using a metronome

[ada]

Hi, a metronome question:

I understand the perils excessive use of a metronome, ie, it will result in mechanical playing.

But at what stage of learning a piece is it appropriate to use a metronome, and to what purpose?

To bring a piece up to speed? To play without faltering?

I am interested because this has never actually been explained to me.

Tks

[stevehopwood]

I mostly use a metronome as a 'reality check' in Baroque and Classical music - making sure that I really am playing at a consistent speed throughout.

Steve 

[princess_moose]

If I need to increase the speed of a piece, then I will play passages with a metronome and gradually increase it.

[ada]

I mostly use a metronome as a 'reality check' in Baroque and Classical music - making sure that I really am playing at a consistent speed throughout.

Steve

Ah yes interesting you should say that  I've been using it on Bach and found it very useful

[nick]

If I need to increase the speed of a piece, then I will play passages with a metronome and gradually increase it.

This is what I use it for, and since I am musical already, I never worry that my playing without it will be unmusical. You know exactly what speed you are playing from day to day without question and can move up very gradually. Great invention!

Nick

[bernhard]

For me, the most important use of metronome is to get a student (who cannot do it) to distinguish between rhythm and pulse. If the student has already a sense of pulse, it is unlikely that I will ever use a metronome.

Once the student understands and can follow the pulse, I will discontinue the metronome because the pulse it provides is regular, and true pulse is never regular (I have heard the proposition that pulse is ultimately defined by our heart beat – and I tend to agree with it -  so within a piece of music, just as one heart rate may fluctuate in response to the emotional pull of the piece, so should the pieces´s pulse).

Of secondary importance but nevertheless necessary if the student needs it, is to use the metronome to guarantee that the student is not rushing through the bits he knows and slowing down on the difficult parts – a frequent case with children. Usually they do it because they do not realize they are doing it, so the metronome brings their awareness to their unevenness. Again, once the student corrects the variation in tempo, I discontinue the metronome.

Finally, I use the metronome to sort out particularly difficult rhythms (lots of dotted notes, triplets, etc.)

I never use a metronome to speed up passages (by going up a notch every repeat) because it will create speed walls. It is one of these traditional pedagogical devices which is almost impossible to dislodge from teacher´s and student´s minds, and yet it will frustrate the very thing it is supposed to help.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[ada]

thanks again, great replies

[timothy42b]

It is fairly rare for many pianists to play with anybody else and have to adjust to their tempo and variation in tempo.

While it may not seem like it, adjusting to the metronome is one method of learning to adjust to something external.  This may later allow you to play with a group more easily.

One thing I use a metronome for is transition between sections.  I seem to be able to keep a steady tempo during part of a piece, but sometimes don't notice the pause before going on.  The metronome makes that painfully obvious.   

(or not, I've seen it work both ways!) 

[gorbee natcase]

I think its off putting and irratating to play with a metronome and you don't need it ticking away while you play (i'm talking in rhyme now )

Instead if I need it I will set it to the correct speed and listen to it on its own for a minute.
Then you can still hear it ticking away in your mind, and perhaps thats enough

[princess_moose]

It is annoying if you have it on for a while, but using it now and again is very beneficial .

[joyfulmusic]

Am currently using for "Blue Rhondo A La Turk" by Dave Brubeck.  Bear of piece to keep going.  I generally use it in pieces that there is a relentless need for rhythm to be "cooking".  I agree with whoever said they use with students to help them get the pulse.

[pianistimo]

i agree with bernhard about using the metronome for pulse.  i don't agree, however, that it is not a useful tool also for learning the fairly accurate ratings for each tempo marking.  for instance, as a teacher - you hardly need to turn it on after a while and can mark in the appropriate beat per quarter for students.

for myself - i use the flashing light more than the sounds (maybe light sound) - and it helps to get a general feel for the speed that i am starting with.  but, when u speed up - you suddenly have to change ur outlook.  u have to play lighter to be able to handle all the notes coming at u.  this is where the metronome tells u the truth.  can u play it a notch faster - or are u stymed at this speed.  this tells me if i should progress any more that day on a particular tempo - or stay at the current one.

i think, and maybe i'm wrong, bernhard means not to become overly dependent on the regularity of pulse of the metronome when a piece is getting ready to be performed.  u don't want to sound mechanical.  on the other hand - sometimes the general pulse can be really messed up for some students and they even need a reminder before performance not to go too slow or fast here or there.

with the brahms intermezzo op 118 #2 - i was really surprised my teacher didn't want so much rubato.  at first, i thought he was trying to take the 'love' out of the piece.  then, i realized that u can carry a line much farther by giving more illusions of rubato.  u don't have to make a dramatic rubato every time.  maybe at the end of a page or something (end of section) but not every line.  this type of pianist can be extremely irritating to listen to after a while because it's too romantic and can sound 'affected.'  on the other hand, we don't want someone tapping a pencil to our music.

[counterpoint]

Metronome:

they, who don't need it, use it way to excessively

they, who needed it badly, don't use it at all

[crazy for ivan moravec]

like bernard said.

our pulse is our metronome.

listen to the metronome and use it for your pulse training, but listen to your pulse and use it for your playing. (ooh, it rhymes)

[counterpoint]

I don't quite understand, what's the meaning of "pulse" here.
It seems weird to me playing all pieces in the tempo of someones heartbeat.
Pulse is something, which doesn't stand still ever, but music has tempo changes, ritardandi, out of time sections etc.
What "pulse" does Prokofieff's Sonata 7 last mouvement have, or Beethovens Diabelli-Variations?

I'm really confused...

[bernhard]

I don't quite understand, what's the meaning of "pulse" here.
It seems weird to me playing all pieces in the tempo of someones heartbeat.
Pulse is something, which doesn't stand still ever, but music has tempo changes, ritardandi, out of time sections etc.
What "pulse" does Prokofieff's Sonata 7 last mouvement have, or Beethovens Diabelli-Variations?

I'm really confused...

Pulse are the metric beats. In 4/4 the 4 beats per bar are the four pulses.

To quote Ralph Kirkpatrick:


What is meter as defined for our purposes?

A regular grouping of beats, or a regularly recurring rhythm pattern.

How can one differentiate meter from rhythm?

Meter in our terminology is essentially regular, rhythm irregular. Rhythm is derived from the imposition of irregularity on regularity.

By what is a beat influenced?

By its preparation and by its subdivisions.

How does a downbeat achieves significance?

According to the nature of its preparation by an upbeat.

What parts of the pulse can best be used to maintain or alter a tempo?

The offbeat parts, for example beats 2 and 4 in 4/4; 2 and 3 in ¾.

What is the expressive basis of rhythm?

Physical movement, whether pulse, breathing, verbal declamation, bodily movement, or a combination of these factors.

On what is all musical movement based?

On the relationship of impulse, activity and repose.


(Ralph Kirkpatrick – Preface to “Scarlatti –Sixty sonatas” – Schirmer)

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[counterpoint]

Very interesting elaboration, I'm really fascinated, Bernhard 

But my confusion even intensifies. 

Meter in our terminology is essentially regular, rhythm irregular.
....
What parts of the pulse can best be used to maintain or alter a tempo?
The offbeat parts, for example beats 2 and 4 in 4/4; 2 and 3 in ¾.

When pulse may be used to alter the tempo, how could he say, meter is essentally regular?

I don't think, there is something like a regular pulse at all.
There is a regular counting, but this doesn't mean, that the tempo of counting is fixed, it's only the numbers (the words) we count, that are fixed.

Perhaps you will climb the barricades, but I'm really convinced:

Every single note has its own tempo

There are even single notes, which will get slower or faster in itself.

Measure and counting are for differenciating the function of any note

Notes on beat 1 of the measure are like the tonica in the cadenza.

Upbeats, which can be  a single note, but also groups of notes, in some cases almost the whole measure, sometimes even 2 or more measures, are like the dominant in the cadenza.

I don't be convinced of this pulse-thing, so far as it stands for something other than counting, which never should be mechanical or unflexible.

[bernhard]

I will try to keep this very simple.

Consider a simple bar in 4/4 with 8 quavers in it (1/8 notes).

Ask a child to clap to it as you sing it. Some children will clap together with the notes (8 claps – one for each note). They are clapping the rhythm, not the pulse. A second group of children will clap on every other note (four claps – two notes per clap). These children are clapping the pulse (intuitively). The first group of children will need to be taught what the pulse is as opposed to the rhythm. That is when a metronome can be most useful, since a metronome gives you the pulse, and not the rhythm.

However a metronome gives a regular pulse, and most music will sound dead if played with a regular pulse.

To bring music to life it is necessary first to figure out what its pulse is like, where it accelerates, where it slows down, where it is regular. Then the rhythm will follow this pulse. Different interpretations are often simply different pulse patterns.

For ensemble pieces this matter is even more crucial, since everyone must follow the same pulse (or if you prefer, the same beat). One way to do that is – of course – to ensure a dead regular pulse. The other way is to rehearse a lot with the conductor providing the pulse pattern they have decided to apply.

Pulse is ultimately meter (the beats in a bar). The relative duration of notes, on the other hand is rhythm in its most basic definition (one can talk about all sorts of rhythms besides metric rhythm – the relative duration of notes – for instance, harmonic rhythm, melodic rhythm etc.).

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing.

In any case, the original question was on the use of the metronome, and my answer was: to learn about pulse as defined above.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[counterpoint]

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing.

That's quite possible 

But now it's much clearer for me, what you are talking about.
It's some very basic thing, that most people even don't have to think about, because they have the feeling for rhythm, which implies the feeling for the meter. Otherwise, there wouldn't exist something like rhythm at all.

I stressed my point of view so much, because some people are quite allergic to all tempo modifications, and these people do adore the metronome as their Credo for judging the correctness of rhythmical playing.  In contrast to this, my Credo is , that you must have the option to change the tempo in every bar, at any single note.
This does often conflict with the pulse. I'm sure, you understand, what I'm talking about.

Bernhard, this is a very interesting discussion, and I like you're way to clearly explain even complicated things very much. Thank you for this   

[bernhard]

It's some very basic thing, that most people even don't have to think about, because they have the feeling for rhythm, which implies the feeling for the meter. Otherwise, there wouldn't exist something like rhythm at all.

Yes, it is totally basic.

Yet, there are many people in the world that do not have a clue that underlying the most complex rhythm there is always a pulse. So in order to teach beginners who do not know how to recognise pulse the best alternative is the metronome (some teachers prefer clapping, but in my experience it will not work with a student who is not pulse conscious, s/he will just clap the rhythm instead of the pulse)

I stressed my point of view so much, because some people are quite allergic to all tempo modifications, and these people do adore the metronome as their Credo for judging the correctness of rhythmical playing.  In contrast to this, my Credo is , that you must have the option to change the tempo in every bar, at any single note.
This does often conflict with the pulse. I'm sure, you understand, what I'm talking about.

Exactly, and this is the reason why I said that as soon as the student understands what pulse is, the metronome should be discontinued, otherwise you will not be able to play to a flexible, inner pulse (or as you say, change the tempo at every bar).

Bernhard, this is a very interesting discussion, and I like you're way to clearly explain even complicated things very much. Thank you for this   

You are welcome.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[timothy42b]

It is possible to vary systematically about the pulse to create an effect.  Some jazz styles may lay behind the beat a little, or precede it a bit.  This can be very musical, and when this music is played straight, metronomically, much of the effect is lost.  This can happen in the recording studio during the editing process, a digital editing studio can line everything up on the beat and ruin it.  (though it is often necessary with singers just to get them close)

However it is also possible to get disconnected from the pulse, and for me that doesn't work even in solo literature.  Most of my background is playing in bands, orchestras, big bands, pit crews, etc., and that may lead to a bias, I guess.  But I feel physical discomfort when people vary the pulse to the point where they lose it. 

[goose]

A metronome is an essential tool for practising jazz.

A simple trick is to switch the beat around in your head so that instead of thinking of it as clicking on beats 1 and 3, you think of it as on 2 and 4. This approximates a drummer's regular hi-hat. You can practise your eighth note lines, or indeed any regular swinging piece in this way. At first, you may find yourself switching the beat back again (especially up tempo). If you do, then you'll really see why it's a good idea to use a metronome, since you want to be able to swing at any tempo and keep that 2 and 4 beat pulse.

It's important to use a regular steady click (and not, say, a beep-click-click-click sound). If you find it hard to hear the click as on 2 and 4, just start by reciting 'two' and 'four' with the the metronome. The fill in the other beats (TWO.........FOUR..........TWO...three...FOUR...one...TWO...three...FOUR) and you're there.

Thinking about it, practising with a metronome in this way might give some nice forward motion feeling to Bach Inventions or even something like Debussy's Dr Gradus.

Best,
Goose

[bella musica]

I usually use a metronome when first learning a piece to make sure that I learn the rhythms correctly.  After that I use it to help get my pieces up to speed (going up a notch at a time).  I have a tendency to rush sometimes so using the metronome has helped me in that respect.

Bernhard - I notice that you said the you don't use the metronome to get a piece up to speed because you tend to hit mental 'speed walls'.  I know exactly what you are talking about because this has happened to me before (usually one notch before my ideal speed...) so I'd be very interested in hearing how you get a piece up to speed.  Thanks in advance!