the phrasing. This is in line with the observations of swing musiciians of the dance hall era.

We didn't mess around with Anovar, Kolmogorov-Smirnoff,  Kruskal-Wallis or any other parametric or non-parametric test or even pose a null hypothesis - but then neither did the swing dance musicians.

Fair enough, but all I want to say is don't make any statistical reference if you haven't done the study, looks rather dumb if one states 99% of this or 99% of that. It is not very scientific, especially if you contradict yourself in the same sentence it becomes much like the very famous "all swans are white" statement.

furthermore of the above test only the kruskal-Wallis is applicable unless you only want to sample 1 region of the world, and I can't recall a anovar (unless you meant the software) but do use ANOVA very frequently

[albanaich]

If you've had any experience dealiing with novice dancers, you should be aware of the 5 to 1 and 9 to 1 ratio in terms of beat and musicality without reference to normal distributions and statistical tests.

There is a tendency to assume that because we hear music every day everyone understands how it is structured. The reality is that unless you've has some kind of musical traiining, its very unlikely you can interpret a piece of music at all.

[Some guy]

The reality is that unless you've has some kind of musical training its very unlikely you can interpret a piece of music at all.

This sentence in itself is a contradiction by the inclusion of the word "interpret" (definition per Merriam-Webster: conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment, or circumstance).

[albanaich]

Is it?

Perhaps you can tell me the time signature of this piece of music. . . . and perhaps explain why it makes it difficult to dance to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwNrmYRiX_o

Or this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k55NuWQCh78

And this one is a beauty. . . . . .so deceptively easy to listen to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UTRMP1Uk1k

[Vagabond]

If you've had any experience dealiing with novice dancers, you should be aware of the 5 to 1 and 9 to 1 ratio in terms of beat and musicality without reference to normal distributions and statistical tests.

I was merely replying to your "statistical claim" of 99%, and I do have experience dealing with novice dancers

There is a tendency to assume that because we hear music every day everyone understands how it is structured. The reality is that unless you've has some kind of musical traiining, its very unlikely you can interpret a piece of music at all.

learning to "interpret" music starts in the mothers womb, we only have to been thought how to re-use/redevelop/rediscover it after the age of 4 until then we are a very musical species indeed.

It is not only people that are AT or Swing that have the "gift" of musicality, we all have it but use it differently. I have some great experiences with aborigines the world over that would put us all to shame on the issue of music and dance.

[albanaich]

You were trying to show that the 99% firgure was without basis.

We've actually done the test for musicality on this board - and many people, not measureablly 99% but clearly a very large majoriy - have difficulty distinquishing between musical and non musical dancing. even though they are very experienced dancers.

A lot of people find it very upsetting, not just because they can't see it, but because everyone, including the judges and respected dance teachers, can't see it either.

It's sort of like discovering that 99% of people, including yourself, are colour blind.

However, just consider, its even worse for the 1% who can see it, but whom no one else beliieves.

If you want to take the test in private. . . . . .post me.

[Vagabond]

You were trying to show that the 99% firgure was without basis.

We've actually done the test for musicality on this board - and many people, not measureablly 99% but clearly a very large majoriy - have difficulty distinquishing between musical and non musical dancing. even though they are very experienced dancers.

A lot of people find it very upsetting, not just because they can't see it, but because everyone, including the judges and respected dance teachers, can't see it either.

It's sort of like discovering that 99% of people, including yourself, are colour blind.

However, just consider, its even worse for the 1% who can see it, but whom no one else beliieves.

If you want to take the test in private. . . . . .post me.

Lets leave it where it belongs right there.... in your opinion!

[cornutt]

As an experienced Swing dancer but a  novice ballroom dancer THE biggest problem with dancing the quickstep is trying to ignore 'the Swing' - as a rule (and it is a generalisation,) ballroom dancers are not taught to listen for 'the Swing'. If they did, the quickstep would look and feel entirely different.

You do know, of course, that quickstep was in fact the original dance for swing music?  That it was danced to swing jazz in the 1920s, a decade before any form of swing dance existed?  No, of course you don't.  It doesn't fit your pre-conceived notion about ballroom dancers.

[ZPomeroy]

Is it?

Perhaps you can tell me the time signature of this piece of music. . . . and perhaps explain why it makes it difficult to dance to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwNrmYRiX_o

Or this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k55NuWQCh78

And this one is a beauty. . . . . .so deceptively easy to listen to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UTRMP1Uk1k

What is your point here exactly? n the "Learning how to understand music" thread you were criticizing musician dancers whereas here you seem to be saying that only musicians can understand the music and are able to actually dance to it. So what is the point of this?

"The difficulty with musicians learning to dance is pretty much as discussed, essentially they know where there feet should be in relation to the music - they don't have the co-ordination or timing to get there fast enough."

Zac

[albanaich]

You confuse 'observation' with criticism.

How we understand music MUST affect how we dance it, if it doesn't we might as well dance to the beat of a metronome.

The point is that without specific musical training or experience you are likely to miss most of what is going on in piece of music. The covers over 90% of people, similarly 90% of people are going to miss the training and effort that goes into doing smooth body isolations.

Some dance forms demand high level musical skills others don't. You yourself commented that you thought it was iimpossible to improvise to a unknown  piece of music while dancing - its rountine competion practise in WCS and Lindy Hop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szAXZPJcMsI

Now a international latin dancer would tear the above piece of dancing to shreds in terms of isolations, body control and footwork but to the dancers in competion the body and foot movement is means to en end, the interpretion of the music, not and end in itself.

Competitive ballroom and latin dancing has reversed that - the music is there to show off the dancers physical skills, not to demonstrate musical knowledge and understanding.

That's not a criticism - its an observation.

You can't judge one dance form by the standards of another. . .. . . . . but, dance itself should be a diaglogue between the leader, the follower and the music, when becomes a set rouitine or sequence which has no contact with the music and the physcial moves pre-determined it has ceased being dance and become gymastics - the musical and physical conversation has stopped.

[elisedance]

You confuse 'observation' with criticism.

and you confuse discussion with lecturing.
You also seem to confuse statistics with buest guesses; knowledge with opinion, and respect with domination

I think you are ahead on the confusion game.

Competitive ballroom and latin dancing has reversed that - the music is there to show off the dancers physical skills, not to demonstrate musical knowledge and understanding.

That's not a criticism - its an observation.

The art of observation is to see things as they are.  Yours is not an observation, its an arrogant opinion based on a egocentric view.  And its also a repeat of the issues that got you banned last time.  You seem incapable of live and let live, having an open mind to others opinions and ideas and most of all to admitting that you don't know everything.  Even though you are a self-confessed beginner.

I'm afraid this experiment is failing - the door is about to close a second time.

This is

[catsmeow]

oh no not banned again!  and I was learning so much