Rhythm theory question

[curiousgeorge77]

Greetings! I have a question with a long set up.

I just put out a book proposing a "new" approach to rhythm theory. Simply stated, the idea is that instead of defining rhythm as the pattern of notes, it is more accurate and practical to define rhythm as the effect those notes have on the listener. Rhythm causes the brain to resonate (as in the EEGs, the brain waves synchronize to rhythm - meaning the activity of the brain synchronizes with rhythm)

This resonance, this synchrony is what drives the effect that rhythm has on us. It is a literal, physical effect that is by now quite well established in neuroscience. What we feel with our senses drives this resonance. The stronger the resonance to rhythm, the stronger the groove. Thus, oine way to learn to groove harder is to emphasize how we feel currently. (As predicting or remembering would interfere with current resonance). There are other implications, too, such as why you shouldn't use a metronome.

I say '"new" approach because this is really a very, very old approach, just with new scientific support. What this means is that people should learn to play by feel.

In my own experience, and in my experience teaching, these are things many musicians don't realize, and things that hold them back.

So far so good, but here's the problem. I recently connected with Efrain Toro, who has been saying/teaching the same thing for the last 20 years. He is extremely frustrated because while people like the ideas but they don't make any meaningful change in the way people teach. The people who would benefit most from a change in perspective just don't want to hear it.

Now here is my question. How do I reach people? The ideas are simple, the implications of how to approach performance profound, the history is long and the scientific evidence is strong. How do I go about getting these ideas put into the general conversation amongst musicians and music lovers?

thanks for your time!

 

[Ant Wellington]

It's really not that you have to reach people.

It's just that your concept has to resonate with people.

Like you said, it's not a new concept. Everyone who has learned how to play by ear are playing 'internalized' rhythms(playing by feel). It's just that most of them never 'take the time' to learn the 'formal' way of expressing it.

For a concept to be successful it has to be simple and truly make it easier to learn something that was considered hard. If the concept simply shows how smart a teacher is it won't 'catch on'. Clever is not the same as better as many teachers think. And when something is 'profound' it is always profoundly simple. There's no such thing as profoundly complex.

If you put your concept out there and it resonates with people it WILL catch on. That's one of the 'pluses' of the Internet. Good ideas, concepts, music, movies, etc,...get passed around on the Internet like wildfire.

peace,
anthony

 

[curiousgeorge77]

Thanks for your time to read and reply!

However, I don't think it is that simple.

First, the ideas do resonate with people - if they listen.

The ideas are obviously important to me - but I've found from discussing these ideas with others that they do also resonate with others. I've had a few people take the time to tell me how useful the ideas have been in terms of understanding rhythm. I've had quite a good keyboard player tell me that he still uses my drawings with his students. I've had top players in 4 genres say "Yep, that's right." I've had non-musicians tell me that the ideas resonate in their personal non-music experience.

But this all takes place in the context of casual conversation. They listen because it has naturally flowed from context. Spreading the ideas farther means talking out of place.

Second, it took me long enough to figure this stuff out. Had I intuited, as Efrain Toro says he did, I would honestly be a much better musician now. Instead, I spent years spinning my wheels. Victor Wooten credits much of what he knows from things his teachers have told him. I was never told this stuff, and it took me years to figure out. Some never do. Most simply think they don't have rhythm, or don't have talent for music and either quit or never even begin in the first place. I know dozens of parents who send their kids to music lessons as a proxy for themselves.

So I can't say I agree with your assessment. The ideas themselves are useful, easy to understand, and intuitively correct. One person talking on the internet doesn't help. People think they are crazy.

Especially if what you are saying contradicts what is taught in school (even if it compliments what people say they do). I had a music professor actually recoil when I said that music isn't only about the downbeat - that there is also a back beat and the back beat serves as the compliment to the down beat to create what we experience as 'swing'.

 

[two fingers]

If I may be so bold........

I think what Mr. Wellington was trying to say is this. You simply can not force a concept on people. You may think it is the greatest theory ever concocted. But, like he said, if it doesn't resonate with people, it won't "take off".

There are dozens of designs already patented for cars that would run longer, burn less (or no) fuel, and cost very little to operate. However, people just aren't "in the mood" for those kinds of cars right now. (See Chevy Volt.) So the designers of those cars can go on forums all day long and decry the naysayers until they are blue in the face. But that doesn't mean that people will suddenly see light bulbs and say "Oh, well why didn't you say so? I'll take one in red and one in blue."

These days in particular, people don't want ideas forced upon them. Most are way too prideful and closed-minded to come around to new ideas. And to completely accept your version of reality is (by proxy) to admit that their own has been false up until this point. Many are unwilling to do that (especially in higher education).

Add to this that many of us in the musician community simply don't take our instruments all that seriously. Sure, we may make a living playing. But we don't sit in the woods meditating on how to better communicate through music and rhythm. We take more of a "grip it and rip it" approach. We let the groove do what it does and then thank (insert your divine being here) that we were there to experience it and be a part of it. Many jazz and/or classical musicians/educators will take a bit more academic approach to it. But for those of us banging it out in clubs, theaters, festivals, arenas and corporate events, it is a subject that need not be breached. (And that accounts for probably 90% of the musician community that deals heavily in rhythm).

In my view, you are just way over analyzing the whole thing. But, like you said, it is a topic that you are very passionate about (and obviously very knowledgeable of). We all tend to over think things that we are really into. Best of luck with your project either way.

 

[Ant Wellington]

I'm simply saying that I've been teaching for over 20 years. I've had thousands of students. I have my own school with a curriculum that I developed(not 'borrowed' from other curriculums) . Victor Wooten and major music universities are using my curriculum for their courses.

AND,...

I don't advertise at all!

The curriculum speaks for itself. A curriculum will ALWAYS speak for itself. Word of mouth is powerful in the 'Internet' age.

I know what resonates with people. It's not based in speculation or non educators or non serious students thinks. It's based on what some of the best musicians and universities on the planet have said about curriculum.

I'm not asking people about my curriculum. I'm not asking whether it works or not. I know that it works. That's the reason why I have students from all over the world. If the curriculum is good people will gravitate to it and everyone else will pilfer from you. That's how it works. I'm not guessing about that. I'm not speculating.

When I saw Victor on Wednesday he told me that he used my curriculum to teach a course at Berklee last weekend. And I'm only siting Victor because you did. And by the way,...I know him pretty well. Those teachers that you mentioned,...I know who they are. They are his brothers. His brothers and his parents are the inky teachers Victor credits.

Like I said, you method will sell itself. If its good me works. You don't need to worry about that.

peace,
anthony

 

[curiousgeorge77]

You certainly may be so bold!


I understand you cannot force them. And I do understand what he is saying. Your retelling is also very eloquent, and thoughtful. And yes, it is at the heart of what I'm trying to ask.

Given that the idea is solid, and will resonate (You'll have to take my word for it - although if you'd like to see what I've come up with I'd be happy to send you the book, if you'll tell me your response to it, good bad and ugly)

...how do you attract attention to it? Yes, people will only resonate with it if it makes sense to them, but if you don't say it, it won't get said. If they don't see it, it won't get read.

...

As far as the car goes, it is a bit more complicated than that. Car making is not a free market, but that is another story. (See "who killed the electric car?")

...

As far as over thinking it, I don't think so any more than you could say that naming intervals is over thinking it. People are confused about whats going on with rhythm, and for good reason. A little thought about what is really going on can be quite useful.

 

[curiousgeorge77]

Like I said, you method will sell itself. If its good me works. You don't need to worry about that.
peace,
anthony

I hope its that easy. I do appreciate your time and thoughtfulness, and sharing your experience. I also deeply respect your opinion and experience. I guess I just don't have that kind of faith in inevitability. I also don't feel that I have the resources to wait, as I'm at a bit of a crossroads.

I brought up Victor just to make the point that many people never have the good fortune to have those teachers - whether they are family or not. Taking the time to show someone else the ropes is a very generous act. That it was his family in the book doesn't surprise me in the slightest. It kinda makes my point, actually.

Anyway, like I said, I do appreciate your time and input. It may not be the answer I want to hear but it is *your* answer.

 

[flojob]

First of all, I have no idea what you're taking about. Id like some examples because it sounds like a fun concept. but its hard to say. Mostly because I have no idea what your talking about.
But more to the point, it sounds to me that the problem is being able to communicate the value of the system to people. Also by extension, having those people believe in the value of the system to their cohorts. If they feel your system has benefit and is easier than the pervious way of doing it, why are they not endorsing to others besides yourself? If is not a flawed system then it must be a communication error. Perhaps approaching people who are already learned in an old way are not your target audience? Perhaps your way should be presented as compliment to existing practices? For me, the concept is promising, but the theory is vague. Of course not more can be expected on a message board. Your system will not become popular if you can not find a way to make the general population understand is value. And its realized value will depend on understanding the target audience. Music teachers and trained musicians may feel you are reinventing the wheel. Who is your system designed for? Most likely it is not for everybody. People who understand rhythm understand how to feel, manipulate it already. Id like some examples of this stuff though. Sounds cool as a concept.

 

[curiousgeorge77]

Thanks flojob!

I can boil the basics down to a paragraph,but the explanation is what the book is for. I put it up free here: http://bit.ly/19XmfNx

The concept is that rhythm causes the brain to resonate (our actual brain waves synchronize with the music), and it is this resonance that drives how rhythm makes us feel. You can create a theory of rhythm based on what are basically harmonics of the pulse.

More important is that the brain resonates because what we sense drives that resonance. Our senses change energy from outside of us into energy inside of us. Another word for this process is "feel." Feel is the word we use for what our senses tell us.

The "groove" of the song is the feeling of movement/drive towards movement created by music. The stronger the resonance to rhythm, the stronger the groove. Also, groove is much *less* subjective than is generally assumed. Still subjective, but there are some objective factors driving it. Like being in tune generally leads to better music.

What we feel drives resonance. The stronger the resonance, the stronger the rhythm affects us, the stronger the groove.

So feel is important for being able to tune in to, and connect with, rhythm. By putting our attention onto what we are feeling as we play, we strengthen the connection with whats happening now, and strengthen the resonance, strengthening the groove. However, if we are thinking about what is going to happen, the areas of the brain that would normally tune in to what is happening now get hijacked to run predictions about what is going to happen instead. We resonate with our predictions instead of whats happening around us - this is one of the reasons performance anxiety is detrimental and one reason why playing 'in your head' doesn't work. Instead, you should play with your whole body/being.

... well, that's part of it in a nutshell, without examples or ... anyway. Check out the book if you like.

 

[Ant Wellington]

I hope your idea takes off and blows up! It would be great for ME to say,...

"Oh yea, he ran that idea by me!"

I'll get a 'I knew him when' story out of the deal.

Good luck, bro!

blessings,
anthony

 

[Spin Doctor]

If I may interject from a layman's point of view. I think the reason Anthony's ideas have taken off is because they are generated from fundamentals and basic principles. They are as irrefutable as E=Mc(squared)

Any real learning and mastery of anything, be it basketball, music, chess or whatever comes from the ground up. Most people approach leaning sideways... meaning they are usually looking for the magic bullet that will make them learn something quickly. That doesn't exist. You may be able to get so far, but eventually the holes in the knowledge will show up.

Also, Anthony has applied his fundamental principles by teaching thousands of students. This alone exponentially increases the ideas exposure because they tell a friend and they tell a friend, and so on. Because the ideas are fundamentally sound, they cannot be disputed. So they tend to become the "definitive" method.

So I'm in agreement with flojob. I don't understand your concept, because to me, it doesn't come from an intuitive system of what rhythm is. You seem to be taking the concept of rhythm and applying it to psychology and brain function. Nobody really understands psychology and brain function...

Anthony takes the concept of rhythm and applies it to the ability of being able to count to 4, 8 or 16. We could do that since we were 3 years old. Ultimately this is what rhythm is. A subdivision of a pulse. Being able to manipulate the pulse within a variation of 16 subdivisions and understanding where to place these subdivisions within the framework of "time" is what mastering rhythm is about.

To paraphrase Forrest Gump... I'm not a smart man, but I know what rhythm is. By the way, I definitely don't have all this figured out, but I know how to get at it. Incremental learning, i.e. learning something piece by piece, brick by brick is the way to mastery. And generally it takes a long time to master anything, but to put that simply, it's a matter of how much time you spend on a particular concept. Digressing...

Anyway... If you're in a high level session and the BL says I need you to come in on the "a" of the 3rd beat, then he counts it off, you need to instantly know what that means. You don't have time for the "resonance" to take hold... Or you will be packing your stuff and headed out the door.

I'm not saying that your ideas are not valid. But they are not fundamental. They may be able to help you feel rhythm in a different way. But you probably have to know what rhythm is before you can apply your concepts. Being able to add, subtract, multiply and divide is fundamental. Differential Calculus is "simply" a different method of manipulating those fundamental principles.

So you, as an author, educator and advanced musician probably applies the fundamentals unconsciously. Which is as it should be. So then you say "I have this concept for rhythm" and try to apply it to people who don't have a fundamental understanding of rhythm. That whole thing is gonna miss the mark and just become sideways learning. Everything absolutely has to come from the ground up.

 

[Ant Wellington]

Yo Spin Doctor,

I don't know who you are but you make me sound smart!

-aw

 

[Spin Doctor]

Ahh, I'd say you are a smart dude! You have a lot of things figured out in ways most people never did. I'm realizing music isn't quite as mysterious as people try to make it. I think mainly it's a matter of having a passion for learning it, which makes a person take the time to figure it out. And you always told me, you can't go wrong with knowing the fundamentals. I'm still trying to make my way toward "unconscious knowing"!

But you know me pretty well, I'd say!

 

[Doley50]

Hello John,

I just finished reading " A Matter of Time." It was a good read, some of the theories were pretty interesting.
There is nothing that I disagree with, well maybe I found it hard to believe that " Start Me Up" was last on list of songs with groove! Lol!
The thing is, I believe most, if not all intermediate to advanced musicians are consciously or at least sub-consciously aware of rhythm on that level, and I believe you have to understand rhythm at the basic mathematical foundation first.
I would be interested in reading more, as I have been trying to lock on with my drummer using as few notes as possible , but I have been going back to the foundation (math) working with that 1 beat. I am sure I play ahead, behind or on, but I want it to be more conscious .
Thank you for the opportunity to read
"A Matter of Time" when I go for my next EEG I am going to ask if I can listen to some music for a second and see how I respond!! Seriously , I have Epilepsy and have to go a least once a year.

Take care,
John


One last question about entrainment ,
When I play the drums,( which is not very often) one of my biggest problems is getting different limbs to do different things, kick, snare, HH. One of them usually will pause or just flake out. Do you think this is related to entrainment?

 

[phillybass101]

When it comes to this stuff I'm like Forest Gump. But I do know in the music world at any level of musicianship, word of mouth is King.

 

[curiousgeorge77]

I'm not saying that your ideas are not valid. But they are not fundamental. They may be able to help you feel rhythm in a different way. But you probably have to know what rhythm is before you can apply your concepts.

What if rhythm is only accessible through feel? That's what the idea means. You have to directly experience it, through tuning in to what your body tells you. By doing this, you tune in to what is happening around you now and your brain and body fall into rhythm. That's the nutshell of what the science implies.

It isn't really all that different then what you are trying to say, either. That you must experience it for yourself is part of the whole point.

Also, Anthony has applied his fundamental principles by teaching thousands of students. This alone exponentially increases the ideas exposure because they tell a friend and they tell a friend, and so on. Because the ideas are fundamentally sound, they cannot be disputed. So they tend to become the "definitive" method.

Yeah - I get this. And thank both of you again for taking the time to say this. I've taken it to heart, and have been working with this in mind. I'm working on setting up courses (on the advice of the head of the Jazz Dept @PSU), and I'm getting some very encouraging interest from different Universities about it.

If I may interject from a layman's point of view. I think the reason Anthony's ideas have taken off is because they are generated from fundamentals and basic principles. They are as irrefutable as E=Mc(squared)

As are these. In fact, the Physics Department @ Portland State is willing to crosslist it as a Physics course so students can take it for physics credit. It is applied physics afterall. Just fwiw.

So I'm in agreement with flojob. I don't understand your concept, because to me, it doesn't come from an intuitive system of what rhythm is.

If I may beg a slight semantic difference... the language I'm using is what isn't intuitive for you. I'd bet dollars to donuts that if you connected up how I'm using the words with your own experience then you'd see the ideas are indeed intuitive. I can and do explain them to 5 year olds and they understand, as well as 50 year olds. As per above, rhythm is a feeling, what your body says, and through playing music and talking about the feelings it creates I can identify terms. Once a common language is established, then the ideas are as intuitive is 'red' or 'cold.

 

[curiousgeorge77]

Hello John,

I just finished reading " A Matter of Time." It was a good read, some of the theories were pretty interesting.
There is nothing that I disagree with, well maybe I found it hard to believe that " Start Me Up" was last on list of songs with groove! Lol!

You'll be happy to know that it wasn't - there are 2 more pages of results, so it scored in the top 33%. Personally I was also surprised it didn't score higher, but there's no arguing with Superstition being #1!

The thing is, I believe most, if not all intermediate to advanced musicians are consciously or at least sub-consciously aware of rhythm on that level, and I believe you have to understand rhythm at the basic mathematical foundation first.

Yes, I believe so as well. In fact, I've had many conversations with top musicians who told me I was on the right track with the explanation. Same goes for music theory. Most everyone thinks of notes in terms of chords, even if you don't know the names for them.

I don't, however, think you need to know math to access them - I think that there is a direct connection through feeling that is both more accurate and more valuable than the one available through math. However, the math is a very valuable tool, especially for creating new ideas and understanding ideas already out there.

I would be interested in reading more, as I have been trying to lock on with my drummer using as few notes as possible , but I have been going back to the foundation (math) working with that 1 beat. I am sure I play ahead, behind or on, but I want it to be more conscious .

I don't think it is number of notes you play, per se, that matters. In fact, it seems that more notes can help establish a *better* lock. However, the huge caveat here is where the notes are coming from. If you are just playing notes to play them, are bored with the notes you already have, are not physically comfortable with the notes you are trying to play, or are not tuned in physically to what is happening around you (i.e. thinking ahead to a lick you want to put in, head buried in the score, etc) then those notes get in the way. And in all but one (the physical comfort level) even simpler patterns would experience the same issues.

What I'd recommend is to have a pattern that is very comfortable to play,. and work on placing your attention instead of trimming down the notes. Some specific options are to tune in to the feel of the vibration of the bass strings, watching what the drummers hands, the feeling of gravity as it pushes you into the floor and the floor pushing back, and the fluidity of your movements. These are things that most top performers do without even realizing they are doing it.

Thank you for the opportunity to read
"A Matter of Time" when I go for my next EEG I am going to ask if I can listen to some music for a second and see how I respond!! Seriously , I have Epilepsy and have to go a least once a year.

Cool ! I'd love to hear about your experience!

One last question about entrainment ,
When I play the drums,( which is not very often) one of my biggest problems is getting different limbs to do different things, kick, snare, HH. One of them usually will pause or just flake out. Do you think this is related to entrainment?

Not entrainment per se. What I'd advise here is a change in approach. While it is often called independence, it is much more accurate to say coordination. Think of it like playing a chord on a guitar. Your fingers aren't independently doing different things but instead are creating a unified 'shape'. It is the same with the drums. Hitting the hihat and the bass drum at the same time is a 'shape' as is hitting the snare and the hi hat. Sometimes it is suggested to play each limb separately but I think this is most often more than a waste of time, it is counterproductive. Instead, take your time and go through the shapes in the same way that you would figure your way through a series of unfamiliar chords.

 

[Bassman197835]

If I weighed in I would have to say. And I mean absolutely!!! no disrespect! at all! But although I understand what! you're saying. I dont understand at all how you're saying to do it. I get the resonance thing but if you have to wait till the groove catches in your mind instead of counting.. It seems it would take much longer to get! the groove..it would cost me gigs personally.. I can listen to a measure or two and get the timing and run with it. I had never heard of Anthony before. My loss right!! Well after I did find this app and found Anthony and started watching his clinics. It was his simplistic method of counting that was able to send me in the right direction with my playing. I bet thousands would say the same. And this is after watching about 3 portions! of clinics. Anthony dont have to advertise because his method speaks volumes to both beginners and old hats. You watch a clinic by Anthony and it almost makes ya feel dumb that you werent able to discern that for yourself.. Just in my humble opinion.. It seems like you're trying to break away from the fundamentals of music which is always gonna require a good!! example and curriculum if you want people to catch on. And advertisement wont do it in my opinion. Anthony could have a commercial on TV ever 3 minutes but I doubt I'd ever pay it any attention. I would just think. Here's another! guy with another! method....It wasnt till I saw a lesson and saw that it was understandable! and ever so simplistic yet teaching me! That I said 'hey I got no room to argue with this cat! He is a great! teacher' to me its always weird to hear someone say "no clicker" even if its a drum machine. Well its still!! tech a metronome. The Kick is! a metronome. I still need to count the beat to understand the timing. Then the groove comes. I can! sit till I hear exactly what I wanna play. But the songs usually half over and the players are saying.. Uh.. Ya gonna play homie or just watch?? I would love! to see a breakdown of your method. But in my opinion... It sounds! like it would be hard to teach without the basic fundamental counting required to learn beat. Maybe a You Tube vid to give an explanation of how your! method will help me?? Honestly if I just picked up your book and even saw the words "no metronome" I'd prob put it back.. Just because I would think. Yea this may work for him! But how are you gonna teach a beginner to groove without first teaching him to count? Or teach an old hat to groove better! without improving his ability to count the beat and then add the notes to make a groove.

 

[Bassman197835]

To me though playing in my head does!! work. I feel I have become a better player in just a few weeks by using Anthony's past advice. "Dont worry about quick fingers. Worry about quick ears!" If my ear is fast then my ability to pick up the groove is gonna be faster. Ive been learning dif styles to improve my playing. Ive learned to play Country music this way. I had no idea as to how to play country! My mates kept saying "this aint James Brown homie!" So I started listening to Country Bass. Now I understand the basics behind playing Walking Bass. Not that Im a country Bassist! But I understood the idea by spending time humming Bass lines in my head. I cant say I agree with "playing in your head dont work" if you're able to pick out new beats and understand what the player is doing. Than you learned something you can apply to to "your tool box"

 

[Ant Wellington]

Yo Bassman,

I don't know who you are but I hope you are a music teacher. You're pretty good at it!

peace,
anthony