Teaching Musicality

[JohnEm]

This is from a site dealing with learning to play bass, but I believe that the explanation for the musicality of the milonguros is that they know the music so well that they don't have to "think" about it (and of course they aren't playing chords!). And as I've arleady written, I was mightily impressed and absolutely delighted to see a whole room full of people dancing the music at Lo de Celia.

Yes it happens at Lo de Celia and elsewhere, the pity of it is that that
is not the dance that is taught abroad but you can learn it for yourself.

Not only that, we don't have to wait to hear an orchestra, we can play
CDs and music from computers and just listen. A lot. My view is if you
don't understand it then listen, but don't analyse, and if after a time you
still aren't moved by it then tango is not for you. You must like the music.

You say the explanation for milonguero musicality but I think it only
partly explains. Apart from their years of experience they had a head start
over any of us, the music came first. It was the music of the city.
Although tourism interests, guide books etc., claim that tango music is
everywhere, it really is not except in the tourist spots.

However good dance music usually has a recognisable structure and inbuilt
audible clues for phrase endings, breaks and pauses. It's the approach
of those that dancers subconsciously recognise from repeated hearing.
And milongueros are aided by their own dance which can respond in an
instant to blocks on the floor and stops in the music.

Most of us could probably get there on our own, eventually, maybe. Ideally, someone who is teaching "musicality" can guide someone and help them get there sooner than they would on their own.

To a greater or lesser extent you can get there on your own.

Musicality teaching almost invariably results in analysis to a greater
or lesser extent. If you must seek musicality lessons find a musical/rhythmic
dancer who teaches with music and dancing. And avoid musicians who
have an entirely different analytical approach to the music as their ears
and minds are tuned to the creation or playing of music. Dancers hear,
they don't play.

The milongueros you admire never had such lessons, they listened,
they danced. It works, do the same.

One thing was also clear, many of the women in BsAs loved and knew
the music too. Sadly the one recurrent theme here can be the lament
of women saying they don't really like the music and that can only mean
they don't listen to it when they dance. It shows.

 

[JohnEm]

What I think JohnEm is missing, is that when someone doesn't understand musicality, a way to get them on the right track is to get them to understand about phrasing and such. John does seem to understand the end game, but the thread is about teaching musicality (not so much what you are doing once you already have it).

Read my last response to Steve for further explanation.

We are in a prescriptive society, seeking ready answers and certainties.
Teachers often offer promises (for money) which are not often fulfilled.
I'm advocating taking the responsibility for your own learning because
a teacher cannot make you dance, you have to dance yourself.
Dance is not like walking into a shop and buying an iPad.

If you are familiar with Maslow's 4 Stages of competency, this (understanding phrasing) involves getting them all the way to Stage 3 of that model (Conscious Competency). They still will need to get to Stage 4 (Unconscious Competency) on their own, typically by lots of practice. It's just a lot quicker to get to stage 4, if you can get to stage 3 first.

For those not familiar with these 4 stages (basically, a model for learning), the link to the wikipedia page is here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence

Oh spare us please.
There's a certain truth in the psychology described but it's not absolute.

And just because there is such a theory, it does nothing to prove one way
or another which is the best way to learn. The best way to learn is rather
more influenced by what it is you want to learn.

 

[dchester]

Read my last response to Steve for further explanation.

We are in a prescriptive society, seeking ready answers and certainties.
Teachers often offer promises (for money) which are not often fulfilled.
I'm advocating taking the responsibility for your own learning because
a teacher cannot make you dance, you have to dance yourself.
Dance is not like walking into a shop and buying an iPad.

Agreed. I'd say it's probably more like learning to write code to run on an iPad. One could figure it out on their own, but most people will learn quicker with the proper training.

BTW, for people who have never done it, there actually is an art to writing good code. Of course there are some who may never get it.

 

[JohnEm]

Agreed. I'd say it's probably more like learning to write code to run on an iPad. One could figure it out on their own, but most people will learn quicker with the proper training.

I agree with your simile and the fact that coding can be learned yourself.

BTW, for people who have never done it, there actually is an art to writing good code. Of course there are some who may never get it.

Yes indeed and certain guidance or learning is good.
But you cannot be taught to code and you either have the brain and
the dedication or you don't. In the earlier days of computers, and then
the IBM PC, coders were self-taught including Bill Gates. Many still are.

It's an interesting simile that an occupation that requires such thinking
can be compared with Tango, a dance not of the brain but the senses.

 

[AndaBien]

I'm interested in knowing the experiences, preferences and ideas of other dancers. I don't care if they are right or wrong, I just want to know them. Once I think I understand them, I'll decide if they can be useful in my dance or not. Since that is what I want from you, that's what I offer on my behalf.

If you have an experience, a preference or an idea, I'd llike to know it. Whether it's right or wrong makes no difference to me.

 

[Angel HI]

Steve - The 3 rhythms are referred to by various names; base, hi, and low are just one such grouping. Median, half-time, double-time is another grouping. An expeditious example would be a simple Fox rhythm. The low rhythm could be a rumba, and the hi could be a swing. In either case, this is the type of thing which I was referring to.

Sixela - Great points on polyrhythms.

Jan - I, too, have read this, and agree with much of it... not all. For example, though I understand counts, counting, etc., I tend to agree that they should be used as carefully and sparingly as possible. When one becomes too enslaved to this, the essence of dance can be compromised.

JohnEm - that you haven't studied music of sorts shows. I really don't mean this to be condescending. What I'm saying is that there is nothing choreographic about anything that I teach in a social AT situation, and it seems that you haven't learned much about the differences of dancing to beats, phrases, music, orchestration, etc. I'd be glad to try to help you with some of this off-thread if you really wish to know it. If not, I really would rather not get into a petty tete-a-tete about it.

...dance with a partner in the embrace
and to have a successful dance you'd better be sure you're both hearing
and dancing the same beat.

This isn't necessary when you are dancing well together. The lead is interpreting the music, and the follow is interpreting the movements. Both 'hear' the music and both 'feel' the music but from different sources. The lead listens to the music; the lady listens to her lead. This isn't to say that she doesn't hear or feel the music -I just said that. But, then, this could be a whole different discussion different from the topic of music.

I also realize that persons learn different things in different ways. Neither may be right, both may be right, and either could be incorrect in a given situation. I am saying that you probably disagree with much of what I have posted. It doesn't mean that you are incorrect in your dance, and I know that I am not, so I hopee to really not go there.

Lastly, I feel this bears reposting since it was exactly what I meant when I replied originally......

But surely, while you can't teach someone how to feel music, you can teach them to listen to it more fully? To hear the different layers, and how they relate...or to notice things like phrasing or things like staccato v. legato playing? And then to learn how those musical devices can contribute to different feelings? Furthermore, you can teach ways of moving in such a way as to capture or express those musical elements, yes?

While that's not musicality-as-feelings, it can function as something as a proxy. It provides the tools to express the emotion.

So...while the actual feeling can't be taught, you can reasonably teach something that will get you close and allow actual feelings to be expressed.

 

[JohnEm]

Steve - The 3 rhythms are referred to by various names; base, hi, and low are just one such grouping. Median, half-time, double-time is another grouping. An expeditious example would be a simple Fox rhythm. The low rhythm could be a rumba, and the hi could be a swing. In either case, this is the type of thing which I was referring to.

Well at least that is clearer now, but nevertheless still irrelevant
to social dance music which requires a clear and danceable pulse.

JohnEm - that you haven't studied music of sorts shows. I really don't mean this to be condescending. What I'm saying is that there is nothing choreographic about anything that I teach in a social AT situation, and it seems that you haven't learned much about the differences of dancing to beats, phrases, music, orchestration, etc. I'd be glad to try to help you with some of this off-thread if you really wish to know it. If not, I really would rather not get into a petty tete-a-tete about it.

You are being condescending and what you are talking about is
choreographic. Not in the performance dance way but fitting patterns
to phrases is planning of a kind and far too much thinking.

How can you know what I have learned - you just don't know.
I've taken part in musicality lessons, all of which have ended up in
learning patterns either to fit to music or to play with. Some have
started really well with different ideas to encourage partners to both
listen, identify and dance to the different parts. It's all just too much
conscious thinking. I dance the social dance of Buenos Aires, not one
favoured by academia, commercial performance and teaching.

This isn't necessary when you are dancing well together. The lead is interpreting the music, and the follow is interpreting the movements. Both 'hear' the music and both 'feel' the music but from different sources. The lead listens to the music; the lady listens to her lead. This isn't to say that she doesn't hear or feel the music -I just said that. But, then, this could be a whole different discussion different from the topic of music.

A partner recently described what she felt about "our" dance, a feeling
of being part of a whole, of floating and utterly knowing without question
or conscious thought of where to go.

That's very different to your follow interpreting the movements.
I know your dance - I've rejected it - you obviously don't know mine.

I also realize that persons learn different things in different ways. Neither may be right, both may be right, and either could be incorrect in a given situation. I am saying that you probably disagree with much of what I have posted. It doesn't mean that you are incorrect in your dance, and I know that I am not, so I hopee to really not go there.

This is the only part I agree with.

I just can't help thinking that you and many, many others, are missing
the very special nature of tango. And it is just not as complicated as
you and many, many others make it. But each to their own.

 

[opendoor]

..I personally like GA music a lot (probably more than anything else), but I find it rather presumptuous of jantango to decide for others what they like or find interesting..

Hi sixla, you know I´ve got a problem with GA music. So I am interested in what makes it that important for you. Before the GA hype such a highly developed and refined music (de Caro and the european influenced guardia nueva school of tango) already was played and makes it difficult to find GA music in generally that outstanding.

 

[Mladenac]

Hi sixla, you know I´ve got a problem with GA music. So I am interested in what makes it that important for you. Before the GA hype such a highly developed and refined music () already was played and makes it difficult to find GA music in generally that outstanding.

GA tango is outstanding for dancing, and I find it very listenable.
I don't know know to what are you referring in de Caro and de Caro and the european influenced guardia nueva school of tango.
Maybe your personal taste may lean towards sth newer that GA, but as you know that GA is mainly played at milongas through the world.

The thing is that some of us here dislike attitude what is proper and not.
What is accepted or not by some members.
It seems that they want to impose themselves as some authority in AT.

 

[Mladenac]

I personally like GA music a lot (probably more than anything else), but I find it rather presumptuous of jantango to decide for others what they like or find interesting.

I am completely on your side.

 

[dchester]

You are being condescending and what you are talking about is choreographic. Not in the performance dance way but fitting patterns to phrases is planning of a kind and far too much thinking.

It seems pretty clear to me that your usage of "choreographic" is different from how some us use that word.

It's not the first time (nor the last) that a term had more than one meaning. Maybe the word is used differently across the pond, than it is here in the US. It certainly would make things easier (at least for me), if you could learn to speak American.

 

[JohnEm]

It seems pretty clear to me that your usage of "choreographic" is different from how some us use that word.

It's not the first time (nor the last) that a term had more than one meaning. Maybe the word is used differently across the pond, than it is here in the US. It certainly would make things easier (at least for me), if you could learn to speak American.

It is why I qualified my use of the term. The Basic8 (8CB) is choreography.

There seems to be a belief that improvisation means not having a
pre-planned dance and that it can amount to choosing some pattern
or sequence to suit the music at the time. But in fact the dancers are
dancing sequences of little bits of choreography strung together differently.

And that is why I most often talk about the dance being improvised in the
moment step by step to the music & according to the floor - literally not
deciding beforehand. It requires a different mindset and certainly
a willingness to lose yourself, with your partner, in the dance.

 

[dchester]

There seems to be a belief that improvisation means not having a pre-planned dance and that it can amount to choosing some pattern or sequence to suit the music at the time.

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty strong believe around these parts.

But in fact the dancers are dancing sequences of little bits of choreography strung together differently.

How big can a "bit" be, before you would consider it choreography (2 steps, 3 steps, 4)? Would doing a single rock step sequence (Q - Q - S) in the middle of a dance be considered choreography by you? Would walking to the cross be choreography? What about ochos or a giro?

 

[JohnEm]

How big can a "bit" be, before you would consider it choreography (2 steps, 3 steps, 4)? Would doing a single rock step sequence (Q - Q - S) in the middle of a dance be considered choreography by you? Would walking to the cross be choreography? What about ochos or a giro?

There are no absolutes - how can I explain any better that it is as much
about the approach as it is about the execution. There are no thoughts
about step numbers or walking to the cross or a rock step series although
all those may or may not be part of the dance. Asking such questions
is the wrong mindset.

It is literally that a cross is done on the spur of the moment or cross feet
walking or whatever - there is nothing preplanned - the only consciousness
is in the moment.

The answer could be much more clear cut if your dance amounts to the
lady "owning" her own giro or if she overturns ochos, or if you have been
encouraged to allow the woman space and freedom to do so. Mine is none
of that. If you think a giro is eight beats, or some fixed number of beats
or has some quicks in it, and that once started it has to be completed,
it isn't that either.

My dance is a dance of two bodies dancing as one. Almost any movement
can be stopped, rebounded, repeated etc. Once dancing there is no start
and there is no conscious end until you stop. The dance is seamless. Can
you halt your partner at any moment to match the music or cope with
an unexpected intrusion to the ronda? Can you dance sideways?

Can you change travelling backward ochos to forward ones and maybe
back again? Can you change those into giros of either direction and return
to them etc., etc. Can you halt the cross, in the cross, rebound the cross,
halt and/or rebound the giro at virtually any point or walk out of it any
point whether into the cross feet or parallel. If you have been taught that
there are only certain limited ways to exit a giro you are locked into a
pattern and a timing. Such teachings and habits are difficult to break.

Can you dance a rotating dance such that you can dance on the spot
yet give the lady an interesting dance to the music? And move gently
forward when the ronda allows. That's what you see at Lo de Celia.
Never seen it taught yet abroad, even by Argentines although I did pick
up some technique clues from one but he never taught a continuously
rotating anti-clockwise close embrace giro.

I think I may have quoted this before. This same Argentine saw me jive
once (I've jived since at Lo de Celia in the rock break) and commented
how he was pleased to see me let go and just dance. One day, he said,
you will do that in tango. At the time, that seemed an impossibility but
now that is as good a summation as any other. I say tango is a relatively
simple dance unnecessarily made complicated by teachers who mainly
teach something else. I don't mean that it's easy and I have no answer
other than my own experience how anyone else gets there.

I'll leave you to tell me whether this is any help.

 

[AndaBien]

...
Can you change travelling backward ochos to forward ones and maybe back again? Can you change those into giros of either direction and return to them etc., etc. Can you halt the cross, in the cross, rebound the cross,
halt and/or rebound the giro at virtually any point or walk out of it any point whether into the cross feet or parallel. If you have been taught that there are only certain limited ways to exit a giro you are locked into a
pattern and a timing. Such teachings and habits are difficult to break.

Can you dance a rotating dance such that you can dance on the spot yet give the lady an interesting dance to the music? And move gently forward when the ronda allows. That's what you see at Lo de Celia. Never seen it taught yet abroad, even by Argentines although I did pick
up some technique clues from one but he never taught a continuously rotating anti-clockwise close embrace giro...

Yes. That's how I dance and it's what I teach. I do all those things AND I let my dance be informed by the music. I don't consider it too mental or at all problematic. I do consider it a degree of musicality.