Just Returned to Salsa

[DWise1]

I just started Salsa classes again last night. I had started learning to dance with intermediate Salsa (ie, the very first dance classes I ever took as a rank beginner, though I didn't know at the time that it wasn't the right class for me) four years ago for 3 or 4 months, followed by a few series of beginning Salsa through the city, after which we stopped because we could not find intermediate classes locally. Since then I had moved on to Swing (WCS and ECS/Lindy). I was planning on returning to Salsa in about another year, but I saw that this local studio is offering classes on a night I can attend so I decided to start now.

I surprised myself by remembering a lot after nearly four years, plus of course my other dancing also helped. The instructor normally insists that beginners not go into the intermediate class until after the first series unless they had been studying elsewhere. After observing me in the first beginning class he asked me to stay for intermediate, so I must have been doing alright. And I think I did well in keeping up with the intermediate class. Of course, I still need to work on hearing the rhythm in the music (I didn't develop that basic skill until a couple years after leaving Salsa) and getting these Scottish/Irish hips to learn Spanish.

Anyway, a couple questions, just out of curiosity:

The count I had learned before was straight 1-2-3--5-6-7- (ie, hold on 4 & 8). His counting is like NC2Step: 1&2-3&4-5&6-7&8. It works out the same; it just takes two old-count basics to do one new-count. And when he took the basics out of the combinations he had us doing in the intermediate class, it seemed that the different counting made even less of a difference. I'm just curious whether different counting patterns are indicative of the different styles of Salsa (we're in Orange County, BTW, just south of Los Angeles, so I'd expect to encounter the LA style).

The other question regards ganchos. From an earlier discussion here, I understood a gancho to be like in Tango where the woman raises her foot behind her "hooking" the man's leg (Robert Duvall in "Assassination Tango": Me gusta. Me gusta. ¡Cuidado!). Last night in intermediate the men did a double turn which is a right turn followed immediately by a hook turn, which he called a gancho in both languages (most of the students are Hispanic, so he teaches bilingually; I am bilingual enough in Spanish to follow both). I'm just curious whether this is common terminology.

[Sagitta]

For on1 I've heard 123 ---567, quick quick slow, 1234 5678, but never this 1&2, 3&4, 5&6, 7&8. I eagerly wait to see how, why, and where it is used. It does not seem to make much sense to my ignorant ears! :oops: :)

[tj]

Yuck! I know that counting like that would really annoy me...

I've taken quite a few classes from quite a few instructors over the years, and that's the first I've heard of counting that way.

If you can handle it, great. Be aware that this could affect your ability to learn from other instructors in the long run, however.

[DWise1]

Yuck! I know that counting like that would really annoy me...

I've taken quite a few classes from quite a few instructors over the years, and that's the first I've heard of counting that way.

If you can handle it, great. Be aware that this could affect your ability to learn from other instructors in the long run, however.
I've done tons of classes over the decades, the vast majority non-dance, so I've learned to take instructors in stride. They each have their own methodology for teaching which may or may not agree with others, but then I always work out my own way of learning which is most often helped in some way by their methodology, but not necessary dependent on it. When I move on to other instructors, I'll simply adapt their counting method in their classes.

I'll probably ask him casually outside of class about his counting being different from what I had learned before. Nonjudgementally, just out of curiosity type of question. After all, as long as I'm there I'll be using his counting in class. Besides, I use counting as a guideline, not as something carved in a stone tablet.

The only real difficulty I can think of is in learning to hear the 1. Because it seems to me at this point that in his counting scheme the music's 1 would hit at the counts of 1 and 5.

[tj]

I've done tons of classes over the decades, the vast majority non-dance, so I've learned to take instructors in stride. They each have their own methodology for teaching which may or may not agree with others, but then I always work out my own way of learning which is most often helped in some way by their methodology, but not necessary dependent on it. When I move on to other instructors, I'll simply adapt their counting method in their classes.

I'll probably ask him casually outside of class about his counting being different from what I had learned before. Nonjudgementally, just out of curiosity type of question. After all, as long as I'm there I'll be using his counting in class. Besides, I use counting as a guideline, not as something carved in a stone tablet.

The only real difficulty I can think of is in learning to hear the 1. Because it seems to me at this point that in his counting scheme the music's 1 would hit at the counts of 1 and 5.

Well, it could also affect how and when you initiate spins and other moves, too. Often, I'll slightly modify an instructor's pattern to more traditional timing mostly so that follows who don't take that class are able to do the move.

When moves get extremely complex, I personally find it important to find common ground. So if you learn counting different from the rest of the world, it may set a bad foundation for your continued learning.

Just my opinion, of course. Whatever works best for you and your schedule is the most important thing.

On a side note: early on, both Josie Neglia and Rene Gueits had their own ways of counting that was different from the rest of the world. They have since modified it to fit in with everyone else.

[SDsalsaguy]

For on1 i've also heard it counted 1,2,3 4,5,6 (i.e. the steps were being counted rather than the beats). My question to you would be where are steps being taken in the count structure you describe? If the half beats are being used for some type of weight shift/body action, than I don't think there's any issue at all... if it's for actual steps i'm a bit more perplexed.

As far as terminology in salsa, do yourself a favor... give up now!!!! Every other instructor has a different name for almost everything! :doh:

[DWise1]

For on1 i've also heard it counted 1,2,3 4,5,6 (i.e. the steps were being counted rather than the beats). My question to you would be where are steps being taken in the count structure you describe? If the half beats are being used for some type of weight shift/body action, than I don't think there's any issue at all... if it's for actual steps i'm a bit more perplexed.
Sure thing:
on1:
1 - step left foot forward
& - step right foot where it was
2 - step left foot back to starting position
hold
3 - step right foot back
& - step left foot where it was
4 - step right foot forward to starting position

5&6 repeat the 1&2
7&8 repeat the 3&4

As far as terminology in salsa, do yourself a favor... give up now!!!! Every other instructor has a different name for almost everything! :doh:
Si, todo es relativo. (since half the class is literally in Spanish, I've already started to revert) I've seen the same thing in discussions of other dances as well.

[tj]

Hmm, actually, I think an Instructor in Denver counts this way... been a while.

Hey youngsta, can you confirm? Does Rafael count this way?

[MapleLeaf Salsero]

Hmm... Sounds rather confusing to me. I guess every instructor has his own method.

The way I learnt it was: 123 pause/tap 567 pause/tap.

[SDsalsaguy]

For on1 i've also heard it counted 1,2,3 4,5,6 (i.e. the steps were being counted rather than the beats). My question to you would be where are steps being taken in the count structure you describe? If the half beats are being used for some type of weight shift/body action, than I don't think there's any issue at all... if it's for actual steps i'm a bit more perplexed.
Sure thing:
on1:
1 - step left foot forward
& - step right foot where it was
2 - step left foot back to starting position
hold
3 - step right foot back
& - step left foot where it was
4 - step right foot forward to starting position

5&6 repeat the 1&2
7&8 repeat the 3&4
Hmmmm... well, as a *step* count I guess I can sort of understand this as it marks the first two steps as half the beat value of the third step. It does not, however, make sense to me regarding the musical structure wherein three steps are taken across four beats of music (true of all major styles of salsa). I'd be curious what your new instructor has to say about his reasoning...

As far as terminology in salsa, do yourself a favor... give up now!!!! Every other instructor has a different name for almost everything! :doh:
Si, todo es relativo. (since half the class is literally in Spanish, I've already started to revert) I've seen the same thing in discussions of other dances as well.
Quite true... but salsa seems especially bad given the many countries and regions involved even before you introduce all the instructors trying to differntiate themselves and "their" style. :wink:

[youngsta]

Hmm, actually, I think an Instructor in Denver counts this way... been a while.

Hey youngsta, can you confirm? Does Rafael count this way?
I'm 90% sure he does...no 95% sure! I've only taken one class from him though. I don't remember the count bothering me though, maybe because I don't really pay much attention to it to begin with! :lol:

[Sakura]

Hmmm, interesting! I just started Salsa, technically, on Tuesday**, so I'll say what I can and leave it at that! 8)

We count four beats at a time only. So it's just: 1, 2, 3, hold 4; 1, 2, 3, hold 4; etc, etc, etc.

As far as what SD said about how your teacher counts, it really doesn't seem like it would go with the music, unless you're into counting super fast of course... :roll: Being in band, I can start conducting the music the way a drum major would, so counting through 4 makes much more sense than any other counting I've seen mentioned (though I know counting to eight is just the same thing... :? :wink: ).

So, that leads me to ask: is it imperative that you count as your teacher has shown you, or could you just use a different count in your head?
Just asking here myself; whatever works for you, so long as it's not implanting little seeds of Evil in you, go for it! =^_~=

Sakura Kitty :kitty:

**Had my first Private lesson -- SOOOO HAPPY!!!!! :banana: :banana: I've got so much Seratonin in me, it should be *illegal!!!* =^_~= Yay, Salsa. *waves little flags*

[DWise1]

So, that leads me to ask: is it imperative that you count as your teacher has shown you, or could you just use a different count in your head?
Doing a different count in my head would require me to translate between what's going on in the class and what's going on in my private little world. For instance, when he tells us to turn her on 3&4, I should understand what he's saying instead of translating in my head, "Oh, that would be 567".
It's like using the metric system (remember, in the US everybody's raised on our version of the English system); either you convert every measurement back and forth between metric and English all the time or else you just simply work within the metric system. Working within the metric system is very easy, but too many Americans have been taught metric by having to convert back and forth all the time with messy long multiplications and so they all think that metric is really hard to use.

I choose to work within whatever system I find myself in and then whatever sorting out I need to do, I do off-line.

[Sakura]

:) Well, that most certainly makes sense. =^_^= I like the metric system, however, I cannot use it in my normal everyday life... =-_-= I hate being screwed up on mathematical systems in my upbringing... :wink:

Sakura Kitty :kitty:

[Sagitta]

Well I just follow along whatever the instructor says, as Dwise1 does. It is too difficult to translate while learning. However, soon after class I rework all that I have learnt the way I do it on1 and on3.

[SDsalsaguy]

We count four beats at a time only. So it's just: 1, 2, 3, hold 4; 1, 2, 3, hold 4; etc, etc, etc.
Heya SK... this will work at the beginning but even the basic step has a front half and a back half, so counting through (1-8) instead of 1-4 and 1-4 should, in the long run, make it easier to incorporate more complex "patterns." I would think this might be even more so for leaders, but even as a follower it should help to have a different beat count for your forward/left half a basic and your back/right half a basic. That way, when your dancing starts to advance way beyond basics you still have a beat count that corresponds to the different halves of the basic dance structure. Hope that makes sense and is of some help...

[Sakura]

We count four beats at a time only. So it's just: 1, 2, 3, hold 4; 1, 2, 3, hold 4; etc, etc, etc.
Heya SK... this will work at the beginning but even the basic step has a front half and a back half, so counting through (1-8 ) instead of 1-4 and 1-4 should, in the long run, make it easier to incorporate more complex "patterns." I would think this might be even more so for leaders, but even as a follower it should help to have a different beat count for your forward/left half a basic and your back/right half a basic. That way, when your dancing starts to advance way beyond basics you still have a beat count that corresponds to the different halves of the basic dance structure. Hope that makes sense and is of some help...

:nods: I see where this comes from, and I appreciate the feedback! 8) I'll keep it in mind; but the 1-4 really works for me. I think it may tie into my being a Band Geek, so 1-4 has been pounded into my brain! :lol: :wink:

With the different parts of the steps, as you said, the basic has a forward half *and* a backward half, so for me, with two different parts -- as maybe you'd have two different charts to look at for a band show -- the count starts over again: one count for each part. If that made any sense to anyone at all. :oops: :D :D Heh, heh.

Sakura Kitty :kitty:

(PS- I'm really happy though! I just got a shirt today that says, "I was uncool before being uncool was cool." Perfect for a Geeky, little outcast like me!!! :lol: :lol: :D :lol: :lol: Next up on my list: their video game tee-shirts and that Rocky Horror Picture Show shirt.... =^__^= )

[Jake123]

Yea as I understand 123-567 is the predominant count for the LA area, there are Mambo style dancers in the OC who do it on 2, there's a local Mambo group on meetup.com, Bernard at Dance Sport CA (from New York) does both styles, depending on the night.

One Mambo instructor said (paraphrased):

Dancing on the 1, you are dancing to the melody, dancing on 2, you are dancing to the beat.

[sweavo]

These days, the clave cycle is usually written over two measures of 4 beats; so you get (musician's count) 1,2,3,4,2,2,3,4. This lines up exactly with the common dancer's count of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.

However, in the past (when? '50s?) the clave was written over one measure, so the count would indeed be 1,&,2,&,3,&,4,&... to line up with the same dancers' count.

Maybe your prof is from an old-school mambo heritage?

[tj]

Welcome to DF, Jake. Bernard Martinez was probably the first instructor to teach me "authentic" On2. Good to see that he's still teaching. Is Sonyo still teaching with him?

Also, you might want to check out our "sister" forums - www.salsaforums.com

[tangotime]

One Mambo instructor said (paraphrased):

Dancing on the 1, you are dancing to the melody, dancing on 2, you are dancing to the beat.



ALL music has 4 BEATS to a bar ( waltz, apart ) .

The beat # we choose to dance on may change according to the music being played .

Emphasising and varying beats within the bar is the whole purpose of " dance " in general.

" 2 " is quite often described as dancing on " clave " and ,also to consider , the Son rhythm that is being employed, such as Guajira, Montuno etc. should determine how we interpret that particular song .

Music is not only about numbers . It defines the way people prefer
to teach ,and unfortunately this does not always correspond with the attendant rhythm . It essentially defines the specific number of movements required to complete a given sequence.
HOW we use those steps, speed ,style, etc ,may also dictate a more specific style in the genre .

In laymans terms, steps are given a "beat " value in dance terms . A slow maybe 2 beats and a Quick 1. They ( notes ) may be also farther subdivided into halves and quarters ( which would be more musically correct ) .

The dancing to the " melody " is a frequently used distinction, but it doesnt address all the many polyrhythms that are normally present .

Add to this already complex music, the possibilty of clave reversal from 2/3 to 3/2 ( not as frequent as it used to be )