Counting

[taikonoatama]

I'd like to talk about counting. As in 1, 2, 3, 4.

It's seemingly straight-forward on the surface, but it's one of those things you take for granted as being done a certain way and then you encounter someone whose understanding and usage of the concept are radically different from your own and this can create a whole lot of confusion, especially in the context of teaching/learning rhythms.

I'm discussing counting here in the context of Afro-Cuban folkloric music, not dealing with issues around 3-2 vs. 2-3 clave that you more commonly find in popular styles, though feel free to comment on that here as well.

Here's a basic example to illustrate the issue:

A teacher starts counting 1, 2, 3, 4 and on the next 1 plays a stroke.

I, the student, make several assumptions based on his counting, most of which turn out to be completely wrong. Here are my assumptions about counting:

1. Each of the 1, 2, 3, 4 numbers represents a (down)beat or pulse you might tap your foot to, and in Afro-Cuban 4/4 and 6/8 there are four beats/pulses per clave and per most 6/8 bells. (Ignore shorter bells, like the typical one in Makuta (x--x--x-), for now.)

2. The "1" is the ONE of the first downbeat of bell/clave as it's commonly started (in Cuba and elsewhere) for rumba clave (x--x---x--x-x---) or the most common 6/8 Afro-Cuban bell (x-x-xx-x-x-x) or whatever. Yes, some people start playing 6/8 bell on the pickup before the ONE, but the count would still start on the downbeat after that pickup.

3. The "1" for any part (in an ensemble) is common to all parts.

4. Counting does NOT mean you need to start playing on the ONE itself; the first stroke of a pattern can start anywhere in the count cycle.

And what I've experienced from the above:

1. I've had teachers who count 1, 2, 3, 4, and then start a stroke on the following "1" and I find out later in the lesson, after much confusion, that that first stroke is actually an upbeat and not a downbeat. It's as if 1, 2, 3, 4 is used like "On your mark, get set, go!" in races.

2. I've had teachers who start their count on what I'd call the 2, 3, or 4 of rumba clave or 6/8 bell.

3. I've had teachers who show one part in an ensemble with the "1" of their count starting on what I'd call the 3 of 6/8 bell, and then 10 minutes later show another part with their "1" on what I'd call the "1" of 6/8 bell. This is often done without bell being played over the counting, so it's often not something you realize till later when you and the other students and teacher try to fit all the pieces together and find things don't mesh correctly, the teacher burying his head in his hands in disbelief at such shocking ineptitude, oblivious to the root cause - the count.

4. This turns out to be the only assumption of mine that is consistently true; the first stroke starts where it starts and that could be anywhere in the count cycle.

I should point out that the issues I've had with counting styles are with people who are not from my culture in the USA. They happen to have been Cuban, and likely not educated at Escuela Nacional de Arte or some such institution teaching formalized methodologies, but it's obviously not a Cuban-specific issue.

So what's going on here?

Counting in music is a learned behavior, of course, and in many places in the world wholly unnecessary. If you grew up in an environment where playing music was a part of everyday life, learned by ear from childhood - purely an oral tradition - the count is (likely) irrelevant. These people are beyond the count. Beyond the ONE. They just play - space and time are their toys.

Alas, I am learning their tradition as someone who did not grow up with it, is not immersed in it 24/7, AND I am learning it as an adult.

Adult brains and children's brains are by necessity optimized for different kinds of learning and ways of thinking about things and what might have worked when I was 7 is just not realistic now in my 40's. As such, and for the way my brain works now, I need structure to have any hope of learning this stuff. I wish things were different but that's my reality. And, really, I don't need the 1, 2, 3, 4 count if there's clave or bell, as I can deduce it myself from that and put things in place in respect to one another in my mind, but if a teacher is counting and doing so (in a possibly inconsistent way) that's greatly at odds with my assumptions, we have a big issue.

Thoughts?

James

[davidpenalosa]

Hi James,
Many Cuban folklorists get the idea of “one” being the beginning of a cycle. What some don’t realize is that “one” is not the beginning of the pattern in question, but rather the beginning of the underlying beat scheme. Over the years, I’ve encountered some North American conga drummers who also had this misconception.

When some Cuban folklorists count-in parts when they teach, they are adapting a system they don’t fully understand. Since a lot of us DO understand how to count 1, 2, 3, 4 over clave or other parts of a rhythm, we should attempt to assist our Cuban teachers who use the system incorrectly. Maybe it would be best to pull them aside after class. Someone has to count the four beats under clave and then under the other parts in order to demonstrate where within clave the count should always begin. Fortunately, the first stroke of clave is “one”—beat 1. This fact would no doubt resonate with any Cuban folkloric drummer.

We don’t do them any favors by not helping them out. Some students may like the fact that their teacher is on “another plain” with their counting; it’s more exotic. But this confusion is just holding back both teacher and student. If a teacher can properly count over the various parts, students will grasp the inter-relationships of the parts much quicker. They will also be mired in much less confusion on their path of learning the music. Students will be even more satisfied.

If a teacher can could properly count over the various parts I imagine that he will make his own connections and to some extent at least, improve the organization of his lesson plans. In general, understanding the counting of music opens doors for musicians in this country. I wish all our folkloric masters the most success. They deserve it.
-David

[bongosnotbombs]

I take the same classes as James and have experienced the same counting thing. I personally adapted by not applying the abstract system of counting that we are
all familiar with and instead just try and focus on exactly what our instructor is counting and doing, because each time he counts he is counting different things.

I'm not going to say thats the best way or even prescribe it for others. It's not systematic for sure.

I think it's also worth pointing out that while James is very familiar and adept at the standard counting system, some students do not know or use the
system at all and learn the music more intuitively, perhaps more similarly to how our teacher learned.

[davidpenalosa]

Bongosnotbombs,
I think that counting all the pulses (subdivisions of the main beats)

1e+a2e+a3e+a4e+a
or
1+a2+a3+a4+a

...is not a comfortable practice for a lot of conga students. But, simply counting 1, 2, 3, 4 is not abstract. That is the main emphasis of most of the accompanying dance steps, so it is in fact, intuitive. It properly GROUNDS each individual part, as well as the overall rhythm.

I believe what we are talking about here is simply focusing on where a particular part enters as opposed to showing that entrance within the context of the beat cycle . The subject of counting could be completely avoided by having one person play clave (or other pertinent two-celled pattern) while the teacher came in with the part in question. That also serves the purpose of showing each part in its proper context.

I'm not suggesting that we should demand that folkloric teachers teach this way. I have always thought that it was my job to try to understand their way of thinking about the music. There's always something for me to learn there. But, if they have taken the step of adapting counting in their teaching, we can help them to understand what counting means in music.
-David

[bongosnotbombs]

Yeah Dave, I totally agree with you on all parts. Nearly every conga player knows about the "1",
they don't always know about eight notes and sixteenth notes.

I remember in Carlos Aldama's class clave was always counted as 1,2 1,2,3 and that's more or less all
the counting he does.

[taikonoatama]

Many Cuban folklorists get the idea of “one” being the beginning of a cycle. What some don’t realize is that “one” is not the beginning of the pattern in question, but rather the beginning of the underlying beat scheme.

Bingo. "underlying beat scheme" - that's a good way to put it.

We don’t do them any favors by not helping them out. Some students may like the fact that their teacher is on “another plain” with their counting; it’s more exotic. But this confusion is just holding back both teacher and student. If a teacher can properly count over the various parts, students will grasp the inter-relationships of the parts much quicker. They will also be mired in much less confusion on their path of learning the music. Students will be even more satisfied.

I completely agree from a certain angle - both teaching and learning would be easier if everyone were on the same page - but it's a little touchy to tell a teacher, especially a master, how to teach. I have brought up the issue in class to one teacher, but my Spanish (or his English) was not up to the challenge of getting my point across.

That being said, I do think that if it were explained in their own language by a friend or someone whose knowledge/perspective they respect, it could be a major "Aha!" moment for them that would clear up a lot confusion they might have about why their students have such difficulty with certain aspects of learning.

[taikonoatama]

I remember in Carlos Aldama's class clave was always counted as 1,2 1,2,3 and that's more or less all the counting he does.

Yeah, when I took his class I was like, "Woah, now that's an interesting way to count rumba clave!" But then, when you consider how he plays it, with that in-between 4 and 6 feel, with those last three notes closer to equidistant than not, it sorta makes sense (if you consider how it sounds, not how it's written). It's a cluster of 2 notes, then a cluster of 3.

[davidpenalosa]

It is indeed touchy and requires tactfulness. I think I would leave the “counting” of clave: 1,2 1,2,3 alone, but depending upon the person, there could definitely be an “aha!” moment with the counting of 1, 2, 3, 4.

The only way to nail it down with certainty is to introduce the four count in relation to clave. As long as the folklorist can superimpose clave over a rhythm, that count will be accurate.

It’s worth noting that after decades of controversy and confusion, African scholars (Africans) have codified a good deal of the universal rhythmic elements found south of the Sahara. Counting over the pattern we call “clave” for instance is now a simple matter. Master musicians from across the continent come to the University of Ghana to teach and learn from other masters. There is now a great awareness of the shared rhythmic structures and with that, a growing body of written music and shared terminology and concepts.

We may eventually see a similar thing happening here in the Western Hemisphere, at least informally.
-David

[davidpenalosa]

I remember in Carlos Aldama's class clave was always counted as 1,2 1,2,3 and that's more or less all the counting he does.

In Kwaku Ladzekpo's (CKs brother) first class at Sonoma State in 1977 he taught the five-stroke gahu bell part by counting "1, 2, 3, 4, 5."

1oo2oo3ooo4ooo5o gahu bell pattern (one stroke difference with son clave)

The count of course was nothing more than a way of naming each stroke, yet it's funny, I found that it helped me when he called out those numbers. I remember really struggling with the part, being confused as to which stroke was which and then when he started calling out "1, 2, 3, 4, 5" I locked into the pattern for the first time. Perhaps it would have worked just as well if he had called out "A B C D E".
-David

[pavloconga]

Just my take on this. Whenever I have been to Africa or Cuba to study with master players I have always tried to adapt myself to their way of teaching rather than ask them to adapt to me.

In my experience at least, it worked pretty well, as I could almost always relate a drum pattern to the clave pattern, or at least ask for the bell to be played in relation to the drum pattern.

In this way I didn't have to say, "Can you count 1 2 3 4?" etc but rather, "Can I hear how/where the pattern starts/fits with the clave?" Then I would write some simple notation of the drum part in relation to the clave for later reference.

If, in the absence of a clave there was any doubt whether something was a downbeat or an upbeat, I would ask, "Where are the dancers stepping with this pattern?" They always understood this request (seemed like I was 'speaking their language' you might say), and I could usually determine where the downbeat was being felt.

The '1 2 3 4 5' thing to describe a bell pattern sounds familiar. The first time I went to Ghana in '98, I spent some time with one of the members of the Pan African Orchestra, (his name was "Kwachi") who counted the 6/8 bell for Fumé Fumé as "1-2-3-45". In a funny sort of way it made sense. It was similar in principle to the little mnemonic songs they use over there to help one memorise a bell pattern, e.g. 3/2 bell for kpanlogo, "pinty pinty pa - pa pa" (with the notes of the bell falling on all the letter 'p' s).

cheers
Pavlo

[windhorse]

I've had my head turned around and upside down so many times,,, by this very thing. I've always learned something from it though, so it was always good.
I've found that Sandy wouldn't mind when I asked him, "Where does this fit with bell?".
Then, either I would play the bell as he played the part, or vice-versa.
He wouldn't do it very long, so it was still a challenge to get it understood completely, but those challenges are fun as it presents a kind of social darwinism to the study..

But, when you can go, "Oh, it's like this!" and he says, "YES!!! That's it!! Good!", then you're on top of the world!

My latest difficult timing pattern was just this weekend learning Tui Tui Tui.
The Okonkolo plays:

S---S---S---S---
with the left hand, and
--o---o-o-------
with the right hand,
making this pattern:

S-O-S-O-S/O---X---

So, the slap and tone hit simultaneously on the three,
And of course this is played with upbeat 6/8 bell.

They showed me the pattern, and I wrangled it in pretty quickly, but I had the hardest time thinking of the pattern on the right side of clave after being shown it from the 4.
4, 1, 2, 3, etc.

If you're shown with the count at the beginning, then you learn it straight away where the pattern is supposed to be. Then, the only thing holding you back is your own musicality, playing technique, etc.

[taikonoatama]

... or at least ask for the bell to be played in relation to the drum pattern.

Yeah, this is something we make an effort to do when things are unclear, but it's hard to keep on the teacher's case about it all the time.

[davidpenalosa]

Whenever we hear a discernable pattern, we automatically, instantly and unconsciously superimpose a beat scheme over it. We can’t help it. Our minds naturally seek focal points in any pattern. It’s how we make order of the world. The problem for many of us when we first start out learning a drum system, especially a complex system like the bata, is that the accents are most often offbeats rather than onbeats. In other words, we can easily hear the offbeats as beats. Once that happens, you are screwed, at least for awhile. I have found it very difficult to re-learn parts that I misinterpreted. I’m much better at it now, but early in my studies I was plagued by those parts I originally learned in an incorrect relation to the beat. Without warning my mind would default to the incorrect relationship. Scary!

The folkloric teacher who can play every part while tapping their foot and counting will be the one who gets the job at the prestigious (and well paying) university. Those that don’t make the effort will be more likely to be stuck teaching privately and at community centers for less $.

By the way fellow conga drummers, while we are on the subject of proper usage—the proper terms are ‘beat’ or ‘onbeat’ and ‘offbeat’, not ‘downbeat’ and ‘upbeat’. ‘Downbeat’ and ‘upbeat’ are terms that relate to measures only. The downbeat is the first beat of a measure or the first beat of an entire piece. So, there can’t be four downbeats per clave. Upbeats are essentially pickups leading into the next measure. So, there can’t be multiple upbeats per clave.
-David

[Joseph]

Hi David, been a while

.....while we are on the subject of proper usage—the proper terms are ‘beat’ or ‘onbeat’ and ‘offbeat’, not ‘downbeat’ and ‘upbeat’. ‘Downbeat’ and ‘upbeat’ are terms that relate to measures only. The downbeat is the first beat of a measure or the first beat of an entire piece. So, there can’t be four downbeats per clave. Upbeats are essentially pickups leading into the next measure. So, there can’t be multiple upbeats per clave.

I've been following the subject so far with interest, but am a bit confused by the above.
So you are saying that in a 4 beat measure, with 4 divisions of each beat there is:
one "Downbeat" (on the ONE), three "beats" (or "onbeats"),
All other divisions of the beat are considered "offbeats"

1e+a2e+a3e+a4e+a
In the counting example above, I always considered the "1,2,3,4" as '"downbeats": where your tapping foot is down.
And considered all the "+,+,+,+" as "upbeats": where your tapping foot is Up.
All the other "e,a, e,a e,a e,a " as "offbeats": foot neither up nor down.

1+a2+a3+a4+a
When I switch to triple pulse, I get
4 downbeats, the rest are offbeats, no upbeats.
Unless as you said, one of those offbeats is used as a pickup to the next measure.

I like the idea of relating downbeat and upbeat to the measure.

So the "proper usage" you described seems to be a more consistent method to describe beats in different meters.
Makes sense to me now.
...it's the little things
Thanks
~Joseph

[davidpenalosa]

Joseph,
Your observation about ‘up’ and ‘down’ in relation to beats makes sense. That’s how I used to think of it. I was at first very resistant to changing my terminology, but eventually I went with the accurate usage.

The term ‘downbeat’ is not usually helpful unless you are talking specifically about a particular chart. If you write clave in one measure, there’s only one downbeat per clave. If you write clave in two measures, there are two downbeats per clave. So, the term doesn’t necessarily even mean the first stroke of clave ("one").

The correct terminology is actually pretty easy. A stroke is either on the beat or off the beat (an offbeat).
-David