quote:

ORIGINAL: norumba2
interesting points on the subdivisions. ..because ive done so much odd meter stuff in my day, i find myself doing a lot of phrasing in 7 + 5 or 5 + 7 against two 6's...

quote:

ORIGINAL: payaso

The Foro had a very interesting 10-page thread on the compás of buleriás in 2004 (initially titled ‘Todd’s latest Bulería’) in which Estela ‘Zata’ insisted that the fundamental structure of Bulerías (and not just the Jerez style) was binary. As an example of her analysis (contested by other members) this is from one of her many posts:

“All bulerías is structured on twos. If you prefer not to consider it that way for whatever reason, the structure is still there, and there's never any need to beat your foot...plenty of older guitarists beat 1-2, 4-5...some beat 12...some let their feet waggle nervously. None of this changes the nature of bulerías in any way. It's either useful to you or not, but there is no way to separate one bulería from another in this regard.

I think the only way to see the inner structure is to listen to many recorded bulerías beating twos straight through, never lapsing into 3s, 6s, or 12s. It's very exciting when you see the elegant simplicity of it all.”

As a singer, she said, in effect, that this realisation had been an epiphany. She was then commissioned to write a long thesis on the subject for the Peña in Jerez. It hadn’t been published at the time, but was going to be. Did that ever happen, and has anybody read it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: payaso

I would hate to prompt Ricardo to injure himself. No head-banging needed.

Other people’s realities can be interesting even if weird, loopy or just wrong. Many of the world’s tragedies can be seen as resulting from people trying to force their realities on others. When somebody has such fiercely-held convictions, however strange or mistaken, it can be worthwhile (entertaining, even) trying to understand how they acquired them. More so if they seem to have some relevant experience to base them on.