quote:

ORIGINAL: silddx

quote:

Of course it's not. But I wrote above 2 straight quarter notes can be a quarter note triplet. That means they both can be played at the same time. It would be 2:3 or 3:2 polyrhythm.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Don't worry, it's me, I'm a beginner. Are you able to explain it in simpler terms?

quote:

The beamed triplet gets three beats in the space of two.

quote:

ou can read it here

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyrhythm

quote:

quote:

Very often the rhythm executed first at 4:06 is how that 5 stroke rasgueado is executed if you slow the recording down

He executed it wrong. He did not play a triplet. Instead he did straight four notes. Thats why it sounds like 5 stroke ras to you. Rhythm is math. He should either correct the notation or play as it is.

Anyhow, any reason why 5 stroke ras is executed like the first rhythm? How about Paco? I always thought 5 strokes should be evenly spaced.

quote:

123 and 5 have the same note value. 4 has two times more note value than other notes because it took up the value of the omitted beat.

You can put rest after 4 but this guy played it without rest.
If there was a rest, all notes 12345 would have the same note value. A rest would represent the omitted beat or note between 4 and 5.

quote:

this thread is really hurting my head!

I checked the video at 4:06, and I slowed it down to half speed. I tapped on and off the beat (so twice the speed of the beat, double time). Seemed like in the first beat of the bar the 3 16th notes beamed together were a triplet on the beat, and the other 2 16th notes beamed together came in off the beat (my 2nd tap).

quote:

That is not a 50% difference it is literally a ratio between 16 and 24, or 2/3

quote:

My analysis is based on standard notation
When I analyze the subdivision of the beat, I always use my approach. Actually it's not my approach. I believe it's a generally accepted method for demonstrating the subdivision of the beat. Straightforward and easy.

quote:

Devilhand first claimed 5/4 for sliddx example (Romerito correctly identified as 4/4), demonstrating as I have been saying, a complete lack of understanding, and yet, he continues to send advice with sliddx demanding an explanation after arguing with him. Yes, it hurts anybody’s head. (Ps give it up sliddx!!!)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kitarist

quote:

Straightforward and easy.

quote:

Could apply to many people on here.

quote:

Simply put, this exercise is challenging for top level drummers (a thing to work on) is because people tend to rush the 24th notes and drag the 16ths, not feeling the correct slowdown. I would have to observe you doing it but seems like you are making the typical error, which is again, the point of the exercise.

quote:

Don't count...feel.
Set metronome to 2/4. Play a triplet on the strong beat and a duplet on the weak beat. ....

1----------2
Tri-pl-et---du-plet

quote:

ORIGINAL: kitarist

quote:

That is not a 50% difference it is literally a ratio between 16 and 24, or 2/3

It sure is: note 5 (or 4) is 50% longer than notes 1, 2, or 3. Or, mathematically, 1/16 is literally a 50% larger number than 1/24 (3/48 versus 2/48). You are just reading it in reverse, effectively saying that note 1 (or 2, or 3) is 2/3 of the length of note 5, which is also true, but what I said was that note 5 is 50% longer than note 1 (or 2, or 3). So, not sure what you point of correction is here "that is not a 50% difference".

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark indigo

quote:

Simply put, this exercise is challenging for top level drummers (a thing to work on) is because people tend to rush the 24th notes and drag the 16ths, not feeling the correct slowdown. I would have to observe you doing it but seems like you are making the typical error, which is again, the point of the exercise.

I did it wrong? I did exactly as Romerito described:

quote:

Don't count...feel.
Set metronome to 2/4. Play a triplet on the strong beat and a duplet on the weak beat. ....

1----------2
Tri-pl-et---du-plet

thread is hurting my head because of devilhand's bizarre and barely comprehensible, or completely comprehensible ramblings.

quote:

My analysis is based on standard notation.

quote:

According to standard notation what he played (probably a computer program played it) differs from the notation he showed in his youtube video.

quote:

OOOPS my bad. I read what you wrote earlier as IT WAS OFF BEAT, meaning your tap did not line up, but what you meant was the UP BEAT, between 1 and 2, basically without properly saying it, the example was executed correctly. Sorry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark indigo

quote:

OOOPS my bad. I read what you wrote earlier as IT WAS OFF BEAT, meaning your tap did not line up, but what you meant was the UP BEAT, between 1 and 2, basically without properly saying it, the example was executed correctly. Sorry.

phew! had me worried for a sec there!

quote:

I guess I mean the opposite, that a triplet 16th is not half the speed or duration of a normal 16th….that would be a single 32nd note.

quote:

Perhaps for future reference we use flamenco terms. “Off beat” is almost like “fuera Tiempo”, versus “up beat” or “counter time” we use “contra Tiempo”. “Up beat” can mean a lot of things of course, but if we attach that to a note value “Up beat 8th note” or “up beat 16ths” then it is crystal clear in context. I am sure I have made confusing statements too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kitarist

quote:

I guess I mean the opposite, that a triplet 16th is not half the speed or duration of a normal 16th….that would be a single 32nd note.

Yes of course; but what I said earlier was that a normal 16th is 50% larger [than a triplet 16th]. Both things are correct. A 2 is 2/3 of a 3; also a 3 is 50% more than a 2. You are replying as if I said 'a 2 is 50% less than (i.e. half the value of) a 3'.