Lindy Hop: Improving the "Swingout"

[Apache]

So after a year of Swing Dancing mainly East Coast Swing and Lindy Hop one thing has bothered me, which is the inconsistency of my Swingout to the point that I have considered once I get the money to throw down the money for private lessons to fix it.

While my swingouts have at least been in the range of mediocre to sometimes good at my local scene where I dance, I have found the few times I have traveled out of town they go from the range of horrid to mediocre.

Until I save up enough money on the side to invest in some private lessons my question is does anyone have any advice how to improve the swingout in general?

Or does anyone have any advice on how to work on the issues I have below?
1. During the swingout I tend to step or move forward on the second count, something I have tried to fix several times but subconsciously creeps back.
2. Often I will for some reason rush the steps and make the swingout very rushed.
3. For some reason during the 5th and 6th beat of the swingout sometimes the follow will get offbalance and moving her back to her original position will feel very awkward.

Yes, I know most of this can be fixed by practice which I have been doing and am willing to do more. I am just curious if anyone has any suggestions on what to change, focus on or any advice that would make my practice more effective.

[Lyndee]

Well, I'm not exactly an expert lindy hopper myself, and I'm not a lead, so I can't offer very much helpful advice.

But, as far as rushing the swingout, I've danced with a lot of guys that have done that very thing. One thing that might help is counting along with the song. You might feel silly doing it, but it'll help you be in the right place at the right time.

Fill up every count. If you're feeling the music and counting with it, it'll help you to make each count full, and then it'll be the right rhythm.

I hope that made sense...I'm somewhat bad at putting into words what I'm thinking.

Good luck, and keep practicing!

[tangonuevo]

So after a year of Swing Dancing mainly East Coast Swing and Lindy Hop one thing has bothered me, which is the inconsistency of my Swingout ...
It took me perhaps two years of dancing Lindy before I felt comfortable with it, and after 15 years I am STILL messing with it.

To help with the rushing, try this - and it may help to let your follow know what you are working on so that she can help: Lead her 1,2 in switches and only then lead her to come in on 3. Or lead 1, 2 as a rock step. with her coming in on 3. Then, as suggested by Lyndee, try to fill the rest of the full eight counts with the swingout.

To help with the awkwardness on 5,6, do the swingouts way down tempo, like 125 BPM, and use NO FORCE anywhere. Let your follow manage her own balance and get a feel for how it is working. Then, as you ratchet up tempo to real dance tempos, contually ask for feedback so you can see just where it starts to fall apart. My regular partner and I can easily handle 200+BPM tempos with little force because 1. she can move, and 2. I am patient and fill out the whole 8 counts. Little force is required except at the moments of my follows changes of direction.

But getting a solid swingout is a long adventure!!

[Steve Pastor]

Yes, I know most of this can be fixed by practice which I have been doing and am willing to do more. I am just curious if anyone has any suggestions on what to change, focus on or any advice that would make my practice more effective.

Although many people belittle "counting", it can be very helpful. So you want to practice doing your steps, as quicks, slows, whatever, S L O W L Y. ala tangonuevo's suggestion.
It is unfortunate, but true, that repetition is the key to developing "muscle memory", which doesn't mean that your brain isn't guiding things, but that you aren't consciously thinking of what you're doing.
And you want to do it to music, too, which many of us think is very important. You do, too, apparently.
These things you can do on your own. The more doing your steps in time to the music is "in your body", the more you will be able to pay attention to a partner.

I've been trying to learn to play some keyboard for year, and finally found a couple of songs I could stick with: Blue Suede Shoes, and Boot Scootin Boogie. I have FINALLY gotten to the point where, sometimes, when I sit down stuff just comes out, and I think "Hey, I'm doing it!"
But I keep practicing the same "tricky" passages over and over again, especially what for me are different rhythms/phrases in the vocal, treble, and base lines.

It was the same way when I struggled to learn Argentine Tango.

Meanwhile, if you have never looked at the book by and about Frankie Manning, you might google "frankie manning their swing-out was different", and click on the first link which will take you to google book search.
or try this url
http://books.google.com/books?id=cPdDLXYWWaUC&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=frankie+manning+their+swing-out+was+different&source=bl&ots=tVqQd8FCzu&sig=iOxkVSpbtX3Dvh1_03JTrhUPoYc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result

[Apache]

I'd like to say thank you for the quick and informative responses. I will try to take all your advice to heart when I practice.

Also thank you Steve Pastor for your link, it was an interesting read. I actually want to go to Frankie Mannings 95th birthday celebration, unfortunately it may come down to a money issue if I can attend or not.

[tsb]

So after a year of Swing Dancing mainly East Coast Swing and Lindy Hop one thing has bothered me, which is the inconsistency of my Swingout to the point that I have considered once I get the money to throw down the money for private lessons to fix it.

While my swingouts have at least been in the range of mediocre to sometimes good at my local scene where I dance,


don't have to name the venue or studio, but what city is this?


I have found the few times I have traveled out of town they go from the range of horrid to mediocre.


again, what city, please?



Until I save up enough money on the side to invest in some private lessons my question is does anyone have any advice how to improve the swingout in general?

Or does anyone have any advice on how to work on the issues I have below?
1. During the swingout I tend to step or move forward on the second count, something I have tried to fix several times but subconsciously creeps back.


on the swingout, there's an expectation that your body lead will prompt your partner to come towards and then go *past* you. but if she *doesn't* you may need to move towards her so that you can step around her to perform the swingout. and i have to do it more often then one would think you'd have to at one of the largest and most popular lindy venues in LA.

if your body lead is clear on count one, your partner should move towards and past you, but if that lead isn't clear, that might be part of the original problem.


2. Often I will for some reason rush the steps and make the swingout very rushed.


as long as you don't step across until count 4, it can't be that bad.


3. For some reason during the 5th and 6th beat of the swingout sometimes the follow will get offbalance and moving her back to her original position will feel very awkward.


assuming you're not trying to lead a turn, try to keep your left hand low, which allows you to guide your push towards and through her hips which is where her center of gravity is located.


Yes, I know most of this can be fixed by practice which I have been doing and am willing to do more. I am just curious if anyone has any suggestions on what to change, focus on or any advice that would make my practice more effective.

some of it can hinge on how you've been taught. if there are dancers there who have a style you admire, you might want to ask them who their instructor is.

and after a dance, ask your partner if there was one thing you could improve to make it a more fun dance for her, what would it be? most folks will be pretty gracious about it, but be prepared to take everything with a grain of salt. still, if they all say the same thing, it's a pretty good indication.

good luck!

[Apache]

So after a year of Swing Dancing mainly East Coast Swing and Lindy Hop one thing has bothered me, which is the inconsistency of my Swingout to the point that I have considered once I get the money to throw down the money for private lessons to fix it.

don't have to name the venue or studio, but what city is this?

While my swingouts have at least been in the range of mediocre to sometimes good at my local scene where I dance,
don't have to name the venue or studio, but what city is this?

again, what city, please?




Well the local scene I dance in State College, PA.

However when I dance out in California I am either in Irvine or Pasadena, I either hit up the Atomic Ballroom or Lindygroove.

[eclipse]

The forward 2 step usually happens because your body is trying to start the next step before finishing the first. There are several possible reasons why you get this and a pro would be the best idea to look you over. Until then...
1- Let her come to you. Leading is about redirecting her energy into the direction you want her. No reaching. you do not get to triple until you have her in your cradle.
2- Redirect your weight. Shift it back a little toward your heels. If your posture is too far forward you will 'fall' into step 2
3-practice practice practice... do it often without music or partner, then add music...then add partner

As a pro, that would be my advice. (knowing that I have not seen you to mend mechanical flaws)

Eclipse Dance

[drejenpha]

Well the local scene I dance in State College, PA.

However when I dance out in California I am either in Irvine or Pasadena, I either hit up the Atomic Ballroom or Lindygroove.

Part of what you're getting is the difference in swing between areas... each pocket develops slightly different from the others. The local area will seem relatively the same because of exchanges, but after some distance things change based on instructors' preferences and styling.

If I were you I'd just grab Annabel and run her through a few asking her to pay attention to the 5 6... you'll be able to change some things to make it better but you've also got to take into consideration that several of the follows are doing it wrong (I would say differently, but they're just wrong).

[Apache]

Part of what you're getting is the difference in swing between areas... each pocket develops slightly different from the others. The local area will seem relatively the same because of exchanges, but after some distance things change based on instructors' preferences and styling.

If I were you I'd just grab Annabel and run her through a few asking her to pay attention to the 5 6... you'll be able to change some things to make it better but you've also got to take into consideration that several of the follows are doing it wrong (I would say differently, but they're just wrong).

I fully agree on the difference between areas idea. I've noticed the first night I am back dancing in California its usually rough but the next few consecutive nights get better.

And I have been meaning to grab Annabel or another one of the really good follows there and try to work it out, so I think I will take your message as the initiative to kick myself to do it on Wednesday.

However your last comment about the follows is completely dead on though. There are some who when I try to start a swing out are definitely doing whatever version of the swing out pattern they were taught and not even following.

[Flat Shoes]

The Lindy Turn/Swingout from open position is a simple, yet difficult pattern. Although its form is simple, it requires good technique to lead an follow well.

As a leader, you should focus on being smooth and even all the time, while maintaining a good connection all the time.

The follower also needs to focus on the connection, and not anticipate the move but move as lead.

No part of the swingout is choreographed. The follower does not turn herself, and the follower is not stopping on her own. Both are common follower mistakes.

1. I'm not sure what you mean and why it is a problem. Are you shifting your weight back forward to your right foot, placing the right foot where it was on one, or are you actually olacing it forward from its original position?

If your are lunging forward it can make it difficult to time the move and maintain connection. If not, as long as you have a good connection during the move and can time it correctly, it doesn't matter what direction you move in. You can move your right foot back to the side of your left foot, or you can step back where you came from. Both are fine.

2. Relax and take your time. You need to feel where your partner is at all stages during the swingout. Always seek connection with your partner before leading her. If a 8 beat patterns sometimes takes 10 beats, just go with it and keep dancing from there.

3. Do not push her with your arms at this point in the swingout. She should have all the momentum she needs from you leading her with your body from about count 4-5. It is your partners responsibility to maintain the movement and direction after you've started her in the direction she is going.

And as others have said, a good lindy turn/swing out requires a follower who follows. As a leader you have the responsibility to lead her in a smooth and relaxed pattern. But the follower needs to let herself be led, and maintain the speed and direction given her by the leader.

There are many ways to lead the basic pattern of a swingout, before adding variations in rhytm and adding turns. They are all correct if lead well. Focus on maintinaing connection, be smooth and relax. When you can combine these, you are doing very well.

[Apache]

1. I'm not sure what you mean and why it is a problem. Are you shifting your weight back forward to your right foot, placing the right foot where it was on one, or are you actually placing it forward from its original position?

If your are lunging forward it can make it difficult to time the move and maintain connection. If not, as long as you have a good connection during the move and can time it correctly, it doesn't matter what direction you move in. You can move your right foot back to the side of your left foot, or you can step back where you came from. Both are fine.


Well the problem was I was shifting my weight forward and moving my right foot forward as well. Even occasionally moving forward with my upper body which I know is bad. I've been working on fixing that.


2. Relax and take your time. You need to feel where your partner is at all stages during the swingout. Always seek connection with your partner before leading her. If a 8 beat patterns sometimes takes 10 beats, just go with it and keep dancing from there.


This is something i've been really working on as well. I try a lot now to really enjoy and use each beat to my advantage. On a random side note, by really practicing this a lot while social dancing i've noticed how some follows will attempt to rush through steps to keep on what they think is on time, even if that true or untrue in some circumstances.


3. Do not push her with your arms at this point in the swingout. She should have all the momentum she needs from you leading her with your body from about count 4-5. It is your partners responsibility to maintain the movement and direction after you've started her in the direction she is going.



And as others have said, a good lindy turn/swing out requires a follower who follows. As a leader you have the responsibility to lead her in a smooth and relaxed pattern. But the follower needs to let herself be led, and maintain the speed and direction given her by the leader.

There are many ways to lead the basic pattern of a swingout, before adding variations in rhytm and adding turns. They are all correct if lead well. Focus on maintinaing connection, be smooth and relax. When you can combine these, you are doing very well.

I have really been trying to take this summation to heart because I think my problem in the past was instead of trying to practice a "swing out", what I was trying to do was practice just doing the pattern I was taught. Now, I am really focusing on the connection and feeling instead of trying to follow exactly a eight beat pattern exactly.

But thank you for your great advice and thank you to everyone else who has chipped in useful comments as well.

[Flat Shoes]

I have really been trying to take this summation to heart because I think my problem in the past was instead of trying to practice a "swing out", what I was trying to do was practice just doing the pattern I was taught. Now, I am really focusing on the connection and feeling instead of trying to follow exactly a eight beat pattern exactly.

Great!

Patterns are good as a frame for what you're doing. Although dance is about the connection between the people, we're not white sheets just coming together. We have a basis in the dance and its patterns.

But to learn to do a pattern well, the focus needs to be on the connection between the partners. The follower must wait for the leader to lead, and the leader must wait for the followr to be ready to be lead. And both must seek connection and a good frame.

And the confusing part is that the frame should have a good connection and still be relaxed and smooth. The key is understanding the difference between using force and being rigid. And yes, if you are confused by this, it is very natural. This is difficult to explaind, and difficult to understand before you actually feel it.

But good luck, and once you're there, you'll know it.

[tsb]

Well the local scene I dance in State College, PA.

However when I dance out in California I am either in Irvine or Pasadena, I either hit up the Atomic Ballroom or Lindygroove.

AHHH. i understand. i've danced at both places (i live less than 10 minutes away from lindygroove in pasadena).

at lindygroove, there are a number of follows who simply refuse go past you on the swingout - which of course makes the whip extremely difficult unless you compensate by moving towards them. with some, i will lead what will feel like an underarm pass but turn it into a reverse whip so that they can actually feel how much better it is when they continue down the slot and give me something to counter balance doing a whip. also, though no one will admit it, the lindy there is influenced by WCS to some degree.

at atomic, since shesha took over from jerry (jordan), i understand that he actually teaches a rock step to start the swingout with the idea that the open break will actually compel the follow to come towards you more effectively than a body lead. not everybody
subscribes to that, but the follows taught exclusively by shesha will probably be confused.

why not try memories in whittier the next time you're here?

[Flat Shoes]

at lindygroove, there are a number of follows who simply refuse go past you on the swingout ...

This is a known problem I spend a lot of time on when teaching locally. These are some reasons I know causing this:
- The follower is afraid to crash into the leader
- The follower walks in the pattern she thinks she's supposed to follow
- The follower thinks lack of contionous leading means stopping

The problem is, you can tell and show and lead this multiple times, and even if you get better result in one class, the next class they're back to old bad habbits again.


- which of course makes the whip extremely difficult unless you compensate by moving towards them.

As more experienced leaders, we have to compensate. But even if we can compensate a lot, the dance still suffers. Compensating means first trying to reestablish connection, and then start leading. This takes more time than just leading, it causes more jerking, and the dancing looses its flow and momentum.


at atomic, since shesha took over from jerry (jordan), i understand that he actually teaches a rock step to start the swingout with the idea that the open break will actually compel the follow to come towards you more effectively than a body lead.

Are you talking about swingout from closed position?

And I don't understand what is ment by not using body lead. But body lead is one of these ambigous terms that mean different things to different people.

I've heard professional teachers criticize the term because you lead with both arms and body. Other teachers talks a lot about the importance of body leading.

I like to say that we should lead from the body. The movement comes from the leaders body and is transfered to the other body, with help from the arms. This smoothes down any leading, because the arms are more jerky than the body. The arms are used a lot, but seldom without the body being behind the movement in some way.

Body leading is not wrong to say, but the arms are used a lot too. So it's ambigous.

[DWise1]

at atomic, since shesha took over from jerry (jordan), i understand that he actually teaches a rock step to start the swingout with the idea that the open break will actually compel the follow to come towards you more effectively than a body lead.

Are you talking about swingout from closed position?

And I don't understand what is ment by not using body lead. But body lead is one of these ambigous terms that mean different things to different people.

Uh, what Shesha teaches is a body lead. For that matter, a lot of his instruction currently concentrates on using body leads with compression and extension.

That rock step is done by the guy, though it could also be done by the girl if she's not swivelling -- and, yes, it is being done from open position. But the rock step is not being used to pull her in right then, as is the case in the WCS whip, but rather it creates the "rubber band" extension to lead her in on 2.

Part of the emphasis he's been placing for the past few years on creating that extension on 1 to bring her in on 2 is to break us of the bad Westie habit of bringing her in on 1. There's a lot of syling that can be done in that interval between swingouts (7&8, 1(&)2 -- depending on whether you're syncopating) which cannot be done if the guy keeps bringing her in on 1. Westie gals can use a hitch kick to postpone that in a whip and, while we are taught something similar as a styling, I don't think there's much that the girl can do about it in Lindy.

[Flat Shoes]

But the rock step is not being used to pull her in right then, as is the case in the WCS whip, but rather it creates the "rubber band" extension to lead her in on 2.

A lot of leading in Lindy is like this. The connection is being built before the follower starts moving in that direction.

When leading you can force the follower to step forward on one in the swingout by having a very strong and marked lead. But it is better to build the connection first, and then the move forward comes at the appropriate time. And it can be delayed as long as to around count 3, I think, even though that is a bit difficult.

As a leader you need to "listen" to your partner. If she is doing some improvisations you should let her finish those, before she has to move forward. But waiting too long, and the follower will need to find something to fill the time while waiting for your lead, and not all partners like being "forced" to improvise like that.

To summarize my take on this:
Leading often starts before the follower actually starts moving.
The actually step forward is lead at the appropritate time, depending on music, what the follower is doing and so forth. It does not have to happen on an exact count, like one or two.

[tsb]

Uh, what Shesha teaches is a body lead. For that matter, a lot of his instruction currently concentrates on using body leads with compression and extension.

That rock step is done by the guy, though it could also be done by the girl if she's not swivelling -- and, yes, it is being done from open position. But the rock step is not being used to pull her in right then, as is the case in the WCS whip, but rather it creates the "rubber band" extension to lead her in on 2.

Part of the emphasis he's been placing for the past few years on creating that extension on 1 to bring her in on 2 is to break us of the bad Westie habit of bringing her in on 1. There's a lot of syling that can be done in that interval between swingouts (7&8, 1(&)2 -- depending on whether you're syncopating) which cannot be done if the guy keeps bringing her in on 1. Westie gals can use a hitch kick to postpone that in a whip and, while we are taught something similar as a styling, I don't think there's much that the girl can do about it in Lindy.

i will defer to your explanation of what shesha is teaching. the major point is that the feel can be different from what the LA county instructors who have significant followings such as: roscoe, ben & sheri, doug silton, tip west, rusty frank, (and god help us, the march march bouncy bouncy march march place in my hometown whose following also make up a good portion of the lindygroove crowd) etc. are teaching their followers.

[Apache]

Hey, I thought I would just post an update on this topic all the advice people in this thread have given me.

I took a lot of your advice into consideration and usually focusing on one tidbit at a time applying it to whenever I had time to practice the swingout, whether it was in my own practice time or on the social dance floor.

While I have noticed my swingout has gotten slightly better over the last few months, it was not something that came easy. When I first started swing dancing it felt like I was constantly learning and getting better. However it seemed in the task of improving the technique of my swingout, I had to fight tooth and nail to see myself visually improve and to actually "feel" like I improved.

In interest of giving back to the community, here is what worked well for me in the last few months:

1. Getting input and advice from really good dancers on the issue: Often the experienced dancers could see and feel things that I was oblivious to. This helped greatly in addressing problem areas.

2. Traveling out of town: In the past three months I have been traveling to different places (Jam Cellar in D.C. was quite the experience!). Having a difference in follows has shown me what was lead well versus not well, in not just my swingout, but dancing in general.

3. Practice, practice, practice: I would say the hardest part of the progress I have made at improving my swingout is taking the problem areas I discovered and practicing it differently, to fix my bad habits to the point that I didn't have to actively think about it while dancing. In retrospect its amusing to think how much time I spent practicing the 1 and 2 of a swingout, with a chair, just to fix the bad habit of moving forward on 1 or 2 and pulling in on 1.

4. Practicing "well": This one is slightly tricky to explain. Before when I tried to improve my swingout I would try to tackle all my issues at once. But as I learned it doesn't work like that, I got overloaded so quickly it wasn't even funny. I learned to take one problem at a time and figure out how to address it in an apporpriate manner that would make sure I was not reinforcing a previous bad habit. (Because what good would practice do for me if I am reinforcing bad technique?)

On a last tidbit two things I noticed while on my endeavor the last few months.

First thing that I did find as an odd change is often while addressing issues in my swingout, it would temporarily get worse for a bit then better. However I attribute that for time for the fix to get subconscious/(into muscle memory) so I can do it naturally.

Second was after fixing some issues with my swingout, it would simply stop working with some people it did in the past. Remembering what Tsb said, I believe the reason for that is I believe some of my bad habits were formed by compromising on the social dance floor on a weekly basis to make the swingout somewhat work. While I still do that, so me and whoever I am dancing with can enjoy the dance I try to make sure that I do not let that affect technique-wise how I lead the swingout.

But to end this ridiculously long post, I would have to say I am starting to understand:

It took me perhaps two years of dancing Lindy before I felt comfortable with it, and after 15 years I am STILL messing with it. [...]

But getting a solid swingout is a long adventure!!


Even after making some improvement, I am still nowhere near as satisfied as I want to be with my swingout, but I am heading in the right direction. Again, thank you to everybody who has helped me out in this topic.

[Flat Shoes]

Great to see you're improving. :)

The best way to learn to lead and follow well is what you're saying; Dancing a lot, dancing with different partners and getting feedback from experienced dancers who can explain when the feeling is wrong/missing.

When it comes to leading/following I think the two most important words are: relaxed connection.

Both partners should always seek connection. But relax and avoid being tense/stiff. As a leader, always try to make things as smooth and pleasant for the follower as possible.

And followers should always "hang back" just a little, always complete their moves and always waite for the leaders signals and trying not to anticipate too much.

Apache, just continue practising, and one day you will discover that special felling/connection that tells you that you've "got it". And after that ... there still much to learn and improve on, but you'll know the feeling and know that that is what you're looking for. :)

[Albanaich]

Too follow up on that, the special connection comes when you are both on time and you are both working as couple. Don't expect it to be there with every partner, in fact, knowing your partner 'has not got it' is part of the learning curve.

With experience you can take tell in about 30 seconds how your partner is balanced, what their timing is like, what there co-ordination is like - being able to dance within their envelope is as much part of leading/following as the process of indicating what you want them to do.

Nothing is more exciting to me as a lead is follow who intuitively senses my ability - then pushs me to achieve more.

That's when you get that special connection.

[Flat Shoes]

In Lindy it is not so much being on time (with the music), as it is paying attention to the partners body position/weight distribution and physically seeking the connection.

A follower should move with the partners lead, and not move on a certain beat. A follower moving forward on a beat, withpout witing for the lead, will break connection. Also the leader should wait with the lead until the partner is at the appropriate position/has approriate weight distribution. If the leader leads on a beat, and the follower has not reached the right position, this will be hard and jerky leading.

I write this because if a follower thinks she has to step forward on a specific beat in a pattern, to be on time with the music, she might actually be breaking the connection.

In order to this while staying in time with the music, the leader has to manipulate and control the speed of the follower, while he moves himself into a optimal position/distance for the next part of the lead.

It sound probably a bit to technical when trying to describe it, but in reality for the leader is all about feeling where your partner is before leading a different direction. And for the follower it is all about continuing the movements till their ended and not anticipating but waiting for the lead.

And in Lindy you can tell almost instantly whether a follower understand this. In the first swingout from a closed position an experience follower will sit back on 3-4, waiting, while most beginners will not seek this connection. At this point, after four beats, you already know a lot about your follower.

To any beginner followers reading this and thinking this sounds mighty difficult, please don't be afraid to dance with experienced leaders because you can't do this yet. Nobody expects anybody to be perfect, and every experienced leader knows it takes time to master. Smile and have fun, that is just as important as having "perfect" technique.

[Albanaich]

By timing I did not mean timing in a rigid musical sense.

It's the same in WCS - the follower is behind the beat the leader ahead of it, a leader doesn't lead and a follower instantly follow, in between is the connection, its what Swing dance is about, whether it be Lindy or WCS.

Connection is everything. . . .


And in Lindy you can tell almost instantly whether a follower understand this. In the first swingout from a closed position an experience follower will sit back on 3-4, waiting, while most beginners will not seek this connection. At this point, after four beats, you already know a lot about your follower


As you say, when they sit back and wait it tells you a lot about your follower, this is as true in WCS as it is in Lindy, it is to me the distinquishing feature of Swing dance.

Remember that video of Ruth Cnaay, clearly holding off and waiting for the connection? It's fine example because you can actually able to 'see the connection'

[Flat Shoes]

From my experience with dance I know you can dance with the music without moving on the beat. I am timing the moves based on the music, but am I on time?

But I know beginner Lindy dancers are often very concerned with what count they are supposed to move on.

English is not my main language, and I am not a musician so I don't know how strict "on time" is really defined. I associate it with being on the beat. So saying that being "on time" is important to have a good connection could at least mislead me into thinking that I would have to be on the beat to dance well.

That's just how I understand it, but I may be wrong. :)


Remember that video of Ruth Cnaay, clearly holding off and waiting for the connection? It's fine example because you can actually able to 'see the connection'

It's so nice to look at followers really getting this dancing. You can really see how they are waiting and ready. Sometimes literally on their toes.

[Albanaich]

I had some difficulty with WCS when I started because I was trying to dance 'on the beat'. I worked out (with a musician follower) that to get swing dance 'on the beat' you have to be moving your feet 'off the beat'.

The rhythm is held at the point you hold the connection, not the point you step off. The lead has to step off slightly ahead of the beat, make the connection 'on the beat' and the follower moves slightly behind the beat.

Lindy is the same as WCS, but the difference in time less noticeable.

[Steve Pastor]

From my experience with dance I know you can dance with the music without moving on the beat. I am timing the moves based on the music, but am I on time?

But I know beginner Lindy dancers are often very concerned with what count they are supposed to move on.

Hopefully, you all aren't too tired of me bringing up Lauré Haile, who was National Dance Director for Arthur Murray , an instructor of teachers, and documented swing dancing as done in the Los Angeles area, called it "Western Swing" aka West Coast Swing.
Anyhow, I was very impressed with what she wrote about dancing in general, and also about the relationship of music and dance. She also shows what looks to me like a deep understanding of not just the rhythm of swing, but the rhythms of swing dancing.

Anyhow, this part might be germane to the current direction of the thread.

People often ask, "How can I tell where to start if I'm in the middle of a musical number?"
One way is to wait until the beginning of the next phrase and then pick up the first or downbeat measure.
Another way is to train yourself to recognize the halfway mark of a phrase, or the end of 4 bars...

She wrote an entire page on the importance of matching the phrases of your dance with the music.

[Dancelf]

The rhythm is held at the point you hold the connection, not the point you step off. The lead has to step off slightly ahead of the beat, make the connection 'on the beat' and the follower moves slightly behind the beat.

I'm all but certain that this is false in WCS....

Try this drill: dance your favorite basic patterns without connection, with both partners concentrating on matching the music with their movements. It should be obvious that they are dancing in the same time - the movements are coordinated together; no echo, no lag.

Now, while dancing, add connection - should this disturb the timing of either dancer? Of course not, both continue to move in time to the music, and therefore with each other. What we compromise instead is the signal that travels through the connection - that's the piece that needs to anticipate the music, so that everything else can occur on time.


That said, there's enough fuzz in the terminology that everybody can be sort of right - movement includes prepare, depart, arrive; a beat can be treated as a moment in time, or an interval. There's a lot of common ground to be established before a constructive dialog is possible here.

In addition to that, it's really hard - much easier with beginners to disguise the subtleties until they are revealed organically.

[Albanaich]

How do you lead without connection? How does the follower know what pattern is being lead? Do you expect the follower to be a telepath?

The whole point is the signal to move is transmitted by physical action - not telepathy, and that action takes a measureable amount of time. To be on time the action must be lead ahead of the beat. Any pattern in swing has an action and reaction, with the space inbetween being the place where the rhtym is held.

[Steve Pastor]

And to think, I almost commented on this. Then I realized where it would go, and how much I would have to write, and remembered that I've got other things to do!

My fave part of these discussions is the "lead with your body" stuff, which will no doubt come up.

[Albanaich]

What we compromise instead is the signal that travels through the connection - that's the piece that needs to anticipate the music, so that everything else can occur on time


But how is that signal generated? How is it recieved? If you are leading with your body you must move ahead of the signal, if you are following you must move after the signal.

There's also the issue Flat shoes raised of building the momentum. The follow and lead sequence has to keep rhythm with the music, but is the centre point of that rhythm at the moment you lead, the moment you connect or the moment you follow.

I say its the moment you connect, I say that because most the musicians I've danced with have problems with WCS for that very reason, to get it right your 'aiming point' in holding the beat is not the footwork by the connection.

[tangotime]

most the musicians I've danced with have problems with WCS



Pretty much ALL musicians have a problem understanding WHAT we dance, to what they are playing. Theres a disconnect for some reason .

Ive taught world class musicians, in rhythm and smooth dances, and without exception ( this includes a drummer, guitar teacher and a classical musician ) each had problems with structuring the music to the steps..

[Albanaich]

That's because they know they are out of time.

Most people when they start dancing have no idea about beat and rhythm, musicians are aware from the beginning - and its awful, because the body doesn't have the physical skill (muscle memory) to hit the beats and rhythm.

Teachers often mistake the clumsy footfoot for a poor sense of rhythm, its actually a case of trying too hard, or rather trying to hit something they know is there but is outside their physical envelope.

Musician should have a lot of physical training before they are ready to dance to music, the music screws everything up.

[Dancelf]

Pretty much ALL musicians have a problem understanding WHAT we dance, to what they are playing. Theres a disconnect for some reason .

Ive taught world class musicians, in rhythm and smooth dances, and without exception ( this includes a drummer, guitar teacher and a classical musician ) each had problems with structuring the music to the steps..

I've long wondered if how much, if any, of that disconnect comes from confusion about when the sounds happen, versus when the movement they use to make the sounds happens.

[kayak]

Isn't the discussion here one of the defining differences between the smooth category of dances and the rhythm category?

In dances like Waltz and Foxtrot there is the concept of the beat as a moment. So the dancer's body motion bridges the up and down beats and creates rising and falling body flight to match the music. Stepping right on beat isn't as important as how the body is moving over the moment that beat takes. One of the reasons the heel and toe leads are so important is those foot motions help create the body movement around the beat.

The whole class of dances that fall under rhythm dances, such as swing, salsa, chacha and even 2-step, take the step right on the beat. The leader's brain anticipates the beat and then moves right on it. The beat defines when the step should be taken in the whole dance category. Whether we call it leading with our body or just good connection, the lady should immediately know where and when to step. While she is still following, the time difference should be small enough that we need super slowmo video to percieve it.

I think the idea of he moves - hand connection moves on beat - she moves is out of character with the dance. Better frame and connection should allow the couple to move together as a unit.

[Albanaich]

If the couple move together as unit there is no compression - tension, no pulse to the dance, and it ceases to become Swing.

[Steve Pastor]

Well then, you would be as dismayed as I am when someone tells me, "I don't like you pulling me". People have even argued here that there is no "push" in the Sugar Push.

Here's a few interesting facts - the "First Five" "Western Swing" songs are around 120 beats per minute, according to MixMeister software.That's one beat every 0.5 seconds!

As Kayak points out, we are parsing very small units of time here!
Still, Skippy Blair, and others I would guess, teach a method for parsing steps into several segments. I wonder if this is a useful concept for beginners.

[kayak]

I've always been taught that good frame creates the boundaries and good connection creates the movement withing those boundaries.

So if I step back in WCS, my frame moves our whole dance boundaries back and the lady steps forward. Once I have created where those dance boundaries are going to be, good connection lets us create fun motion and patterns.

[Steve Pastor]

So if I step back in WCS, my frame moves our whole dance boundaries back and the lady steps forward.
Yes. I would add that in this case, and many if not most others, your body moves because you are taking a step. It makes me crazy when people turn that on its head by asserting that you "lead with your body", as if your steps and body are not connected.
I was reminded of this, once again, in trying to learn some very old, but new to me ,"moves" from step descriptions.

I'll add, too, that she "feels" your movement through the "connection" of your joined hands/arms/etc. So that, for instance, if you DON'T take that step backwards, she would/should not start her forward movement.
That whole move/don't move thing happens in a fraction of a second, which we are perfectly capable of "feeling" and reacting/not reacting to.

Another beef... use of the word "leverage", which I just can't fit into my (sort of) knowledge of physics.

[Dancelf]

Yes. I would add that in this case, and many if not most others, your body moves because you are taking a step. It makes me crazy when people turn that on its head by asserting that you "lead with your body", as if your steps and body are not connected.
I was reminded of this, once again, in trying to learn some very old, but new to me ,"moves" from step descriptions.

I'll add, too, that she "feels" your movement through the "connection" of your joined hands/arms/etc. So that, for instance, if you DON'T take that step backwards, she would/should not start her forward movement.
That whole move/don't move thing happens in a fraction of a second, which we are perfectly capable of "feeling" and reacting/not reacting to.

Another beef... use of the word "leverage", which I just can't fit into my (sort of) knowledge of physics.

Oh, are we taking the thread this direction now? I've got long answers for all of these, I think - with the possible exception of "leverage". My answers might even be useful, or true....

[Steve Pastor]

I have yet to see a thread that stays on one subject, unless it's a very short thread.
I think most of this stuff has been alluded to one way or another during the course of the thread. Or, maybe not.

[Dancelf]

I have yet to see a thread that stays on one subject, unless it's a very short thread.
I think most of this stuff has been alluded to one way or another during the course of the thread. Or, maybe not.

Fair enough.

[kayak]

Oh, are we taking the thread this direction now? I've got long answers for all of these, I think - with the possible exception of "leverage". My answers might even be useful, or true....

Your posts are usually quite good. So I would love to hear your descriptions. There is usually something worth chewing on in them :)

[Dancelf]

Not sure if this will be as extensive as a planned this afternoon, when I was thinking about it in the context of avoiding work, but let's see how we do.

Yes. I would add that in this case, and many if not most others, your body moves because you are taking a step. It makes me crazy when people turn that on its head by asserting that you "lead with your body", as if your steps and body are not connected.

Your steps and your body are, of course, connected. Your steps and your lead are not necessarily connected - you can step without leading, you can lead without stepping. The two actions are coincident in many cases, but that coincidence is not at all necessary.

Drill #1. Open a convenient door to a 45 degree angle; wrap a bungee cord around the door knob, making a loop that you can grasp. Position your hand so that there is just a little bit of stretch in the cord. Now, without disturbing the cord or the door, move your feet to different places on the floor. With practice, you should be able to move toward and away from the door knob, to the left and right of it, without (a) the door swinging (b) the angle of the cord changing (c) the cord stretching or contracting.

Drill #1a. Same idea, except that you use a follower instead of a door. You should be able to move around on the floor without disturbing the connection.

Drill #2. Stand just off one side of the slot, parallel to it, with your feet wide (more than shoulder distance apart). From that position, practice leading partner through a series of side passes, turns, rolls, etc, without moving your feet. As you start to get the hang of it, start moving your feet closer together.


What we are really experimenting with here are the spacial relationships between the connection (where we are touching partner), our centers (center of mass - although Skippy Blair will instead use center point of balance, which is located above center of mass), and our support. If the connection is above the line that connects your support and her support on the floor, then you can create an extension lead by simply moving your center so that it is on the same line, but further from the connection than your support (if partner matches you, you get a W shape), and a compression lead by moving your center closer to the connection than your support (producing an inverted W, or a weird looking M).

You may hear these shapes described as V's and A's. Same animal, different spots.

Warning: in more than one venue, I've heard instructors (even good ones) relate the different leads to the direction that the follower is going, which is entirely satisfactory until you find yourself in the middle of a basket/lock whip, and you suddenly find yourself wishing that the labels were thisway/thatway rather than forward/back.


In addition to direction and timing, the lead is responsible for communicating size/velocity of the movement to the follower. If the speed of the followers movement and or the size of the pattern is going to be independent of our movement (and why on earth wouldn't you want to have that option), then there must necessarily be more going on than the leader's step. (And there is - that dial is controlled by how far we move our center from the neutral position above support).


People have even argued here that there is no "push" in the Sugar Push.

That would be me (and also others). There are a couple of different rationales at work here.

The verb push (and it's companion, pull) are going to be understood by your beginning students as bracing, and then using the strength of their arms to communicate the desired action to their partners.

First, it produces a jerky/uncomfortable/painful lead. Following is not automatic - the signal travels across the connection very quickly, but the muscles used to respond to the signal are voluntary. The mass of the arm is much less than the mass of the body, so it is very easy to get the arm moving faster than the body, producing a jerk in the follower's shoulder that really sucks.

On the other hand, the center, which effectively carries with it the head, torso, hips, and a fair share of the legs, is much higher in mass. Therefore, it's got a lot more inertia. As a result, pushing the body around is much smoother than pushing the hand around; you get a leading action that gives the followers muscles the time they need to initiate the movement of her center.

This is the prime point, and it is especially important because the illusion that we create looks like a braced push or pull - the follower is going that way, and the joints in the elbow are extending as they would were we doing all the work with the arm muscles. Now the follower is coming this way, and the angle of the elbows is collapsing....

Second, because the muscles in the arm are being used to create the movement, they sacrifice the flexibility necessary to change shape. Consequently, the leads to create rotation in the follower are late. (Argument: open hand combat. Counter argument: those people aren't trying to make their sparring partner's feel good or look pretty).

Taking this a notch further, it is very effective to distinguish between body leads (used to change the followers linear momentum), and arm leads (used to change the follower's angular momentum). Rotational leads depend a lot - a whole lot - on relative body position, and you can simplify things considerably by simplifying when arms are used: "only when leading her to turn right in front of you"


From what I recall of studying American smooth, the basic principles of leading with the body are precisely the same (not a surprise - human physiology doesn't change that much). There, the immediate concerns were more closely related to the mass difference between the body and the free foot, trying to elevate the lead to reinforce frame, and to lay the ground work for later attention on the standing leg.


Lead follow is supposed to feel effortless - it's a hug with your loved one swaying in the same time you are, except in open position with more spins. The fastest way I know to get people to discover and recognize that feeling is to take them through body leads - getting arm leads to produce the same result is soooo much harder.

Now, if you squint at that paragraph, and connect it with some of the previous ideas, you'll recognize that it is an admission that body leads aren't necessary. And this is a true statement - though I don't promise indisputable truth.

Let's walk through the program again, and notice that (a) in open position, the tactile connection is created entirely with the hand - let go of the hand, and the connection is lost. (b) that after doing sufficient repetitions of the bungee drill, you should be able to move your body around on the floor without disturbing the connection. If we can learn to move our body without disturbing the hand in that one location, can we not learn to move our body without disturbing the hand in any location. And if that's so, can we not learn to move our body without disturbing the hand as it moves from one location to the next.

And all of that is so - with sufficient practice, and attention to detail, you can get there.

Classic demonstration of this is the old drill where you and partner hold onto different ends of a scarf/handkerchief/tissue, and try to lead. Now the drill is normally taught to emphasize the body lead (if you jerk the lead, the tissue will tear), but when you squint it should be clear that she really has no way of feeling what's going on beyond her end of the tissue - you can do anything you want so long as the result is to move the tissue the way it is "supposed" to go.

Now, that test can run into an additional problem, which is that you are duplicating the lead on two of her three sensory channels (feeling, listening because you are still in time with the music, but not seeing - you are in the wrong place. If she's using smell to follow you, you've bigger problems, and if she's using taste then you certainly don't need my help.) If you've ever lead a right outside turn from the "other" side of the slot, you'll recognize this problem - her eyes start lying to her, and what follow you get turns into a tossup. In short, you need to learn to give the lead perfectly AND to not make any movements with contradict the lead. Not easy.

There's also an interesting contradiction: with practice, you can learn to identify where your partner's feet are from the signal that comes through the connection.... unless partner is better at isolating her hand than you are at finding her feet. And vice versa. So if you and partner are sufficiently competitive, you can improve a lot by playing lots of hide and seek.


In conclusion, "you have to lead with your body" is a really useful and productive lie to believe, because it is the fastest way to get to the desired result - a lead that "feels right".

However, "leading from center", or worse "moving from center", is a completely self contradictory crock that has no effectiveness on its own that's not better communicated discussing the body as a whole. Not that I have a strong opinion - it's just wrong.

I was reminded of this, once again, in trying to learn some very old, but new to me ,"moves" from step descriptions.

Many moons past, Mario Robau taught me to tune out the explanations for the lead when attempting a new pattern - "listen to the description of the follower's footwork, then make her do that". Beyond that, there's not much more than some general principles about relative body position. Oh, and actually executing.

That whole move/don't move thing happens in a fraction of a second, which we are perfectly capable of "feeling" and reacting/not reacting to.

Essentially true - there's a little bit of a dial there depending on how "tight" the connection has been up to that point. The lag is all follower's reaction time.

I'm agreeing with Steve here as a launching point to address some points raised by Albanaich. First, we should all agree that the reaction time, which can be very very short with a well tuned follower, is non zero. Second, that if we begin in a static position, we cannot create a lead without changing our geometry in some way.

In other words, yes - to lead, we have to move, and that movement is necessarily going to come before the follower responds to the signal our movement produces.

The contradiction arises only in the implication that the signal has some fixed relationship to the music. It doesn't - we advance or retard that signal as necessary to get the movement we want at the right time.

That's why I propose the drill I did. The conclusion you should realize (after trying the drill, if not before) is that if your partner is dancing on time, and you want to lead that movement, then the right answer is to make the lead half a snap earlier than the music, so that her following movement continues to match the music precisely as it did when she was dancing on her own.

Anything else is off time....

The whole class of dances that fall under rhythm dances, such as swing, salsa, chacha and even 2-step, take the step right on the beat. The leader's brain anticipates the beat and then moves right on it. The beat defines when the step should be taken in the whole dance category.

I don't think you are taking the right ideas and getting to the right conclusion here. My own experience is that musicality in the rhythm dances is not fundamentally different from musicality in the smooth dances. The rule is still "change your dance to match the music that you hear".

Part of the problem is that "the beat" is a term that needs context for mutual understanding, because it can mean a particular moment, or a particular duration. In other words, sometimes we say the beat when we mean at precisely 2.0s, and sometimes we instead mean everything from [2.0s,2.5s). Dividing "the beat" into counts clearly doesn't work with the first definition, yet there's clearly something worth talking about that's happening at 2.0s which isn't happening at 2.01s.

Just to add further confusion, Skippy's standard terminology turns the beat backwards - "the beat" that she divides isn't [2.0s,2.5s) but instead (1.5s,2.0s]. This has lots of interesting consequences to it. However, to get anywhere with it, you either need to be oblivious to the contradictions, or have enough context to separate this meaning of beat from the other ones.

Beyond that, we westies are dancing to swing anyway (well, except when we are dancing to contemporary. or hustle. or waltz. or windshield wipers.) Swung eighth notes are swung anyway - the timing of our movements necessarily needs to be flexible if we want those movements to match the flexibility expressed by the musicians.

Beyond that, the music we are dancing to is much richer than a metronome (yes, even the windshield wipers. I might be lying about hustle, though.) We can play with timing all over the place to better express the entire song, sacrificing if necessary the strict timing of the clock.

Beyond that... we're doing a street dance, here.

However, I'll note here that my latin dancing (yeah, I fake both of those dances), which I fundamentally approach the same way I dance swing, gets essentially the same reaction "wow, you really hear the music!". Now, I'm not going to claim that a Latin adjudicator would let me out of the qualifying rounds of a comp, but on a social floor, defying the music to maintain a strict staccato timing with your footwork is not your best bet.

Another beef... use of the word "leverage", which I just can't fit into my (sort of) knowledge of physics.

Can't help you much there, beyond the observation that if the bulk of the class gets the right idea out of the explanation, and the smart people can figure it out in spite of the explanation, then that's probably the right explanation to give. Horses for Courses.


whew, glad I didn't write this up at work.

[Albanaich]

In other words, yes - to lead, we have to move, and that movement is necessarily going to come before the follower responds to the signal our movement produces.

The contradiction arises only in the implication that the signal has some fixed relationship to the music. It doesn't - we advance or retard that signal as necessary to get the movement we want at the right time


Yes but what is 'the right time'

Is it when the lead steps of in time to the music, when the follower does, or when both do.

The 'connection' is the mid point between the action of sending the signal and acting on the signal. This is where the rhythm of swing is held, not in the movement of the individual dancers, but in their movement as a pair, which is in the nature of the lead and follow process,

The connection point is only point where the pair are in time - that's why it is so important in Swing.

[Dancelf]

However, "leading from center", or worse "moving from center", is a completely self contradictory crock that has no effectiveness on its own that's not better communicated discussing the body as a whole. Not that I have a strong opinion - it's just wrong.


Actually, that's not quite fair. There are some benefits to posture that follow from thinking about center point of balance that do not follow from body leads alone. The management apologizes for any misunderstandings.

[kayak]

See, I knew someone much better at describing dance than me would come along :)

I don't think you are taking the right ideas and getting to the right conclusion here. My own experience is that musicality in the rhythm dances is not fundamentally different from musicality in the smooth dances. The rule is still "change your dance to match the music that you hear".

Part of the problem is that "the beat" is a term that needs context for mutual understanding, because it can mean a particular moment, or a particular duration. In other words, sometimes we say the beat when we mean at precisely 2.0s, and sometimes we instead mean everything from [2.0s,2.5s). Dividing "the beat" into counts clearly doesn't work with the first definition, yet there's clearly something worth talking about that's happening at 2.0s which isn't happening at 2.01s.

Cool, I will think about this idea and where it leads me. Using your 1.5, 2, 2.5 concepts, I think my training in smooth dancing would place movement over the whole 1.5-2.5 range. My swing dance training would place more emphasis on moving just at the 2 area.

Just to add further confusion, Skippy's standard terminology turns the beat backwards - "the beat" that she divides isn't [2.0s,2.5s) but instead (1.5s,2.0s]. This has lots of interesting consequences to it. However, to get anywhere with it, you either need to be oblivious to the contradictions, or have enough context to separate this meaning of beat from the other ones.

I think I am understanding what your getting at, but we probably haven't described it exactly the same way. Pretty consistently, I have been taught to prep turns at 1.5 so they are initiated from 2.0-2.5.

I am not quite sure how you would describe just a closed basic? Would you say the body lead starts at 1.9 with the foot moving at 2.0 or the body lead starts at 2.0 and the foot follows at 2.1?

Beyond that, the music we are dancing to is much richer than a metronome (yes, even the windshield wipers. I might be lying about hustle, though.) We can play with timing all over the place to better express the entire song, sacrificing if necessary the strict timing of the clock.

This is true, but I don't think you couldn't sacrifice the strict timing throughout a whole dance? Even a playful pro takes clear steps on the beat most of the time.

[Dancelf]

Cool, I will think about this idea and where it leads me. Using your 1.5, 2, 2.5 concepts, I think my training in smooth dancing would place movement over the whole 1.5-2.5 range. My swing dance training would place more emphasis on moving just at the 2 area.

OK, it sounds like you have adapted my idea to beats, rather than time. Nothing wrong with that, except the potential for confusion. But let me translate:

If we adopt the same notation to beats, we can think of the attack of the first beat happening on 1.0, and the attack of the second beat happening on count 2.0. Dancing a straight triple would be keying on 1.0, 1.5, 2.0; a swung triple would be more like 1.0, 1.7, 2.0.

If you were to compare this to the sheet music, then 1.0 (were it the first beat of the measure) would happen at the very beginning of the measure, and the end of the measure would be just a fraction of an instant before 5.0. Were the music written in 4/4 time, the tone of an initial quarter note would be heard from 1.0 to an instant before 2.0. [1.0,2.0) is how I would write this, and the middle step of the triple would clearly be part of the first beat.

Dancers who use rolling count turn these endpoints around - the first beat ENDS at 1.0, which I would express as (0.0,1.0], and the middle step in the triple is clearly part of the second beat.

Mind you - even though these two different schools are counting differently, they are still doing everything at the same time. These are merely different conventions for thinking and discussing the continuum.

I don't know of anyone who teaches that the attack falls in the middle of the beat: (0.5,1.5). My gut instinct is that loses some advantages from each of the other two interpretations without gaining anything back.

(My previous example included more fractions because I was thinking about swing in time - 120bpm)

My own preference, rather than talking about an entire movement being smeared over a time interval, is to speak in terms of specific instants of the idealized movement occurring at specific instants in the music. So while in the smooth dances we can talk about the step being spread across the entire two beat spread, it's more useful to speak in terms like "the center is directly over the landing foot on 2.0 (or 1.98, or whenever that happens".

For swing dancers doing rolling count, you can say that the center is directly over the supporting foot, with the body pulse at its peak, on 2.0.

I am not quite sure how you would describe just a closed basic? Would you say the body lead starts at 1.9 with the foot moving at 2.0 or the body lead starts at 2.0 and the foot follows at 2.1?

Neither - the feet are not the dance. In most idealized cases, I would say that the body arrives at 2.0 (or 3.0, if you are thinking of the next beat).

This is true, but I don't think you couldn't sacrifice the strict timing throughout a whole dance? Even a playful pro takes clear steps on the beat most of the time.

The music is with the beat most of the time. Watch what the playful pro does when the music and the beat diverge.

[Albanaich]

Why thank you dancelf - isn't this


My own preference, rather than talking about an entire movement being smeared over a time interval, is to speak in terms of specific instants of the idealized movement occurring at specific instants in the music. So while in the smooth dances we can talk about the step being spread across the entire two beat spread, it's more useful to speak in terms like "the center is directly over the landing foot on 2.0 (or 1.98, or whenever that happens".



The same as this. . . .

[Flat Shoes]

That's why I propose the drill I did. The conclusion you should realize (after trying the drill, if not before) is that if your partner is dancing on time, and you want to lead that movement, then the right answer is to make the lead half a snap earlier than the music, so that her following movement continues to match the music precisely as it did when she was dancing on her own.

You're talking about the beat not being a moment, but a time interval. A lead (in a certain direction) is also goin on over a time interval. A smooth pleasent lead will take time to build, a slow (relatively) acceleration. This is one of the reasons, as you talked about, we lead from (I like 'from' better than 'with') our bodies and not only our arms.

A prep, as used in many patterns (for example tuck turn), are just a preparation for this, you move to one side so that the transition in direction before leading fastert in the other direction has more time to build up.

The lead is an "ongoing process" in every pattern lead.

There is a lot of timing going on to fit the patterns to the music and the rhythm, but even though Lindy/Swing is a rhythm dance, there is no reason to be a "slave to the rhythm".

As I've become a more experienced dancer, I am more and more often off the beat both in leading and steps. Especially if there is an advanced singer with a lot of stuff going on in the melody. When dancing we are not, and should not try to be, human metronomes.

But it is till important to pay attention to the rhythm and not travel too far away for too long time. And long in this sense is for me usually only a handful of beats. What I am trying to say is that the beat and the melody gives us frames to play within. We can and should explore the borders, but still respect these frames and of course our partner.

Is what I'm writing understandable, or does it come across as complete nonsense? :D

Anyway, the point is, I find it hard to say that a lead should be on a certain beat. As I wrote in an earlier post, the lead should be when the relative positions and body weight distirbutions are right, and we should try to time that to fit with the music as best as our abilities to move and interpet music allow us.

[Albanaich]

Yeah - this is my take on things too, and what you say makes perfect sense to me, though I think our view is a minority one

[kayak]

So while in the smooth dances we can talk about the step being spread across the entire two beat spread, it's more useful to speak in terms like "the center is directly over the landing foot on 2.0 (or 1.98, or whenever that happens".

For swing dancers doing rolling count, you can say that the center is directly over the supporting foot, with the body pulse at its peak, on 2.0.


Ah, I didn't think of your 1s and 2s as being time over a 120 bpm song. From a descriptive point of view, what difference would you say there is by describing being centered over the foot at the second second vs the idea of moving with your center on the beat?

[Dancelf]

From a descriptive point of view, what difference would you say there is by describing being centered over the foot at the second second vs the idea of moving with your center on the beat?

Speaking of these as descriptions, I would argue that the first is testable, and the second is not.

All of the movements in the dance are continuous (we don't teleport from one position to the next). Going a little bit overboard, we can say that the movement spans an interval in space, much the same way that a note of music spans an interval of time.

When we say that a dancer is off time, what we are usually describing is a situation where the dancer's span of movement doesn't match the span of music. "he's late". "he's early". "he's rushing".

Our problem right now is trying to figure out if the way you think those two spans line up matches the way I think you think those two spans line up. In other words, you've told me of an span of music (the beat), and a span of movement, so I know that you think the movement overlaps the span in some way, but you haven't given me the information I need to align the two the same way you do.

Phrasing the example another way: suppose you and I each have a camera, and take a picture of someone "moving with [their] center on the beat". How much confidence do you have that the picture I take will look like the picture you take?

[Steve Pastor]

Ha
I've got clips from various dance movies, "swing" mostly, and one of my projects is ananlyzing the elapsed time between "steps" using Movie Maker. I'm looking for "basic step" timing in "Lindy Hop", among other things. What you find is that dvds produce a series of frames, just like film does, and that is the limitation for parsing music. Then there's the issue of "the beat", as you two have been so articulately discussing.

Anyhow, though I'd chime in here with material from Lauré Haile's "I Love to Dance". Haven't found the book yet, but "Dance Teacher Now" ran an expert in their Nov - Dec 1986 issue.

The article is titled "Teaching a Class in Weight Change". I don't want to type the whole thing, and I have a photocopy, so exerpts... And remember there is lots more between these two sentences.

"Next, to take the left walking step, think of this: Get off the right foot. Immediately as the left foot touches the floor, the entire body wieght should be over that foot."

"It is best to mater this like a robot until one can exactly time the weight change on the 1st beat, and the follow-through on the 2nd beat."

DanceElf is right that we don't move instantaneously, but I think the more we parse tiny time intervals like 1 sec, the less helpful it becomes. And, of course, we can vary things as musicians frequently do.

[Dancelf]

DanceElf is right that we don't move instantaneously, but I think the more we parse tiny time intervals like 1 sec, the less helpful it becomes.

Perhaps. Skippy et al swear by Rolling Count, which calls for chopping beats into thirds, which is to say time in 6ths of seconds (at 120 bpm). The musicians can clearly make distinctions at that speed, but they aren't pushing as much mass as the dancers are (as a rule).

[Steve Pastor]

Rollin Count is useful, I think, because it helps people think of "steps" in distinct phases, which they decribe. Skippy has written that there is more analysis and knowledge to pass on now.
But... In making Western Swing/West Coast Swing more accessable by, for instance, by starting with the walking part rather than the "rock apart" then Throwout then do the walking part, the dance became divorced from its roots in Lindy Hop/Jitterbug.

For me, that "old fashion" style of starting from closed was a brain killer, just like Skippy had figures out by 1958, or earlier. (It took me YEARS to figure out what was going on there, although I could dance it without thinking!)
What has been lost, though, is that "Western Swing", which is, or was, considered to be for advanced swing dancers (Haile started you out with all 3 rhythms, which pretty obviously, I would think, you would have to be familiar with already. I can name two other books that state that WS/WCS is the most difficult swing dance .)

Haile's approach is strikingly similar to that used by some Argentine Tango instructors who emphasize weight changes as the basis of the dance. Too much talk about division into smaller segments of the step produces (sometimes I would think) people who "muddle" their steps, just like "no push no pull" produces people who dance without compression or resistence.

One step forward, how many back?

Regarding time duration, I thought it was vey interesting to read in the book "Early Jazz" that African master drummers think in terms of 1/8 notes rather than 1/4 notes as most Western musicians do.

I'd say "rolling count" is a useful concept for people who have "mastered the basics", and want to advance.

[tsb]

Pretty much ALL musicians have a problem understanding WHAT we dance, to what they are playing. Theres a disconnect for some reason .

Ive taught world class musicians, in rhythm and smooth dances, and without exception ( this includes a drummer, guitar teacher and a classical musician ) each had problems with structuring the music to the steps..

sorry but i gotta object to the generalization. i'm not necessarily world class, but most folks would categorize me as being musically gifted: strings, brass, woodwinds, keyboards, vocals, conducting and arranging background, and when i hear a song, the first thing i do is decide what i'd dance to it, and i've never had problems figuring out timing, etc.

in teaching, the trick IMO is find a way to say the same things in different ways because everyone has a different experience set and processes things differently. so in the course of a lesson i might say it in the following different ways:

rumba/box step/salsa/mambo timing
1) quick quick slow / slow quick quick
2) 1-2-3 (hold on 4) /1 (2) 3 4
3) quarter quarter half note (or quarter quarter quarter, quarter rest if i want to emphasize a completion of motion by count three), or half note, quarter quarter

cha cha - breaking on 2
1) listen for the cha cha cha in the music, and put the breaks in between
2) just like the theme from addams family - the finger clicks are on counts 2 and 3
3a) (starting on the break) quarter rest, quarter quarter eighth-eighth quarter
3b) (starting on the cha-cha-cha)... four and one, two three.

so on and so forth

to explain prepping, if somebody plays baseball: "windup before the pitch"; if they play tennis: "backswing";

IMO, a musician can easily figure out how to derive the type of dance best suited for the music in question - if it's explained in nomenclature within a construct that the musician is already comfortable with.

as such, i submit that whenever a student has problems assimilating a subject, maybe it's due to a *teaching method* that is not as robust as it could be.

[tsb]

Not sure if this will be as extensive as a planned this afternoon, when I was thinking about it in the context of avoiding work, but let's see how we do.

Your steps and your body are, of course, connected. Your steps and your lead are not necessarily connected - you can step without leading, you can lead without stepping. The two actions are coincident in many cases, but that coincidence is not at all necessary.

Drill #1. Open a convenient door to a 45 degree angle; wrap a bungee cord around the door knob, making a loop that you can grasp. Position your hand so that there is just a little bit of stretch in the cord. Now, without disturbing the cord or the door, move your feet to different places on the floor. With practice, you should be able to move toward and away from the door knob, to the left and right of it, without (a) the door swinging (b) the angle of the cord changing (c) the cord stretching or contracting.

Drill #1a. Same idea, except that you use a follower instead of a door. You should be able to move around on the floor without disturbing the connection.

Drill #2. Stand just off one side of the slot, parallel to it, with your feet wide (more than shoulder distance apart). From that position, practice leading partner through a series of side passes, turns, rolls, etc, without moving your feet. As you start to get the hang of it, start moving your feet closer together.


What we are really experimenting with here are the spacial relationships between the connection (where we are touching partner), our centers (center of mass - although Skippy Blair will instead use center point of balance, which is located above center of mass), and our support. If the connection is above the line that connects your support and her support on the floor, then you can create an extension lead by simply moving your center so that it is on the same line, but further from the connection than your support (if partner matches you, you get a W shape), and a compression lead by moving your center closer to the connection than your support (producing an inverted W, or a weird looking M).

You may hear these shapes described as V's and A's. Same animal, different spots.

Warning: in more than one venue, I've heard instructors (even good ones) relate the different leads to the direction that the follower is going, which is entirely satisfactory until you find yourself in the middle of a basket/lock whip, and you suddenly find yourself wishing that the labels were thisway/thatway rather than forward/back.


In addition to direction and timing, the lead is responsible for communicating size/velocity of the movement to the follower. If the speed of the followers movement and or the size of the pattern is going to be independent of our movement (and why on earth wouldn't you want to have that option), then there must necessarily be more going on than the leader's step. (And there is - that dial is controlled by how far we move our center from the neutral position above support).




That would be me (and also others). There are a couple of different rationales at work here.

The verb push (and it's companion, pull) are going to be understood by your beginning students as bracing, and then using the strength of their arms to communicate the desired action to their partners.

First, it produces a jerky/uncomfortable/painful lead. Following is not automatic - the signal travels across the connection very quickly, but the muscles used to respond to the signal are voluntary. The mass of the arm is much less than the mass of the body, so it is very easy to get the arm moving faster than the body, producing a jerk in the follower's shoulder that really sucks.

On the other hand, the center, which effectively carries with it the head, torso, hips, and a fair share of the legs, is much higher in mass. Therefore, it's got a lot more inertia. As a result, pushing the body around is much smoother than pushing the hand around; you get a leading action that gives the followers muscles the time they need to initiate the movement of her center.

This is the prime point, and it is especially important because the illusion that we create looks like a braced push or pull - the follower is going that way, and the joints in the elbow are extending as they would were we doing all the work with the arm muscles. Now the follower is coming this way, and the angle of the elbows is collapsing....

Second, because the muscles in the arm are being used to create the movement, they sacrifice the flexibility necessary to change shape. Consequently, the leads to create rotation in the follower are late. (Argument: open hand combat. Counter argument: those people aren't trying to make their sparring partner's feel good or look pretty).

Taking this a notch further, it is very effective to distinguish between body leads (used to change the followers linear momentum), and arm leads (used to change the follower's angular momentum). Rotational leads depend a lot - a whole lot - on relative body position, and you can simplify things considerably by simplifying when arms are used: "only when leading her to turn right in front of you"


From what I recall of studying American smooth, the basic principles of leading with the body are precisely the same (not a surprise - human physiology doesn't change that much). There, the immediate concerns were more closely related to the mass difference between the body and the free foot, trying to elevate the lead to reinforce frame, and to lay the ground work for later attention on the standing leg.


Lead follow is supposed to feel effortless - it's a hug with your loved one swaying in the same time you are, except in open position with more spins. The fastest way I know to get people to discover and recognize that feeling is to take them through body leads - getting arm leads to produce the same result is soooo much harder.

Now, if you squint at that paragraph, and connect it with some of the previous ideas, you'll recognize that it is an admission that body leads aren't necessary. And this is a true statement - though I don't promise indisputable truth.

Let's walk through the program again, and notice that (a) in open position, the tactile connection is created entirely with the hand - let go of the hand, and the connection is lost. (b) that after doing sufficient repetitions of the bungee drill, you should be able to move your body around on the floor without disturbing the connection. If we can learn to move our body without disturbing the hand in that one location, can we not learn to move our body without disturbing the hand in any location. And if that's so, can we not learn to move our body without disturbing the hand as it moves from one location to the next.

And all of that is so - with sufficient practice, and attention to detail, you can get there.

Classic demonstration of this is the old drill where you and partner hold onto different ends of a scarf/handkerchief/tissue, and try to lead. Now the drill is normally taught to emphasize the body lead (if you jerk the lead, the tissue will tear), but when you squint it should be clear that she really has no way of feeling what's going on beyond her end of the tissue - you can do anything you want so long as the result is to move the tissue the way it is "supposed" to go.

Now, that test can run into an additional problem, which is that you are duplicating the lead on two of her three sensory channels (feeling, listening because you are still in time with the music, but not seeing - you are in the wrong place. If she's using smell to follow you, you've bigger problems, and if she's using taste then you certainly don't need my help.) If you've ever lead a right outside turn from the "other" side of the slot, you'll recognize this problem - her eyes start lying to her, and what follow you get turns into a tossup. In short, you need to learn to give the lead perfectly AND to not make any movements with contradict the lead. Not easy.

There's also an interesting contradiction: with practice, you can learn to identify where your partner's feet are from the signal that comes through the connection.... unless partner is better at isolating her hand than you are at finding her feet. And vice versa. So if you and partner are sufficiently competitive, you can improve a lot by playing lots of hide and seek.


In conclusion, "you have to lead with your body" is a really useful and productive lie to believe, because it is the fastest way to get to the desired result - a lead that "feels right".

However, "leading from center", or worse "moving from center", is a completely self contradictory crock that has no effectiveness on its own that's not better communicated discussing the body as a whole. Not that I have a strong opinion - it's just wrong.



Many moons past, Mario Robau taught me to tune out the explanations for the lead when attempting a new pattern - "listen to the description of the follower's footwork, then make her do that". Beyond that, there's not much more than some general principles about relative body position. Oh, and actually executing.



Essentially true - there's a little bit of a dial there depending on how "tight" the connection has been up to that point. The lag is all follower's reaction time.

I'm agreeing with Steve here as a launching point to address some points raised by Albanaich. First, we should all agree that the reaction time, which can be very very short with a well tuned follower, is non zero. Second, that if we begin in a static position, we cannot create a lead without changing our geometry in some way.

In other words, yes - to lead, we have to move, and that movement is necessarily going to come before the follower responds to the signal our movement produces.

The contradiction arises only in the implication that the signal has some fixed relationship to the music. It doesn't - we advance or retard that signal as necessary to get the movement we want at the right time.

That's why I propose the drill I did. The conclusion you should realize (after trying the drill, if not before) is that if your partner is dancing on time, and you want to lead that movement, then the right answer is to make the lead half a snap earlier than the music, so that her following movement continues to match the music precisely as it did when she was dancing on her own.

Anything else is off time....



I don't think you are taking the right ideas and getting to the right conclusion here. My own experience is that musicality in the rhythm dances is not fundamentally different from musicality in the smooth dances. The rule is still "change your dance to match the music that you hear".

Part of the problem is that "the beat" is a term that needs context for mutual understanding, because it can mean a particular moment, or a particular duration. In other words, sometimes we say the beat when we mean at precisely 2.0s, and sometimes we instead mean everything from [2.0s,2.5s). Dividing "the beat" into counts clearly doesn't work with the first definition, yet there's clearly something worth talking about that's happening at 2.0s which isn't happening at 2.01s.

Just to add further confusion, Skippy's standard terminology turns the beat backwards - "the beat" that she divides isn't [2.0s,2.5s) but instead (1.5s,2.0s]. This has lots of interesting consequences to it. However, to get anywhere with it, you either need to be oblivious to the contradictions, or have enough context to separate this meaning of beat from the other ones.

Beyond that, we westies are dancing to swing anyway (well, except when we are dancing to contemporary. or hustle. or waltz. or windshield wipers.) Swung eighth notes are swung anyway - the timing of our movements necessarily needs to be flexible if we want those movements to match the flexibility expressed by the musicians.

Beyond that, the music we are dancing to is much richer than a metronome (yes, even the windshield wipers. I might be lying about hustle, though.) We can play with timing all over the place to better express the entire song, sacrificing if necessary the strict timing of the clock.

Beyond that... we're doing a street dance, here.

However, I'll note here that my latin dancing (yeah, I fake both of those dances), which I fundamentally approach the same way I dance swing, gets essentially the same reaction "wow, you really hear the music!". Now, I'm not going to claim that a Latin adjudicator would let me out of the qualifying rounds of a comp, but on a social floor, defying the music to maintain a strict staccato timing with your footwork is not your best bet.



Can't help you much there, beyond the observation that if the bulk of the class gets the right idea out of the explanation, and the smart people can figure it out in spite of the explanation, then that's probably the right explanation to give. Horses for Courses.


whew, glad I didn't write this up at work.

this is great stuff.

now, speaking to WCS, may i offer the following analogy to explain WCS as how it was explained to me:

ever watch a train at a stockyard? the engineer will attach the engine to its construct (cargo), and then slowly go into reverse, pushing the lead car backwards into the car behind it, until *that* car moves backwards into the car behind it, continuing the process until the end car is moved slightly by the car in front of it.

that's essentially what compression should feel like, there's a certain amount of absorption of compression that is continuous yet exponential.

now, the engineer changes gears and moves forward. because slack is at a maximum, the only car that moves is the lead car in the construct - until all the slack is taken up between the lead car and the car behind it. that second car now has the acceleration of the engine PLUS the momentum of the lead car as an active force working on it. the nth car will have the pull of the engine AND all the momentum of (n-1) cars working on it and will be brought up to speed more quickly as n gets larger.

the engine can pull the entire construct because it only needs to be able to pull the weight of the first car - and the last car doesn't move until all the other cars in front of it move first and reaches speed more quickly than any car in front of it.

this is how a follow responds to a body lead that initiates a new figure in WCS. as such, the follow's response will always be slightly behind the lead timing-wise and the feel will be somewhat bungie-cord-like.

or you could try and describe it stylistically - WCS is a flirty dance - the term sugar push reflects that - you try and bring your sugar in, and she pushes you away. the follow's delayed response reflects the reluctance of the follow to be drawn in to the lead's flirtateous advances.

this is very different from dancing standard (ballroom) where the timing is almost anticipatory.

[tsb]

Ha
I've got clips from various dance movies, "swing" mostly, and one of my projects is ananlyzing the elapsed time between "steps" using Movie Maker. I'm looking for "basic step" timing in "Lindy Hop", among other things. What you find is that dvds produce a series of frames, just like film does, and that is the limitation for parsing music. Then there's the issue of "the beat", as you two have been so articulately discussing.

Anyhow, though I'd chime in here with material from Lauré Haile's "I Love to Dance". Haven't found the book yet, but "Dance Teacher Now" ran an expert in their Nov - Dec 1986 issue.

The article is titled "Teaching a Class in Weight Change". I don't want to type the whole thing, and I have a photocopy, so exerpts... And remember there is lots more between these two sentences.

"Next, to take the left walking step, think of this: Get off the right foot. Immediately as the left foot touches the floor, the entire body wieght should be over that foot."

"It is best to mater this like a robot until one can exactly time the weight change on the 1st beat, and the follow-through on the 2nd beat."

DanceElf is right that we don't move instantaneously, but I think the more we parse tiny time intervals like 1 sec, the less helpful it becomes. And, of course, we can vary things as musicians frequently do.

other exceptions would include the deliberate delay of weight change using kick-ball change styling on counts 1 & 2. if you deliberately delayed your lead to reflect that, the follow would be way behind in her response.

[kayak]

Phrasing the example another way: suppose you and I each have a camera, and take a picture of someone "moving with [their] center on the beat". How much confidence do you have that the picture I take will look like the picture you take?

Kind of funny, but I am pretty confident that both descriptions would get us to about the same place. I hadn't really though in terms of seconds, but it works. What do you do for your description to make it adjust to say a 90 bpm song instead of 120 bpm?

I like your descriptions. They have a lot of good stuff in them.

[Dancelf]

Kind of funny, but I am pretty confident that both descriptions would get us to about the same place. I hadn't really though in terms of seconds, but it works.

I'm not so sure, precisely because of the ambiguity of "the beat" as an interval and "the beat" as a moment.

What do you do for your description to make it adjust to say a 90 bpm song instead of 120 bpm?

Change the example to a tuck.

[kayak]

I'm not so sure, precisely because of the ambiguity of "the beat" as an interval and "the beat" as a moment.

Hmmm, it must work because any WCS dance I go to, we are all stepping at precisely the same time unless we are playing with rhythms for some reason. I guess what we often refer to as the beat is actually the attack and not the interval.

If we talked about a beat being 1/2 second intervals, I would say we are supposed to be aligned over our feet on the second or the very beginning of the interval. Is that what you would say as well?

So I would say our body motion should bring both dancers aligned over their feet at 2.0 and not a situation where the guy gets there at 1.9 the lady at 2.1 and the hands at 2.0. I think even with a mear .2 seconds difference, the two dancers would look out of sync with each other.

[kayak]

My fave part of these discussions is the "lead with your body" stuff, which will no doubt come up.

music to maintain a strict staccato timing with your footwork is not your best bet.[/quote]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Pastor http://www.dance-forums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.dance-forums.com/showthread.php?p=686611#post686611)
Another beef... use of the word "leverage", which I just can't fit into my (sort of) knowledge of physics.

Can't help you much there, beyond the observation that if the bulk of the class gets the right idea out of the explanation, and the smart people can figure it out in spite of the explanation, then that's probably the right explanation to give. Horses for Courses.

I heard a pretty good description this past weekend that gave a visual for leading with our centers that worked well for me. "The arms never create motion - They only suppress motion."