Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
I recently found this chick (ahem, woman - La Caro) looking for "how to play Casilda" - her playing is excellent, but imho has a less agressive and more of a classical feel - right down to facial expressions lol
Casilda is one of my favorite Paco pieces - here's La Caro playing it.
Here's another outstanding video you can use to learn this piece by José Carlos Gómez:
I recently discovered Jose looking to learn this piece - he has quite a flamenco resume, and an album with transcribed pieces. Guessing most of you guys know all about him, but for those who don't, here's his bio: Jose Carlos Gomez flamenco bio
I think Paco's Casilda is more melodic and easier on the ear than many other flamenco pieces. The falsettas sound more like melodic letras, and the estribillo is very catchy.
Do you have a favorite Tanguillos ?
How about llinks to others that teach to play a Tanguillos (that is, have clear shots of the fingers : )
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to joevidetto)
Mine is at 39:52...weird I never recorded at video of it before this. There are several people I don’t know personally that play it on youtube as well.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
Mine is at 39:52...weird I never recorded at video of it before this. There are several people I don’t know personally that play it on youtube as well.
At 48:45 you're saying something like free style form... with no rhythm. Del Monte also says similar thing at 27:15. But I like the way he explains at 27:27 saying there's no strict meter to them which is to me the correct way.
Flamencos seem to use it often though when they're talking about cantes libres. Maybe because compas is translated as rhythm. Strictly speaking music with no rhythm can't exist.
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
Flamencos seem to use it often though when they're talking about cantes libres. Maybe because compas is translated as rhythm. Strictly speaking music with no rhythm can't exist.
The cante Libre are all based on the fandango basic form. Fandango form has a clear rhythmic structure (compas or meter, including tempo). The rhythmic structure (meter), if imposed on the free form cantes implies time is extremely elastic to the point it even stops. These places in the music are considered “free” as they don’t adhere to any special tempo, yet the guitar and voice remain “together” somehow. So you must decide what you like better, no METER or no TEMPO...to me they are two sides of the same “no rhythm” coin.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
So you must decide what you like better, no METER or no TEMPO...to me they are two sides of the same “no rhythm” coin.
I don't know why you mention tempo here. Tempo is the speed of the beat. Nothing to do with the existence of rhythm.
Rhythm can exist all by itself without meter and beat. Sorry to say your "no rhythm" coin is so wrong and meaningless.
quote:
Fandango form has a clear rhythmic structure (compas or meter, including tempo). The rhythmic structure (meter)...
Meter is not a rhythmic structure. Meter organizes steady beats into a group of beats. Certain beats in a group are accented so that we can easily distinguish between groups of beats. As you know in western music the frist beat is accented.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
I don't know why you mention tempo here. Tempo is the speed of the beat. Nothing to do with the existence of rhythm.
Rhythm can exist all by itself without meter and beat. Sorry to say your "no rhythm" coin is so wrong and meaningless.
I guess if it helps you to reify these terms like that then sure...but they're all co-dependent surfaces (Justin London has a fun book about this). I don't see anything about what you're saying that would invalidate Ricardo's comment at all -- unless you're imposing a rigid separation between all three of them, in which case, I am not convinced that you enjoy listening to music.
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
ORIGINAL: devilhand
quote:
So you must decide what you like better, no METER or no TEMPO...to me they are two sides of the same “no rhythm” coin.
I don't know why you mention tempo here. Tempo is the speed of the beat. Nothing to do with the existence of rhythm.
Rhythm can exist all by itself without meter and beat. Sorry to say your "no rhythm" coin is so wrong and meaningless.
quote:
Fandango form has a clear rhythmic structure (compas or meter, including tempo). The rhythmic structure (meter)...
Meter is not a rhythmic structure. Meter organizes steady beats into a group of beats. Certain beats in a group are accented so that we can easily distinguish between groups of beats. As you know in western music the frist beat is accented.
WOW...you are so wrong it is not even funny. Rhythm dog for you again...start at the beginning this time.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to tf10music)
quote:
...but they're all co-dependent surfaces
I'd say they build on each other in the following sequence beat - meter - rhythm.
quote:
unless you're imposing a rigid separation between all three of them, in which case, I am not convinced that you enjoy listening to music.
For me there's a rigid seperation between enjoy listening to music and concentrating on the (complicated) rhythm to derive the underlying beats. The latter is so important for anyone who wants to make or understand music. I can't stress it enough.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
Mine is at 39:52...weird I never recorded at video of it before this. There are several people I don’t know personally that play it on youtube as well.
Since this video is unlisted, can I share it publically (like on Facebook) please?
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to rombsix)
quote:
ORIGINAL: rombsix
quote:
Mine is at 39:52...weird I never recorded at video of it before this. There are several people I don’t know personally that play it on youtube as well.
Since this video is unlisted, can I share it publically (like on Facebook) please?
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
quote:
I'd say they build on each other in the following sequence beat - meter - rhythm.
...but...
The sentence was my reaction to the word "co-dependent" only. The fact is rhythm in music we mostly know today has this structure.
quote:
quote:
Rhythm can exist all by itself without meter and beat.
Time to take your meds.
But the interesting thing is rhythm is not necessarily built on beat and meter. You wrote a lot about tonal and modal stuff on the foro. So you must know a-tonal music more than anyone here. Music can be a-metric or have a complex rhythm such that one can't extrapolate the beats from it. So there are no underlying beats. Rhythm is the least studied element in music. There are a lot to explore in that field. I'm not the expert. I just wanted to point out music can't exist without rhythm.
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
But the interesting thing is rhythm is not necessarily built on beat and meter.
False. I think you are confusing “rhythm” for “time”. Time moves forward even if rhythm stops or ceases to exist. A Melody can continue forward in time without rhythm. But I won’t dare to guess what the heck is going on in your noggin.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
False. I think you are confusing “rhythm” for “time”. Time moves forward even if rhythm stops or ceases to exist. A Melody can continue forward in time without rhythm. But I won’t dare to guess what the heck is going on in your noggin.
LoL. What the heck is going on there? Philosophy or physics? No need to involve time in here. I'd like to hear a melody without rhythm. Examples?
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
Poem or verse has rhythm. Doesn't matter whether it's sung with or without accompaniment.
This is categorically untrue. Poems can (but do not always) have meter. Poems do not have rhythm in and of themselves, though they can suggest rhythm with the use of metrical elements, syllabic emphasis, syllabic length, pause, enjambment, caesura, etc.
When a poem is read aloud, it can be delivered with a specific rhythm, but it does not HAVE that rhythm; another person could recite it completely differently. I suppose that you could argue that a poem would have rhythm any way it is recited, even if it is not interacting with a pulse and dividing time accordingly. Based on that definition, though, literally every interval between anything ever is part of a rhythmic relation (this is actually something that the philosopher Gilles Deleuze argues). But unless you are willing to make the claim that every possible phenomenon is in the midst of a rhythmic relation no matter how disjointed or discontinuous that relation might be, I don't think your understanding of rhythm stands the test of scrutiny.
And if that is what you are claiming about rhythm, then you are really making a more salient claim about the relation between bodies, temporality and spatiality, which is what Deleuze himself was doing. You're certainly not contributing anything that will help us understand the way a piece of music is working.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to tf10music)
quote:
Based on that definition, though, literally every interval between anything ever is part of a rhythmic relation (this is actually something that the philosopher Gilles Deleuze argues). But unless you are willing to make the claim that every possible phenomenon is in the midst of a rhythmic relation no matter how disjointed or discontinuous that relation might be, I don't think your understanding of rhythm stands the test of scrutiny.
I don't want to philosophize here. The fact is even when we talk we talk in simple rhythms. Otherwise human speech would sound robotic. The same goes for reading a poem and singing a song.
Time is the starting point for everything. That's why we take it for granted. It's just there.
RE: Tanguillos - one of my favorite ... (in reply to devilhand)
quote:
I don't want to philosophize here. The fact is even when we talk we talk in simple rhythms. Otherwise human speech would sound robotic. The same goes for reading a poem and singing a song.
You are arguing that anytime a sound divides time, it becomes rhythmic. You might be right, but that still doesn't tell us anything about how rhythm works in music.
Ricardo was trying to explain to you that a melody could theoretically continue in time as a drone, without a rhythmic sensibility that chops up the time of its duration. Rhythm needs to be interacting with other elements like beat and meter in music in order to be legible as such. We can make abstract arguments about the facticity of rhythm as a principle of phenomenal patterning all we want (which is what you're doing when you say that any and all speech must have a rhythm of sorts -- and I agree with you there, by the way!), but nothing that we say in that larger context has any necessary bearing on rhythm's legibility in music.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread