I can't count

[scandenavius]

I can only count very straightfoward stuff, whenever things get just a little bit wacky i just give up trying to count it out and listen to the piece to determine how the rythym should be played. An example of an easy rythymn that i couldn't read would be Rachmaninoff's prelude in b minor. What techniques can i use to help me get a good sense of time and rythymn???

[jgallag]

First thing, metronome.

Second, I'm assuming this prelude is Op. 32 No. 10. The score is a little complex. What you need to do is take a pencil and draw a vertical line on each beat in the score. This will show you visually where the beat is, as the score (at least my copy) is confusing.

[Bob]

More practice.  Some things are like learning new words -- not so much a huge technique, but adding one new rhythm and then another and another.

And there's learning how to tackle rhythm issues.  Things like lines jgallag mentioned.

Learning how to count a line in words.  But when I play more than one line, I don't think in words.  I just play.  If you get better at reading one line, two lines isn't as tricky. 

Subdivide.  Usually beats are divided into groups of 2s and 3s.  In half, in quarters, or in three pieces or six. 

[ac26xp]

What you need to do is take a pencil and draw a vertical line on each beat in the score.

I like this suggestion... ;o)

[faulty_damper]

The longest way is to count and you are taking the longest route.  Stop counting!

[Petter]

1 2 4 5 7 6 it's not that hard. 

[jgallag]

1 2 4 5 7 6 it's not that hard. 

Sarcasm doesn't help anyone. 

[scandenavius]

yeah geez, I thought there was no such thing as a stupid question. I'm just asking a question that I think will help make me a better student.

[iroveashe]

Sarcasm doesn't help anyone. 

Doesn't hurt either.

[jgallag]

Doesn't hurt either.

It wastes time and space (two quite valuable resources, as far as I'm concerned), and it can (and did, apparently) hurt the original poster's feelings.

[faulty_damper]

Rhythm is one of the simplest things to learn because there aren't many combination's; there are only so many ways a beat can be divided.  The problem you are mistaking is that you can't count.  A more accurate description is that you can't read.

If you are reading a rhythm and don't know how a sounds, then subdividing a beat is necessary.  In other words, counting is like learning a new word by sounding it out phonetically.  But it isn't necessary to do this because there are only so many ways a beat can be divided and all of which is easy to memorize.

Instead, what you do is memorize the sound and match it with its corresponding notation.  It is like "whole word" learning.  ("Whole word", BTW, was a disaster in English eduction but wonders in music learning because there are only a few ways to divide the beat.)

The problem with learning how to count is that you learn to read individual notes within a beat and then apply it beat after beat.  This is incredibly slow and a step that can be skipped altogether.  Just as you read words and not the letters in words, you should be reading rhythm and not the notes in a beat.

Another problem that most people have and fail to realize is that a note value longer than one beat (e.g. half, whole, dotted quarter notes) are really an extension; it still has a pulse.  So for example, think of a half note as two quarter notes tied together; the second quarter isn't performed but held.

[faulty_damper]

1 2 4 5 7 6 it's not that hard. 

Petter is right, the issue isn't counting, is it?

[jgallag]

Petter is right, the issue isn't counting, is it?

You're right, the issue is not counting, although you both should know that "counting" in music takes on additional meaning than just 1..2..3..4. However, since you haven't looked at the score in question, you couldn't give a useful piece of advice. Obviously scandenavius can subdivide because he/she said in the original post that straightforward rhythms were no problem. The piece in question is made up of straightforward rhythms, but their arrangement is a little unclear. There are confusing ties in this piece and while the editor has shown the beat it is not immediately apparent to students with less experience. Sometimes, especially in slow pieces, such as this one, the score will not immediately make sense and you have to mark it up a little to show where the beat is, or how the two hands fit together. Beats are not equal in spacial width on this score, and, at least in my edition (Dover), some of the notes aren't correctly lined up. This adds to confusion.

Please, read the original post and take the time to look up the score in question. How can you even hope to be relevant without doing so? If you have another term for such a problem that you think would make it more clear to people who are trying to help, then gently correct the original poster's choice of words. Sarcasm is not helpful. There is a disturbing thing to me on these boards that when a student asks a question, it is treated just like any other topic. People feel free to post their jokes and sarcasms, in short, the first thing that pops into their heads. Because it is an internet board, it seems people think the teacher-student relationship is lifted. No, it is not.

BTW, scandenavius, there is nothing wrong with listening to a piece first, but try and listen for more than just the rhythm. Later you can compare the performance with the score and learn interesting things about interpretation. Make sure that you do listen to more than one recording. It's not necessary in the beginning, but when you've learned the piece you should get a variety of interpretations on it to expand your ideas on how to treat the music.

[scandenavius]

Rhythm is one of the simplest things to learn because there aren't many combination's; there are only so many ways a beat can be divided.  The problem you are mistaking is that you can't count.  A more accurate description is that you can't read.

If you are reading a rhythm and don't know how a sounds, then subdividing a beat is necessary.  In other words, counting is like learning a new word by sounding it out phonetically.  But it isn't necessary to do this because there are only so many ways a beat can be divided and all of which is easy to memorize.

Instead, what you do is memorize the sound and match it with its corresponding notation.  It is like "whole word" learning.  ("Whole word", BTW, was a disaster in English eduction but wonders in music learning because there are only a few ways to divide the beat.)

The problem with learning how to count is that you learn to read individual notes within a beat and then apply it beat after beat.  This is incredibly slow and a step that can be skipped altogether.  Just as you read words and not the letters in words, you should be reading rhythm and not the notes in a beat.

Another problem that most people have and fail to realize is that a note value longer than one beat (e.g. half, whole, dotted quarter notes) are really an extension; it still has a pulse.  So for example, think of a half note as two quarter notes tied together; the second quarter isn't performed but held.

I think there are more than a few rythymn combinations... i was in jazzband last year, and that was the stuff that kept me up at night wondering about my abilities as a musician. The Rachmaninoff prelude in b minor was a bad example of my difficulties with rythymn, a much better example of a difficult rythymn would be the soli section of spain by chick corea. Rythymn and counting might not seem to be very important to someone who only plays their instrument solo, but when you're in a band of musicians this is the sort of thing that becomes very, very important. What i'm taling about when i say counting is the ability to see a complicated jazz rythymn and be able to play it the first time i see it. Have a look at the B section of Spain, those are the types of rythymns i want to be able to count when i see them.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/13409507/Chick-Corea-Spain   (here is a link to the sheet music for spain if anyone's interested)

[jgallag]

I think there are more than a few rythymn combinations... i was in jazzband last year, and that was the stuff that kept me up at night wondering about my abilities as a musician. The Rachmaninoff prelude in b minor was a bad example of my difficulties with rythymn, a much better example of a difficult rythymn would be the soli section of spain by chick corea. Rythymn and counting might not seem to be very important to someone who only plays their instrument solo, but when you're in a band of musicians this is the sort of thing that becomes very, very important. What i'm taling about when i say counting is the ability to see a complicated jazz rythymn and be able to play it the first time i see it. Have a look at the B section of Spain, those are the types of rythymns i want to be able to count when i see them.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/13409507/Chick-Corea-Spain   (here is a link to the sheet music for spain if anyone's interested)

While you could sight-read them, as someone who's played in the school's jazz band for eight years I'd say the big thing to do on the first day is get the feel of it. No one expects you to play all the right notes at sight, and that's not the point of jazz anyways. The point of jazz is feeling it, to give the audience something they can groove to. Let the brass and saxes have their solos, you are part of the rhythm section. If it's anything like my school, your job is to keep the idiot drummer from completely screwing things up by giving him a nice bassline punctuated with the occasional chord. On the first reading, the bass is all-important.

[jgallag]

Apologies, I clicked something on my computer and it posted halfway through.

To continue: I'm assuming that you're referring to the first 11 measures as the "soli" section, since the rest of it is quite standard for a latin piece. It's just another section where you should know, right at the start of rehearsal, your pencil should be out and marking where each beat begins.

Finally, there is really one way to get better at sight-reading: sight-reading. The nice thing about jazz, though, is they give you those nifty little chord symbols that you can read to comp and improvise. Jazz is supposed to be fun. I hope your conductor provides an atmosphere where the first rehearsal can be full of laughs when the band falls apart, and you don't feel pressured to provide perfection at sight.

[scandenavius]

Hey guys, thanks for the tips! Just like to point out that I'm not taking jazz band next year for a variety of reasons:

-It starts an hour before the normal schedule
-junior year (4 AP classes, oh boy!)
-Sports (really going to concentrate on swimming this fall)

Between all of this stuff i'll probably only get practice piano infequently. I am not looking goward to this.

[jgallag]

Hey guys, thanks for the tips! Just like to point out that I'm not taking jazz band next year for a variety of reasons:

-It starts an hour before the normal schedule
-junior year (4 AP classes, oh boy!)
-Sports (really going to concentrate on swimming this fall)

Between all of this stuff i'll probably only get practice piano infequently. I am not looking goward to this.

Sorry to revive a dying topic, but I was on vacation...

scandenavius, I must ask you to reconsider. I don't see any reason above not to do jazz band, unless you are absolutely sure that swimming is more important in your life. Senior year I did jazz band, select chorus, AP Physics, Psychology, English Lit, and U.S. Government (passed all, 3, 3, 4, 5), auditioned for college at three schools (and made all of them), ran cross country, bowled in a league, sang in the church choir, and graduated as salutatorian of my class. This isn't to brag, it's to say that practice time is there if you make it. Also, how much practice time do you need for jazz really? I don't believe I practiced my jazz music really until I had a solo. The Chick Corea piece you posted was sight-readable.

All I guess I'm saying is, it's better to fail than to not try at all. If you try it, and you find you simply can't handle it, fine. But if you don't try at all, you'll have missed an opportunity. I firmly believe we can't truly know what our limits are until we've pushed ourselves over them. This is not to say that we should overwork all the time, but don't say you can't if you don't truly know. Please reconsider.

[scandenavius]

The problem with jazz band is the time it's at (6:45 in the morning) not extra work. The whole waking up really early last year totally messed up my routine; i was always too tired to function properly, and often found myself taking naps in the afternoon to catch up for lost time. Another problem i had with the jazz band was the the pressure of performances. It's one thing when you're up on a stage by yourself performing music that you have carefully read and practiced, but an entirely different thing to be up there with a whole group of peers, and have a bad runthrough during a solo. I like jazz but i don't love it.

By the way i currently play in a jam band, so i think that makes up for not playing in the jazz band.

What i've learned is that the only way to learn how to count is to count! Constantly. This doesn't mean exclusively when i'm working on piano pieces, this includes times when i'm at work (lifeguarding), mowing lawns, and probably most helpfull, while listening to music. I can allready tell my sense of rythymn has improved... GREAT SUCCESS!!!!   

[faulty_damper]

I think there are more than a few rythymn combinations... i was in jazzband last year, and that was the stuff that kept me up at night wondering about my abilities as a musician. The Rachmaninoff prelude in b minor was a bad example of my difficulties with rythymn, a much better example of a difficult rythymn would be the soli section of spain by chick corea. Rythymn and counting might not seem to be very important to someone who only plays their instrument solo, but when you're in a band of musicians this is the sort of thing that becomes very, very important. What i'm taling about when i say counting is the ability to see a complicated jazz rythymn and be able to play it the first time i see it. Have a look at the B section of Spain, those are the types of rythymns i want to be able to count when i see them.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/13409507/Chick-Corea-Spain   (here is a link to the sheet music for spain if anyone's interested)

Here's the problem you have with the B section of Spain: You are not playing the rests.  You are thinking you aren't supposed to play when there is a rest but in fact you really should be.

When you see an 8th and then a Rest, take that to mean you play for half a beat and not play for half a beat.  When you see a Rest followed by an 8th, take that to mean not play for half and play for the last half.  In other words, group the note and rest into one unit.  This simplifies it.

[mcdiddy1]

Try finding working on piece that you can handle rhythmical and understand.

Everyone can count but the problem is counting while playing music! Be for you play a note on the piano be sure you can count through the entire pieces by taking into account the time signature and any difficult rhythm. If a rhythm comes that you are unsure how to count it , say the rhythm on ta and see if you can fit it on a steady beat while clapping. Take as much time as you need to and make sure you get it down because it will save you time when you have a reference for what the rhythm should sound like to go one. It is better than jumping in to piece and having to idea what your aiming for.
Get a metronome!!!! It saves time and energy by clapping for you and all so you can develop the ability to play on a steady beat and it can help with your SUBDIVISIONS.

Most people who have problem with rhythm is because they don't understand PULSE!!!!! When you count quarter-notes....u have to feel the eight-notes, the sixteenth notes in side the grouping. You can play simple songs like mary had  a little lamb against a 16 note subdivision  to play quarter-notes even.

[braintist]

Go by feeling
Its fine to cheat a little so long as it is not prominent