Polyrhythms: The 3 against 4: In Ten Steps
Matthew Faunce
Ten steps to learning the 3 against 4:
First, the mnemonic device:
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Eat your god damn pud-ding, Eat your god damn pud-ding
1 2 3 1 2 3
(In case that didn't come out right, line up the numbers to the words as
follows:
the 4 beat voice uses the syllables: Eat your damn ing
the 3 beat voice uses the syllables: Eat god pud.)
1. Listen to the polyrhythm done right, either by a computer, or a
talented friend, or by having two friends do it, or you and a friend
each taking one voice--make sure you switch who gets 3 and who
gets 4. Actually do all of the above. And more. Do a lot of listening.
2. By yourself, tap out "eat your god damn pudding", alternating hands,
and with the same tone. Do this in the rhythm you heard in step 1.
3. Tap out "eat your god damn pudding", alternating hands, but with two
differnent tones for each hand.
3.5. If you're having trouble, tap out four with one hand and only hit the
downbeat, i.e., one or "eat", with the other. Get the groove going like
this, then try to add the beats 2 and 3 to the triplet.
4. Switch which hand plays the 3 and 4. (you probably won't be able to
switch on the fly right away)
5. When you get a groove going keep doing it and change your listening
habits from hearing them as combined to isolating one or the other.
Counting to one or the other voice while you play both is a way to
insure you can isolate the voices in your mind.
5. Keep practicing until you can switch hands on the fly.
6. Don't just use your two hands. Learn to do this with one voice on
vocals and the other with a hand, with foot and vocals, with foot
and hand, and any other way you can think of. Get that polyrhythm
ingrained in your head as many ways as possible.
7. Apply it to your guitar. Start again by thinking "eat your god damn
pudding," playing the downbeat "eat" on BOTH the high e string and
g string. Get in a groove with just these two pitches, and start to
*hear* each voice seperately. Count with one voice, then the other.
If you're having trouble counting, skip it and go to no. 8, below.
8. Play by ear (or if you have to, write it out) the triplet g-a-g, and
sixteenths which are all on e. Remember to play the downbeats
together. Get a groove going, then count "1, 2, 3" with the g-a-g
triplet (as you're playing both rhythms). If you're having trouble
counting along, have someone else count out loud as you play both,
then join in with his counting.
Next change the bass to a triplet on a constant g and have the top voice
play e-f#-g-f# etc. Then count with this top voice.
Next, go back to the g-a-g bass, with the top voice on an e, and count
out 4 with the top voice. Next, go back to the e-f#-g-f#, and count
out 3 with the bass.
9. Change the bass to four sixteenths and the treble to a tripet. First with
each on only one pitch, i.e., the bass on a g and the treble on an e.
Next with the triplet (treble) playing e-f#-e, and the sixteenths on a
constant g.
Next with the treble constant on an e and the bass playing g-a-b-a. Count
first with the moving voice, then with the stagnant voice. If you're
writing this out, don't write it out as a combined subdivision, i.e., with
the triplet writen with eight notes with ties and dots etc.--I hate that!
Write it as it is, a triplet over a four sixteenths, and then four
sixteenths over a triplet. Counting out loud is the most critical part
of this exercise. It assures you that you know polyrhythms.
10. Play in the treble e-f#-g-f#, and in the bass g-a-g. Count with each.
Vary the pitches, e.g., play the bass as g-a-b. Continue to find new
variations.
I did not get all this in one day, take your time, spend a lot of time
tapping on things. Good luck.
-Matt Faunce
Author of 'Sight Reading for Guitar'
Covers all positions, all major keys
Please email for info.
gary
Matt
I don't believe this is correct.
On your 4/4 line, the beats are not spaced equally (if they fall on the
words
Eat your damn ing.)
There is no way that 3/4 and 4/4 can share any of these same syllables
here except for the first syllable "Eat" because the sentence has only 6
syllables,
which is not divisable by 4.
For an exercise like this there would have to be 12 syllables in the
sentence
and even then both the 3 and the 4 lines would only come together on the
1 or first beat of each measure.
Tap them out and you'll see what I mean. This 3 against 4 is hard to
count out.
Besides playing classical guitar I play hand drums. At first when I was
playing a 4/4 against another player playing 3/4 it was hard not to get
pulled into their
beat. Since the only count that they have in common is the 1, you must
feel it
but after hearing it enough you can automatically , say tap out the 3
with your foot and the 4 with your hand clapping.
I believe the example that John Sloan sited is also incorrect, in that
the phase
"John Bigalow" cannot be used for couning 2 against 3 - as it would need
6 syllables so that the word "John" would always fall on the 1.
Gary Pierazzi
> In article <bigmatt-ya0240800...@news.infomagic.com>,
> big...@infomagic.com (Matthew Faunce) wrote:
> >
> > Ten steps to learning the 3 against 4:
> >
> > First, the mnemonic device:
> >
> > 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
>
> > Eat your god damn pud-ding, Eat your god damn pud-ding
> > 1 2 3 1 2 3
>
> >
> > (In case that didn't come out right, line up the numbers to the words as
> > follows:
> > the 4 beat voice uses the syllables: Eat your damn ing
> > the 3 beat voice uses the syllables: Eat god pud.)
> >
> > 1. Listen to the polyrhythm done right, either by a computer, or a
>
> >snip<
>
> Excellent post, Matt. Sentences in which the rhythm
> of the words is the same as the rhythm of a particular
> ployrhythm are excellent mneumonic devices and are the easiest
> path to long-term learning and mastering of various polyrhythms
> (because all you have to remember is the sentence, as opposed to
> a complicated set of subdivisions which require deliberate counting
> like the one Tom mentioned for 4 against 3). For example,
> the name "John Bigalow" can be used for 2 against 3.
>
> I now leave the floor open for anyone wanting to mention
> some useful phrases representing other polyrhythms.
> 4 against 5; 5 against 6, etc.
>
> John Sloan
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Tim Berens
On Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:35:07 -0600, big...@infomagic.com (Matthew
Faunce) wrote:
>Ten steps to learning the 3 against 4:
>
>First, the mnemonic device:
>
> 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
>Eat your god damn pud-ding, Eat your god damn pud-ding
> 1 2 3 1 2 3
>
Am I the only one who imagines that Christopher Parkening would be
less than thrilled with this particular mnemonic (demonic?!?) device?
Tim
gary
John
Your explanation does not hold true if the 4 (4/4) beats are to be
equally
spaced while playing 3(3/4 ) beats equally spaced over it, at the same
time.
This is essential if two people are playing together ( Brazilian,Cuban
and African drum rhythmns). What I'm talking about here is an even 3/4
pulse and an even 4/4 pulse, played simultaneously, meeting on the first
beat of each measure.
Can you direct me to a piece of music written in 2 against 3 that
demonstrates
what you are talking about?
According to your explanation there would be 5 beats per measure so the
time signature would be 5/4 or 5/8.
Please clarify if you think we are not talking about the same thing
here.
Thanks
G Pierazzi
>
> > I believe the example that John Sloan sited is also incorrect, in that
> > the phase
> > "John Bigalow" cannot be used for couning 2 against 3 - as it would need
> > 6 syllables so that the word "John" would always fall on the 1.
>
> First, the 2 against three. Add up all the notes, 2+3 = 5,
> not six. Since two of the notes fall together on the first beat,
> "John", that leaves only three more for the three syllables in
> "Bigalow."
>
> Same with 4 against 3. (Eat your goddamned butter). That's a
> total of 7 notes, 2 of which are played together on the first
> beat, which leaves 5 more to be played on the 5 remaining syllables
> "your god-damned but-ter."
>
> John Sloan
big...@infomagic.com
(Tim Berens) wrote:
>
> (Matthew Faunce) wrote:
>
> >Ten steps to learning the 3 against 4:
> >
> >First, the mnemonic device:
> >
> > 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
> >Eat your god damn pud-ding, Eat your god damn pud-ding
> > 1 2 3 1 2 3
> >
>
> Am I the only one who imagines that Christopher Parkening would be
> less than thrilled with this particular mnemonic (demonic?!?) device?
>
> Tim
Uh.....well.....the order of sharps and order of flats are equally
distasteful: "Fools Can Get Diseased After Eating Betty", I forgot the
mnemonic devise for flats. The problem is is that these things are usually
learned in childhood or worse, adolescence. They're traditional. What can I
say?
Oh, I almost forgot. Here are some I thought up--or maybe just remembering
what was long buried deep in my subconcious--well after adolescence, for the
2 against 3, and 3 against 5:
Here's a 2 against 5:
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Stop that police car now. Stop that police car now.
1 2 1 2
In case that didn't line up right:
The five syllables are: Stop that pol car now
The two syllables are: Stop ice
Someone new at this will have to listen to it right to pronounce 'police' at
the right pace.
Here's a 3 against 5:
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Here comes the-Trane, El-la Fitz. Here comes the-Trane, El-la Fitz.
1 2 3 1 2 3
In case that didn't line up right:
The five syllables are: Here comes Trane El Fitz
The two syllables are: Here the la
John Sloan wrote:
> I now leave the floor open for anyone wanting to mention
> some useful phrases representing other polyrhythms.
> 4 against 5; 5 against 6, etc.
>
> John Sloan
5 against 6?!?!?! I remember hearing an interview, on your very own CBC, with
some contemporary musicians talking about compositions that use "rhythmic
fading" or something like that. The musicians start off together but one will
ever so slightly fade behind the other rhythmically, much like the windshield
wipers on a bus. I guess that would constitute the extreme
un-mnenomic-devicable and un-subdividable (practically) of all polyrhythms.
-Matt Faunce
art
John Sloan wrote:>
> This is one of my favorite pieces by Albeniz, BTW. You
> don't hear it as often as the ubquitous Leyenda, but it
> has a rhythmic charm that I think would appeal to many
> listeners. It starts out employing 3 against 4 for the
> first 3 pages, then makes a sudden change to 2 against 3
> (as well as a change of key); the rhthmic contrast between
> the two sections is striking, and Albeniz makes very good
> use of it in constructing a slightly more melodic B section,
> in contrast to the more energetic opening and closing.
>
> Some short sections of this piece even have something of
> a "ragtime" feel to them.
>
> John Sloan
John, could you please direct me to a recording or two of this piece?
I'm aware of Granados' Spanish Dances but not Albeniz'. I love Albeniz
and think that his contribution to classical guitar literature (even
though he wrote for pianoforte) is as important as any written. We must
also thank, of course, Tarrega and Llobet and any others who gave us
those great transcriptions. Anyway, I'm curious about polyrythms and
along with the insightful instructions from you and Matt and Gary etc.
there's is no better way to learn and understand than listening to the
music itself. Thanks, art
Philip Hemmo
Try this:
1 2 3 4
Eat the god-dammed spi-nich
1 2 3
Good Luck!
Philip Hemmo
Instructor of Guitar
University of Arizona
School of Music & Dance
Tucson, AZ 85721
(602) 626-2038
he...@azstarnet.com
http://www.azstarnet.com/~hemmo
Beginning Classroom Guitar: A Musician's Approach (Schirmer Books)
gary
If you've noticed, there have been a few posts about polymetric
rhythmns.
As someone who has written, read and played polymetric rhythmns for
several years with others on drums I find the examples in other posts
that are using words to count on incorrect(which I have explained in my
earlier posts).
For anyone who is interested in reading, playing and getting an
understanding of polymetric music for solo guitar I offer the following:
Get a piece of polymetric music that is written for solo guitar.
Guitarist/composer Dusan Bogdanovic has written some polymetric studies
(some moody, some fun) published by GSP
When you look at the written music it will help you to understand what
is happening in a polyrhythymic piece of music for solo guitar.
The first thing you'll notice is that the staff has two time signatures.
You may be asking yourself, how can this be, how is it written?
Dusan Bogdanovic has assigned one time signature to the middle B and all
the notes above it and assigned a different time signature to all the
notes below
th middle B (or center line of the staff)
What he is doing here basically dividing the guitar in half and playing
the first two strings in one time signature and strings 4 through 6 in
another time signature.
Again, these explanations are limited without the written music and the
playing.
Playing music like this is very exciting - but quite a mind bender at
first.
G. Pierazzi
art
> 5 against 6?!?!?! I remember hearing an interview, on your very own CBC, with
> some contemporary musicians talking about compositions that use "rhythmic
> fading" or something like that. The musicians start off together but one will
> ever so slightly fade behind the other rhythmically, much like the windshield
> wipers on a bus. I guess that would constitute the extreme
> un-mnenomic-devicable and un-subdividable (practically) of all polyrhythms.
>
> -Matt Faunce
I have a headache. :^) art
JonLor Pro
> jsl...@telusplanet.net
>Check it out and see if you still disagree that
>"John Bigelow" accurately represents 2 >against 3, and
>"pass the goddamned butter" accurately >represents
>3 against 4.
(and earlier submissions)
Imagine my astonishment that fame has finally landed where I least expected it
and just when I've stepped away for a few moments!--- If my Mom and Dad could
only see this....
May I take this as an invitation to "whey"in with my opinions re: "the
goddammed butter",etc.?
I have , over the past week or so kept intermittent track of postings and
have been aware of this topic to which I had not thought to contribute- but
apparently I have, though unwittingly. In spite of being so pressed into
service, I feel that mneumonic devices are useful to supplement the retention
of rhythms once learned and absorbed, but are not that useful for their
initial construction. I did not find the name so apparently exemplary of the 2
against 3 rhythm in your first such posting- perhaps something about your
chosen example distracted me- but saw how it could be made to conform to such
in your subsequent explication. This is illustrative of the requirement that a
particular rhythm must be heard and understood before a particular mneumonic
can be attached to it; once that is done, mneumonics can be useful indeed.
Hence your having been solicited to cite particular examples, to the sound of
which we are all familiar.
I also found "pass the goddammed butter" inadequate in itself to convey the
intended association; I can come up with a considerable variety of rhythms with
which to express that particular sentiment (including the intended one), not
all of which sound forced.
The gentleman who used a computer to construct an aural model to follow was
working towards the same end as is the goal of the "multiplicative" technique
(i,e. for 4 against 3, multiply to obtain 12 for units of division common to
both etc.), though I think a more profound understanding of a particular rhythm
can result from constructing it mathematically and then performing it- albeit
slowly and painfully at first- than by assigning the task to a computer. This
does not mean that this is ultimately the process by which polyrhythms are
performed; I don't believe performers calculate polyrhythms any more than
guitarists are conscious of careful placement of left hand fingers behind the
fret wire- something which beginners must do on a conscious level.
The point of the mathematical process is to suceed in constructing the proper
distribution in time of sound , so that the ultimate model is an aural one. The
rhythms do have to be heard in order to understand them. To this end I think it
is actually useful to render multiple juxtaposed rhythms into a single complex
rhythm in order to appreciate the "gestalt" of the whole- afterall, it will be
one hand playing the rhythm (except insofar as left hand slurs may be
employed)-- I also find the analogy to how we hear combined sounds compelling-
no matter how many pitches and timbres are combined, the result is a single
complex wave, and there is only one atmospheric pressure on our eardrums at any
one time. This is going some distance, I know, but the fact is that though
elements are discerned, the unified experience is the result of combining
rhythms, which is what frequencies are.
Similar to the mathematical technique is what my singing partner and I did
when working on the song "Nana (berceuse)", #5 of de Fallas "siete canciones".
In this song written in 2/4, the guitar part moves in steady 16ths (actually
8ths offset from each other) over which the voice realizes triplets which are
further divided sometimes into three, sometimes four, with grace notes included
throughout . This is not an extreme example of rhythmic difficulty, but the
notation did seem so carefully chosen to differentiate between motions that are
almost but not quite the same in different places that we found it useful to
rewrite the score in 12/8 in which two measures stood for one of the original-
8th notes became dotted halves!- and were thus able to make very careful
alignment of the vocal line to the accompaniment. The result was very
expressive, and actually felt more freeing than the "just sort of fit it in"
technique, which we had occasion to hear applied to the same piece by another
duo shortly after we had worked on it.
John Bigelow
JonLorPro@aol