timing
C D Bates
thought on timing. When I juggle I tend to speed up/slow down almost at random
so what about using a metronome to keep time? If there's a good solid beat then
it should be possible to synch to that - it works for making music after all!
Has anyone tried it and if so what sorts of tempos work best?
Chris
AFC JLloyd
Bates) writes:
Surely at some point you've juggled to some music with a good beat? You
want music that is somewhat upbeat. A fast 3-ball pattern or a "normal"
5-ball pattern is going to be executed at about 4-5 throws a second, or
240-300 throws a minute. 240 beats per minute is pretty upbeat.
However, it's easy to adjust to your juggling to the tempo of almost any
music, as long as there is a discernable beat. If the beat is quite a bit
slower than 240 bpm, then you can synchronize every other throw to the
music.
Anyway, juggling to a metronome might be good practice, but I doubt it's
any better than juggling to music. I can juggle to music for hours, but I
think a metronome would drive me crazy after a couple minutes.
Jim Lloyd
afcj...@aol.com
Rob Stone
Jazz Feeding
^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Swapping the pole every beat, anything goes. A few drops, but only because
>they were really pushing themselves. Some passes were really high looping
>triples between two of the 'feedees'. I don't understand how this works,
>but it looks nice.
I do! Jason Perry showed me this at BJC7. You're a feeder and
doing 4 count whilst the pole does 2 count. Either feeder
(although the one on the left is easiest) throws a high triple
to the other feeder INSTEAD of passing to the pole. THe pole just
sort of waits around for a while and then carries on. It does
all work and you can try both feeders throwing triples (then
the pole can go get a cup of coffee:-) bit bloody hectic though.
Get Jason to show you I did it with him and Pat.
Rob.
.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+
Rob Stone. Dept of Psychology, University of York, York. YO1 5DD UK
Tel +44 904 433161 Fax +44 904 433181 r...@minster.york.ac.uk
<A href="http://www.york.ac.uk/~rfs1/">Rob's Vanity Page</A>
.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+
Brian Milner
>Brian Milner says
> Jazz Feeding
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Swapping the pole every beat, anything goes. A few drops, but only because
>>they were really pushing themselves. Some passes were really high looping
>>triples between two of the 'feedees'. I don't understand how this works,
>>but it looks nice.
>I do! Jason Perry showed me this at BJC7. You're a feeder and
>doing 4 count whilst the pole does 2 count. Either feeder
>(although the one on the left is easiest) throws a high triple
>to the other feeder INSTEAD of passing to the pole. THe pole just
>sort of waits around for a while and then carries on. It does
>all work and you can try both feeders throwing triples (then
>the pole can go get a cup of coffee:-) bit bloody hectic though.
>Get Jason to show you I did it with him and Pat.
Actually, the only reason I picked up on that is Jason, Big John, Ian and I
were trying that stuff at Hammersmith a couple weeks ago. Only Jase and John
were competent enough to throw them, but I began to see what's going on.
I love passing. There's this guy Lucian, whose just beginning to pass at
the Wealdstone workshop. We put in some time on Sunday afternoon,and he went
from 5 clubs to 6, to occasional doubles (both hands), to solids, to an
attempt at 7 clubs, all in the space of a couple of weeks. I think he's got
the passing bug. Give us 'til the end of the year, and we'll be doing 7
nicely.
--
====Brian Milner, The Computer Centre, Brunel University, West London, UK====
==== Any sufficiently advanced juggling is indistinguishable from magic =====
=========WWW Home page - http://http2.brunel.ac.uk:8080/~ccusbdm/ ===========
Francis Favorini
>I do! Jason Perry showed me this at BJC7. You're a feeder and
>doing 4 count whilst the pole does 2 count. Either feeder
>(although the one on the left is easiest) throws a high triple
>to the other feeder INSTEAD of passing to the pole. THe pole just
>sort of waits around for a while and then carries on. It does
>all work and you can try both feeders throwing triples (then
>the pole can go get a cup of coffee:-) bit bloody hectic though.
This doesn't seem quite right (I'm not saying you can't make it work this
way, though ;-) If the _feedee_ passes the triple instead of his normal
pass, it replaces three throws. Thus, it should go to his own left hand.
The club would ordinarily go to the feeder's left hand, then the feeder's
right hand, then the feedee's (the one who threw the triple) left hand.
You can do this trick just passing 4-count between two people. I.e., do
a self triple (instead of a single pass) from your right to your left.
Back to the feed. If feedee A throws the triple on the passing beat to
feedee B it would land at the same bat time, same left hand as feedee B's
self (thrown from right to left). Am I wrong?
I think what you need is a quad. Once the quad is thrown, the feeder is
left with only two clubs. The feeder then has two opportunities to steal
from feedee B: right after the quad is thrown or the time after that.
Just after the second opportunity is when the quad lands. I recommend
stealing on the first opportunity, because feedee B then has only two
clubs for the two beats before the quad lands, thus giving lots of time
to prepare to be hit in the head.
-Fran
J B Brolly
>In article <1994Aug4.1...@leeds.ac.uk>, r...@minster.york.ac.uk
>(Rob Stone) says:
>>Either feeder
>>(although the one on the left is easiest) throws a high triple
>>to the other feeder INSTEAD of passing to the pole.
>
I'm afraid I'm going to go along with Rob on this one. I haven't tried
this so I'm not sure which is the right one but anyway. Fran mentions
the trick where you throw a self triple instead of a pass. If you try
this in 2 count and the other person keeps passing, it will land at the
same time as the next pass. Therefore in a feed, if you do this to
yourself, it will land at the same time as the pass to the other person.
Following this logic, you could throw it to the other feedee if the post
doesn't pass for that count. Anyway, this seems to make sense. Why doesn't
someone give it a go and see if it works, it seems easier than trying to
work it out in your head.
Brendan.
Brendan Brolly,
Physicist and Juggler,
IRC in Polymer Science, Leeds.
Martin Frost
> In article <1994Aug4.1...@leeds.ac.uk>, r...@minster.york.ac.uk
> (Rob Stone) says:
> >I do! Jason Perry showed me this at BJC7. You're a feeder and
> >doing 4 count whilst the pole does 2 count. Either feeder
> >(although the one on the left is easiest) throws a high triple
> >to the other feeder INSTEAD of passing to the pole. THe pole just
> >sort of waits around for a while and then carries on. It does
> >all work and you can try both feeders throwing triples (then
> >the pole can go get a cup of coffee:-) bit bloody hectic though.
>
> This doesn't seem quite right (I'm not saying you can't make it work this
> way, though ;-) If the _feedee_ passes the triple instead of his normal
> pass, it replaces three throws. Thus, it should go to his own left hand.
> The club would ordinarily go to the feeder's left hand, then the feeder's
> right hand, then the feedee's (the one who threw the triple) left hand.
Actually, you may be thinking of where the actual triple club goes, but
that's irrelevant. It is the throws that get omitted that count. The
triple is thrown to the other feedee causing (1) the feeder not to do a
self and then (2) the feeder not to pass to the other feedee, which is
where the triple comes down at the time of the omitted pass from the
feeder. I described this throw (which I invented) in my Juggler's Workshop
article in the Spring 1994 Juggler's World. (I also showed it to various
people at Leeds last year, maybe Brendan was one of them). My Summer 1994
Juggler's Workshop article deals with "causal diagrams" which are good for
working out where such a triple or quad or whatever needs to be thrown.
> You can do this trick just passing 4-count between two people. I.e., do
> a self triple (instead of a single pass) from your right to your left.
Yes, but that's because the "feeder" is always passing to you, so of course
the triple has to come down to your left.
In fact, if both feedees throw this triple continuously, the feeder can
indeed leave (with two clubs) and the feedees will simply be doing a 7-club
4-count with triples -- a common pattern except usually done facing each
other.
> Back to the feed. If feedee A throws the triple on the passing beat to
> feedee B it would land at the same bat time, same left hand as feedee B's
> self (thrown from right to left). Am I wrong?
Yes, you're wrong alas -- it arrives at the time of the omitted pass from
the feeder. Hopefully omitted, at least.
Rob Stone
m...@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Martin Frost) writes:
> In article <31rtq5$p...@news.ycc.yale.edu> favo...@npl.med.yale.edu (Francis Favorini) writes:
>
> > In article <1994Aug4.1...@leeds.ac.uk>, r...@minster.york.ac.uk
> > (Rob Stone) says:
> > >I do! Jason Perry showed me this at BJC7. You're a feeder and
>> >
> > This doesn't seem quite right (I'm not saying you can't make it work this
> > way, though ;-) If the _feedee_ passes the triple instead of his normal
>
> I described this throw (which I invented) in my Juggler's Workshop
> article in the Spring 1994 Juggler's World. (I also showed it to various>
Bloody Hell, I was right ! Thats a turn up for the books!
Francis Favorini
>Actually, you may be thinking of where the actual triple club goes, but
>that's irrelevant. It is the throws that get omitted that count.
You're quite right, of course. This was my problem exactly. Friday was
a long day--spent two hours with my head inside a 1.5 Tesla magnet. ;-)
Anyhow, I'm looking forward to trying this trick at Burlington.
See you there,
Fran
Brian Milner
the other (you can do it in a 3 or 4 person feed). Instead of a pass to the
pole, you send the club to the other feedee.
He explained how it fits in with the beats - instead of going via the pole, it
goes straight to the other feedee missing out the pole, who's left without an
incoming club. I can't remember any more detail, sorry :-)