I understand how to read rhythms and play them ...is that all that is necessary?

[mathandmusic]

I'm not a great sight reader and although I can read notes on sheet music, my fingers stumble when transferring notes to finger. However, I'm not sure where I am with regards to "understanding rhythm".

I understand note values and know how to count the notes from very difficult pieces (I'm currently working on Rach's Piano Sonata No. 2, despite being a beginner). I'm not trying to toot my own horn here but I wanted to know if being able to count the notes and understand the notes are all there is to know to rhythm. Of course, it does take me a while to play the rhythm correctly, especially if I'm trying to memorize a measure from a very difficult piece but I'm confident I can interpret the rhythm 99% accurately.

When I look to instructional videos and music theory book which includes sections on rhythm, they'll ALWAYS bore me with very basic stuff (explanation of time sigs., quarter notes, 8th,16th notes, measure, the concept of a beat, and etc...) which leads me to ask if I already know all there is to know about rhythm (or the basics of rhythm). What's the next step, moving forward?

Is it just practicing to be able to play any rhythm faster and more accurately?

[j_menz]

I wanted to know if being able to count the notes and understand the notes are all there is to know to rhythm.

No. Not even close.

Six quavers in 6/8 time has a different rhythm to six quavers in 3/4 time for example.

You need to understand note groupings, the feel of particular types of piece (a waltz, minuet and Mazurka are all 3/4 time, but have a completely different feel to them), where the accents fall and a whole lot of other stuff. Just counting out note values won't get you there.

Why are you doing the Rach Sonata now? It is not the best use of your time.  Lay some solid foundations so that when you are ready to play it you can do it justice.

[mathandmusic]

No. Not even close.

Six quavers in 6/8 time has a different rhythm to six quavers in 3/4 time for example.

You need to understand note groupings, the feel of particular types of piece (a waltz, minuet and Mazurka are all 3/4 time, but have a completely different feel to them), where the accents fall and a whole lot of other stuff. Just counting out note values won't get you there.

Why are you doing the Rach Sonata now? It is not the best use of your time.  Lay some solid foundations so that when you are ready to play it you can do it justice.

It's relieving to know that there's more to it than the note values and time sigs. I would really love to learn more but I'm not quite sure how. Like I said before, most books that I've looked at stress the basics -- note counting, time sigs, general rules for where accents lie in the beats of different musical genres, compound/simple time. No book that I've looked at really develops that. Do you have recommendations?

There's really no other reason for why I'm trying to play Rach's Sonata other than because it sounds good. Why does knowing note grouping for pieces that aren't written by Rach useful for "doing this piece [Rach sonata] justice"?

[j_menz]

It's relieving to know that there's more to it than the note values and time sigs. I would really love to learn more but I'm not quite sure how. Like I said before, most books that I've looked at stress the basics -- note counting, time sigs, general rules for where accents lie in the beats of different musical genres, compound/simple time. No book that I've looked at really develops that. Do you have recommendations?

There's no overnight answer. You need to play and listen to a range of pieces of various sorts, different genres, different styles. You need to develop a feel for what is going on and develop an ability to translate that into your playing. It takes time, and practice.

Rhythm is one of the essential elements of (most) music.  If you don't spend the time to develop your abilities - truly ingrain them - in this regard, nothing will come out right.

There's really no other reason for why I'm trying to play Rach's Sonata other than because it sounds good. Why does knowing note grouping for pieces that aren't written by Rach useful for "doing this piece [Rach sonata] justice"?

Rachmaninoff already assumes a high degree of rhythmic awareness (an a lot of other things as well). It is not a place to learn that awareness. You need to lay down solid rhythmic foundations before you will even be able to see what he is trying to achieve (not to mention the other technical requirements). And if you don't understand the question, you can't really answer it.

[ajspiano]

It's relieving to know that there's more to it than the note values and time sigs. I would really love to learn more but I'm not quite sure how. Like I said before, most books that I've looked at stress the basics -- note counting, time sigs, general rules for where accents lie in the beats of different musical genres, compound/simple time. No book that I've looked at really develops that. Do you have recommendations?

Take a look into the concept of musical form, starting early on in the development of piano literature during the baroque period. Dance movements are a good option, meaning minuets, bouree, allemande, gavotte, gigue etc.

These works have rhythmic features that make them what they are. As such you can learn to identify the type of dance by listening to the rhythm (among other elements) without needing to read a title.

You can then also imitate it, compose your own simple versions and this will develop your understanding, it allows you to listen to your idea of what a minuet is for example, and then compare that to examples by composers like bach, haydn, mozart etc. an in turn develop your your playing and sense of rhythm (and harmony, and form, and melody, and, and, and etc.)

Starting with the relatively simple minuet is a good beginning, and leads you to much more complex ideas. The scherzo developed out of the minuet for example, but chopin's are obviously a far cry from the pieces in bach's notebook for anna magdelena.