This compilation of posts on Cha cha rhythm has been collected by Mark Balzer m-balzer@uiuc.edu From: ajh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Hu) Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: How can you tell... Date: 18 Sep 92 01:53:32 GMT neeman@csrd.uiuc.edu (Henry J. Neeman) writes: >What makes a particular song appropriate for ... >Cha Cha: 4/4 time. Emphasis on 1 and 3, I think. The key here, besides tempo and time signature, is the cha-cha-cha on the 4-and-1 of every measure. Listen for it. If it's not there, it's not really a cha-cha (although it may work anyway). This is also why correct rhythm for cha-cha breaks on 2, so you can do your cha-cha-cha'ing when the music does. From: dusenbury@galaxy.decnet.lockheed.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: What dance to what music...(more) Date: 18 Sep 92 21:43:08 GMT MY disclaimer: These are my own opinions based on 8 years dancing in amateur and Pro/Am, collecting and playing music for studio dances, parties, and practices in the Bay Area for 7 years, being married to a competing dance professional, and basically loving music and dancing thereunto. I have actually been collecting music for LOTS of years, now I have an excuse. >What makes a particular song appropriate I have been writing an "article" on this subject for several years now (which was the impetus for the Domestic Music Lists on the net from time to time). I will try to be brief, but this is a BIG subject (my "article" is now over 100 pages, with no end in sight). Alan covered a lot of my points, so I'll just put my additional comments in. I've deleted a lot of Henry's posting for brevity. >Cha Cha: 4/4 time. Emphasis on 1 and 3, I think. As Alan states, the hallmark of a cha cha is the "and" between the 4 and 1 (the "cha cha cha"). Also, since there is a break on the 2, that beat in the music should be crisp, often accented more than the 1. A lot of pop music these days has "ands" between the 2 and 3 also (and often a lot of other places). Historical note that shows my age...in the '50s some pop cha cha was danced 1 2 3 and 4 with the cha cha cha on 3 AND 4 (listen to Sam Cooke's cha cha lesson in "She Didn't Know How To Do The Cha Cha Cha"). From: hage@netcom.com (Carl Hage) Subject: Re: What dance to what music...(more) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 20:16:40 GMT esper@cs35b.cs.umn.edu (Dave Sherohman) writes: : dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: : >Compare this with cha-cha, where there is an accepted right way (side : >step on the strong beat) and a wrong though popular way (rock step on the : >weak beat). : : Am I missing something here, or is that just two ways of saying the same : thing? (i.e., if you go to the side on the strong beat, you'll be doing the : break on the weak beat) Rather than thinking of strong beats vs. weak, the change from fast to slow is where the "accent" occurs. The look and feel of a dance can be improved by emphasizing the change in speed, wheras a poor style will look "mushy" where the speed between slow and quick is evened out. In a technique lecture at BYU this summer, Ron Montez made some comments which struck me as the best explanation of the "feel" of american Cha-Cha (and I think also applies to International). He basically said that the 1-2-3 (the side and break) in Cha-Cha was like a Rumba, done with slow movement and Cuban motion in the hips. The 4-& was a fast action which does not have all the Rumba movement. As Alan and Jay mentioned, Cha-Cha has the 4& and sometimes 2& beats added to the usual 4, and so you hear a strong & 1, where the 1 is a change from fast to slow, and is accented. Breaking on 1 would have the feel strong- strong-weak-weak-weak, or slow-slow-quick-quick-quick. However, to get the Rumba action in the break, you want slow-slow-slow-quick-quick matching the 1-2-3-4-& and the transition from quick to slow accents the 1 beat at the start of a measure. When you do the break, you want to stop your motion before the break typically by taking a slightly larger step on the side, forward, or back on count 1. Almost all rank beginners in Cha-Cha have a similar style which makes the dance more difficult. Notice they move fast into the break, taking a large step in the break and trying to stop and reverse direction with the opposite foot flying up high in the air and the body leaning forward or back. With the moderatly fast rhythm of Cha-Cha, they don't have enough time to change directions and build up speed in the opposite direction. Then the cha-cha-cha steps are rushed to catch up and high speed is built up going into the next break step. When going forward and backward, most of the motion occurs in the break steps and sometimes the cha-cha-cha is done in place. A good style has the opposite, with little body movement and small steps in the breaks, allowing plenty of time for a nice Rumba action during the break. By the way. I have heard some music that has a 1-2-3-&-4 ryhthm with 1 and 2 accented rather than the usual 1-2-3-4-& with 1 accented or 1-2-&-3-4-& with 1 and 3 accented. This would be labelled Cha-Cha, but this is not the authentic Latin ryhthm which is one of the latter. I suppose it would be best to break on 1 with the 1-2-3-&-4 rhythm, although I admit that I dance these wrong by breaking on 2 out of habit. From: hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) Subject: Cha cha music issues Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 03:38:14 GMT We've all been told that the reason cha cha (both American and international styles) break on count 2 is that the "cha cha cha" corresponds to a percussion beat on "4 & 1." It's useful to know that this last fact is true of the traditional cha cha rhythm -- the mambo rhythm slowed down -- but not necessarily of pop rhythms. The traditional cha cha rhythm -- listen to Hansel Martinez's cover of "Love Potion #9" for an excellent example -- has the strongest accent on count 1, with light accents on counts 2 and 3 and a medium, often higher pitched accent on counts 4 &: ONE two three Four And | ONE two three Four And | _ _ | _ _ 4 | ^ | | | ^ | | / | | | | * * | | | | * * 4 | * * * | * * * | BOOM! bah bah Bim Bim BOOM! bah bah Bim Bim Looking at this diagram, you can see why one would want to dance the "cha cha cha" on 4 & 1, because it goes with the 4 & so well. So why is it that beginners generally want to break on count 1 instead of on count 2? The reason is that the break step is a logical -- if unsubtle -- way to express the strongest accent of the rhythm, which is count 1. Since that's the strongest musical accent, that's where you want to start dancing, right? Of course, that way you're doing the "cha cha cha" on 3 & 4, missing the 4 & accent entirely. So, cha cha dancers decided to find different ways to emphasize count 1, since to hit 4 & properly they had to break on count 2. If you dance American style cha cha, you learn that on count 1 you're supposed to stop. Why? The stillness on count 1 creates a contrast to the movement on the other counts. It's not that there's more time between counts 1 and 2 than between 2 and 3 -- there isn't -- it's just that, by being still, you're doing something visibly (and feelably, if that's a word, to your partner) different from the rest of the measure. By creating a contrast through sudden stillness, you emphasize the musical accent of count 1 with your relative body movement. Similarly, in international style, count 1 is often used to create distance between the partners. For example, as the woman moves out to fan position, she does a locking cha cha on 4 & (LR) while the man does a Cuban break diagonally toward her on the same counts (RL). Thus, on 4 & -- particularly on the & count -- the partners are quite close. Then, on count 1, she steps farther back than on 4 & (try this by yourself to see it) propelling from her right to her left foot, though her right foot doesn't really move; he steps his right foot to the right side, so that his body goes away from her, though his left foot hasn't really moved. Thus, the partners are very close on the & count after 4, then suddenly relatively far away on count 1. By creating a contrast through sudden distance, you emphasize the musical accent of count 1 with your relative position. How does this relate to pop music? Well, in pop music the rhythm is usually quite different: One and TWO and Three and FOUR and | | | 4 | _ _ ^_ _ _ _ ^_ _ | / | | | | | | | | | | 4 | * * * * * * * * | | Bom bah BOOM! bah Bom bah BOOM! bah So, if you want to dance cha cha to the standard pop rhythm, you have to change how you move your body, because you need to accent counts 2 and 4 instead of count 1. Of course you can deemphasize count 1 by (in American style) eliminating the stillness or (in international style) stepping smaller and less strongly. And count 2 is easy to emphasize: just put more *oomph* into your break step. What's less clear is how to emphasize count 4 more than count 1. What solutions have y'all found to this problem? One thing that occurs to me is that we could address the problem of dancing cha cha to pop music by putting the break step back on count 1: One and TWO and Three and FOUR and | | | 4 | _ _ ^_ _ _ _ ^_ _ | / | | | | | | | | | | 4 | * * * * * * * * | | Bom bah BOOM! bah Bom bah BOOM! bah Step STEP! cha cha CHA! Of course, now we have the problem that we need to find something interesting to do with the step after the break, which is usually such a dull step that it doesn't even have a special name (8-). But the primary problem with this approach is that a lot of people would then say you were dancing wrong -- even though you'd be dancing with the music and could even explain how. Henry Neeman hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu From: way@aludra.usc.edu Henry Neeman writes an awesome analysis on the counts of cha cha music. And I do believe that is is right in just about every respect. One thing I see missing though, is one other aspect on the distance apart of the dancers on the 4 & 1. I could be wrong, but here's something which makes your cha cha a little more technical, and thus explains this point little better.... It's no doubt that the 4 & 1 counts define a cha cha, but what needs to be added to make it a technically correct 4 & 1 is to add the "Focus" of the dancers on each step, the only thing that Henry didn't discuss (though he is still very correct). Even though there are moves contrary to the rules (like the fan), the focus of the 4 & 1 is generally toward each other than away. In a fan, of course, the two are facing perpendicular directions, but to break it down lets think of a New Yorker. The 2 is obviously to the audience, as well as a technically perfect 3. [The 3 should still be forward and only a weight weight change. DON'T rush your focus back and thus rush the 4.] The 4 then should be directly facing your partner, and thus the & 1 as well. And don't the turn out for the 2 until just before the 2. Let yourself settle, but until that settle, keep your focus flat toward your partner. Even though this is very trite, let me demonstrate with a little more complicated step. Add a 3 count spin to the New Yorker, spinning on the 4 & 1. Now, I have already said something wrong: YOU SPIN ON THE & ONLY!!! NOT THE 4& 1!!! What I mean is this. Don't roll your body through the 4 & 1. Step the 4 like normal, Squeeze to spin on the &, and then end on the 1 focused on your partner. Even though that is very tough for beginners to do, practice it. A spin should always only take the length of the count minus the settles. Thus FAST!!! You can obviously see this in any pro demonstration, in that they use each accent of the music, now combining notes, and thus loosing focus. Let's now take what I have said and add it to the Fan with Cuban Break. Henry is exactly right for the 4 &, but what about the 1. Is the focus away or toward the partner. It can be seen a couple of ways, and I don't wanna cliam either is God's word, because there are many examples both ways. Yes you could claim that the two are furthest apart, and often the man uses this count to play up to the audience, so it wouldn't necessarily be a direct focus to the female. However, it is also the section of the move where the tension between the man and woman are at the greatest. The "explosion" on the 1 can often work to bring the focus back to the couple though they aren't "looking" at each other. I.e. if while doing the Cuban Break, instead of her just locking back, what if you began a Hip Twist (on the 2) and then lead her into a 3 count spin into the fan. For the female, there is a long stretch (2 3 4 &) where her focus is mainly "crowd pleasing" except for the ocasional spot (like on the spin). Thus the female would use the 1 even more to regain the focus she had "lost" (you should never truly lose any focus). But yes, Henry is very correct in all he says. Oh and he also asks what can be done to emphasize the 4 more than the 1. Besides dancing the cha on the 1 rather than the 2. But of course that would be awkward 'cuz you would have a strong accent (2) on a change of weight. So I know everyone will HATE my answer, but here it is. DON'T DANCE CHA TO MUSIC WHICH DOESN'T HAVE THE SIGNATURE OF CHA, NAMELY THE 4 & 1!!!!! But that's just my opinion. I think I covered everything I wanted to say, but probably not. Again I applaud Henry for his effort. Joe Way way@aludra.usc.edu From: Carl Hage <hage@netcom.com> Subject: Re: Hustle Timing Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 06:23:04 GMT hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) writes: : Carl Hage <hage@netcom.com> says: : : > I am really angry with the "teachers" : >who changed the rhythm for cha-cha and salsa/mambo. : : I'm confused about what you're referring to. Do you mean the migration of the : break step from count 1 to count 2? Why does that bother you? No! I mean the migration from 2 to 1! Mambo (a.k.a. Salsa) broke on 2 before cha-cha existed, and cha-cha originally broke on 2 when it was developed in the 1950's. It remains exclusively on 2 in competitive and more advanced dancing. The migration of the break step from count 1 to count 2 occurs when students who were taught on 1 take more advanced lessons. It bothers me because it creates confusion, leads to common styling errors, and (in cha-cha) breaking on 1 becomes a barrier for better styling and patterns as the timing ends up changing from SSSQQ to SSQQQ. Plus, of course, cha-cha music has the beats 2&3 4&1,..., not 1&2 3&4,... From: Josiah Way <way@chaph.usc.edu> Subject: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 20:22:34 GMT In a recent post, Carl Hage wrote about how "angry" he is that the Cha is often danced on the one, and that he is "angry" at the teachers are to blame. Furthermore, he says that "it remains exclusively on 2 in competitive and more advanced dancing." Now, I am not to sure what is to be "angry" about. Sure, I dance Cha on the 2, but I don't at all think that dancing Cha on the 2 is limited to competition. In fact, unless I'm dancing with someone who has recently begun does she get the urge to break on the 1, but good leading can take care of that. What I have noticed is that commonly reletively new dancers know to dance on the 2, but they just can't find the two. In other words, they will count "2 3 Cha Cha Cha", just calling the 1 a "2". That's not bad dancing, but rather simply inexperience. Time and familiarity will take care of that. Joe Way way@aludra.usc.edu From: doppert@libra.loral.com (John Doppert) Subject: cha-cha starts on 2 or 1. Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 21:02:07 GMT Joe Way writes: >Now, I am not to sure what is to be "angry" about. Sure, I dance Cha on the >2, but I don't at all think that dancing Cha on the 2 is limited to >competition. In fact, unless I'm dancing with someone who has recently begun >does she get the urge to break on the 1, but good leading can take care of >that. What I have noticed is that commonly reletively new dancers know to >dance on the 2, but they just can't find the two. In other words, they will >count "2 3 Cha Cha Cha", just calling the 1 a "2". That's not bad dancing, >but rather simply inexperience. Time and familiarity will take care of that. I don't know about dancing rule books, laws or syllabuses, but my interpretation is generally that those that start on 2 are in the international arena and those that start on 1 are in the American circle. It is not whether it is an advanced dancer or not but rather the dancing style. A beginner who only knows the international cha-cha basic will start on 2. Another interpretation is that within the competitive world, international dancing style is mostly danced. Can anyone correct, justify or share there experiences and understandings? From: Josiah Way <way@chaph.usc.edu> Subject: Re: cha-cha starts on 2 or 1 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 21:53:56 GMT John Doppert writes: > I don't know about dancing rule books, laws or syllabuses, but > my interpretation is generally that those that start on 2 are > in the international arena and those that start on 1 are in > the American circle. I think that you are wrong in thinking this, because the American Rhythm Cha is most definately danced on the 2. It's not a count diffenence, it's a technique difference. And as far as numbers of dancers of different styles goes, I would guess that International is done over-all much more, but in the U.S. it seems like a 60% American and 40% International breakdown (estimating). So, again I think that the difference in dancing on the 1 or the 2 is simply inexperience, which is most often fixed as dancing experience is gained. Joe Way way@aludra.usc.edu From: hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) Subject: Re: cha-cha starts on 2 or 1 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 21:56:23 GMT John Doppert says: >Joe Way writes: >>...I don't at all think that dancing Cha on the 2 is limited to competition. >>...[C]ommonly reletively new dancers know to dance on the 2, but they just >>can't find the two. >I don't know about dancing rule books, laws or syllabuses, but my >interpretation is generally that those that start on 2 are in the >international arena and those that start on 1 are in the American circle. >It is not whether it is an advanced dancer or not but rather the dancing >style. Er...that's not my understanding. It's been my understanding that American cha cha breaks on count 2, just like mambo (which is American style only). It's true that neither of the American style rumba dances (rumba or bolero) breaks on count 2, but both cha cha and mambo do. Unless by "start" you mean the first step, which in both American and international styles is a prep step on count 1. >A beginner who only knows the international cha-cha basic will start on 2. I think Joe's point is that a beginner -- regardless of which style -- will try to break on count 2 but will often end up breaking on 1 and calling it 2. I agree, and I've seen it happen (and experienced it when I was starting out). >Another interpretation is that within the competitive world, international >dancing style is mostly danced. That's true worldwide, of course, but in the U.S. it's less so, since there are quite a few American style competitors. In fact, I just got back from BYU's dance camp, where four of the eleven instructors -- Jim & Jenell Maranto and Bob & Julia Powers -- are current American style champions (smooth and rhythm, respectively). From: ann_detsch@maillink.berkeley.edu (Ann Detsch) Subject: Re: cha-cha starts on 2 or 1. Date: 5 Jul 1994 23:41:53 GMT doppert@libra.loral.com (John Doppert) wrote: > I don't know about dancing rule books, laws or syllabuses, but > my interpretation is generally that those that start on 2 are > in the international arena and those that start on 1 are in > the American circle. It is not whether it is an advanced dancer or > not but rather the dancing style. A beginner who only knows the international > cha-cha basic will start on 2. > > Another interpretation is that within the competitive world, > international dancing style is mostly danced. > > Can anyone correct, justify or share there experiences and understandings? > When I took ballroom classes back in jr. high, I was taught to break (start) on 1. When I started competing at UCWDC (country western) events a year ago, the rules allowed couples to break either on 1 or on 2, although breaking on 2 was considered the "preferred" way by many judges. (The main reason that couples were allowed to break on 1 was the popularity and pervasiveness of a choreographed partner dance called "Cowboy Cha-Cha" which breaks on 1.) This year, the UCWDC rules only allow couples to break on 2, not on 1. At the competiton I attended in Sacramento this weekend, I saw two couples in the beginner and novice divisions who started out breaking on 2 but got off their routines and ended up breaking on 1 (actually, one couple ended up breaking on 3, I think -- the judges just kept staring, trying to figure out what they were doing!). Major point deductions for doing this. Having danced cha-cha breaking on both 1 and on 2, I much prefer breaking on 2. It can take a while to "hear" the 2, but once you get used to it, breaking on 1 can almost seem "plodding," kind of like clapping to a song on the downbeat rather than on the backbeat. From: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@rahul.net> Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 00:35:27 GMT Just a hint: If trying to teach somebody cha-cha, it helps to count: 1-2-3-cha-cha 1-2-3-cha-cha and not 1-2-3-cha-cha-cha-2-3 or anything that includes the phrase 'cha-cha-cha'. From: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@rahul.net> Subject: Re: cha-cha starts on 2 or 1. Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 00:41:52 GMT doppert@libra.loral.com (John Doppert) writes: >I don't know about dancing rule books, laws or syllabuses, but >my interpretation is generally that those that start on 2 are >in the international arena and those that start on 1 are in >the American circle. It is not whether it is an advanced dancer or >not but rather the dancing style. I believe the real problem is that two fundamentally different dances are being called by the same name. Cha-cha: Break on 2. Strong cuban motion. Count may be 1-2-3-cha-cha. Cha-cha-cha, also known as ach-ach (pronounced 'ouch ouch'): Break on 1. Weak or no cuban motion. Count is 1-2-cha-cha-cha. Many people count 1-2-3-cha-cha-cha-2-3-cha-cha etc. The inclusion of the 1 count in the beginning and its omission thereafter causes much confusion. Either keep the 1 count (for cha-cha: 1-2-3-cha-cha 1-2-3-cha-cha) or omit it entirely (for ach-ach: 1-2-cha-cha-cha 1-2-cha-cha-cha). From: susan@acsc.com (Susan Williams) Subject: Re: 2 or 1 (*social* Latin) Date: 6 Jul 1994 01:57:02 GMT As a follower, I'd rather dance w/ a partner who breaks on 1 and *stays* on 1 than a partner who is trying to break on 2 but can't stay on 2. I'm talking about social dancing only of course, *not* competition. I often dance with partners who really have to work to hear the 2 and keep slipping back onto the 1, and we end up constantly switching back and forth. Most people seem to hear the 1 more naturally - altho I've heard partners say they've trained themselves to hear the 2. My favorite Latin partner asked me if I minded breaking on 1 because he has to think about breaking on 2, but 1 comes naturally. He just doesn't feel like working that hard when he's out social dancing, so we frequently dance on 1, and I don't have any problem with this. But I don't enjoy a dance where I have to keep switching back and forth. From: eijkhout@cupid.cs.utk.edu (Victor Eijkhout) Subject: Re: 2 or 1 (*social* Latin) Date: 06 Jul 1994 02:59:32 GMT In article <2vd31e$7ri@acsc.com> susan@acsc.com (Susan Williams) writes: > I often dance with partners who really > have to work to hear the 2 and keep slipping back onto the 1, and we end > up constantly switching back and forth. Hah. Try dancing with both women used to breaking on 1 and on 2, and then try leading the same cross-body leads and complicated turns in both rhythms. Good exercise ... From: levinson@garnet.berkeley.edu (Ronnen Levinson) Subject: Finding the "2" in Cha-Cha Date: 6 Jul 1994 08:34:53 GMT It has taken me years to learn to find the "2" in cha-cha, but here's one way, described from the leader's point of view: Stand on your left foot, ready to take a preparation step onto your right. You will probably find it easy to step onto your right foot on the "1", since it's natural to move on the downbeat. Now, if you can go immediately forward with your left foot onto the two, that's great -- that's why they call that maneuver with your right foot a preparation step. I find it easier, however, to let a "2-3-4-and-1" (="2-3-cha-cha-cha") pass, then step forward onto my left foot on the following "2". This way you don't have to rush to step on "2", and you get a moment to listen to the music. Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 From: Roger_Walker@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA (C U E Here Sysop) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:31:59 MDT Rahul Dhesi (dhesi@rahul.net) wrote: > Just a hint: If trying to teach somebody cha-cha, it helps to count: > 1-2-3-cha-cha 1-2-3-cha-cha > and not 1-2-3-cha-cha-cha-2-3 or anything that includes the phrase > 'cha-cha-cha'. I take that a step further ;-) and use a pure count: 1-2-3-4-and The cha-cha-cha ends up as 4-and-1. A couple of my instructors, who also break on 2, use the following count: 1-2-3-4-and-5-6-7-8-and Your mileage may vary... Roger Walker From: Josiah Way <way@chaph.usc.edu> Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 16:36:36 GMT Rahul Dhesi writes: >I believe the real problem is that two fundamentally different >dances are being called by the same name. > >Cha-cha: Break on 2. Strong cuban motion. Count may be 1-2-3-cha-cha. > >Cha-cha-cha, also known as ach-ach (pronounced 'ouch ouch'): Break on >1. Weak or no cuban motion. Count is 1-2-cha-cha-cha. Well Heck, this is a new one for me. I know of cha-cha being called "cha", "cha-cha", and "cha-cha-cha", and all meaning the same dance. If a person says "let's cha-cha-cha", I sure would not relieve myself of cuban motion, nonetheless would I ever consider dancing on the 1. Rahul Dhesi furthermore writes: >Just a hint: If trying to teach somebody cha-cha, it helps to count: > > 1-2-3-cha-cha 1-2-3-cha-cha > >and not 1-2-3-cha-cha-cha-2-3 or anything that includes the phrase >'cha-cha-cha'. Now wait a minute. I just don't understand why people are making excuses for not just teaching and/or learning Cha as 2-3-4&1!!!!! When you count music, you count music, period! That where the accents are, as well, that's how it is danced at any high and proficient level. (Maybe you could find an example where what I say is not the case, but it sure as heck is the rule.) Yes, it's popular to teach to new newcomers the "cha-cha-cha" just 'cuz it makes them think they are doing Cha, but come on now, when I take my lessons my coach would never say "cha-cha-cha", but rather "4&1", which is what the music is. (I don't wanna claim that teachers don't say "cha-cha-cha" and they should be "sent to Siberia" for doing so, but come on let's just quit playing the little games and dance to what the musical phrasing is!) Plus, it really isn't that hard to count music, though it may take a while to get the hang of it. From: hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:27:51 GMT >Rahul Dhesi writes: >>Just a hint: If trying to teach somebody cha-cha, it helps to count: >>1-2-3-cha-cha 1-2-3-cha-cha >>and not 1-2-3-cha-cha-cha-2-3 or anything that includes the phrase >>'cha-cha-cha'. Joe Way replies: >I just don't understand why people are making excuses for not just teaching >and/or learning Cha as 2-3-4&1!!!!! When you count music, you count music, >period! That where the accents are, as well, that's how it is danced at any >high and proficient level. ... Yes, it's popular to teach to new newcomers the >"cha-cha-cha" just 'cuz it makes them think they are doing Cha, but come on >now, when I take my lessons my coach would never say "cha-cha-cha", but rather >"4&1", which is what the music is. I think the problem here is that there are few effective ways to convey certain important information. Rahul brings up an excellent point that maybe needs a little explanation. Cha cha music, as a rule, does not go "2 3 4 & 1." It goes "1 2 3 4 &." Say each of these sentences aloud to see what I mean, or even better try "Cha step step cha-cha" and "Step Step cha-cha cha." The music is best expressed by one sentence per measure of music, rather than one sentence per contiguous four counts. What beginners hear in an instructor's tone of voice is interpreted as: the beginning of a sentence is the beginning of a measure of music. So, saying "Two, three, four-and-one" is interpreted by many beginners -- and even some experienced dancers -- as beginning at the downbeat of a measure, which is precisely what the instructor is trying to avoid. By reformulating the tone of voice, this problem will likely be fixed. >Plus, it really isn't that hard to count music, though it may take a while to >get the hang of it. I think this kind of attitude can create rather than eliminate problems. It's not hard to learn to count music *for you*; for some people it's very hard. Also, I think it's clear from this discussion that most people have a much easier time finding the beginning of a measure than the middle. I think a system that's based on the more natural way of approaching the music is much more likely to be effective than one that people have to work hard to train themselves to use. From: bullock@ee1.ee.ufl.edu Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:50:42 GMT I think this horse is already dead -- but 1. The music definitely has a 4 & 1 accent for cha-cha-cha?. That is the distinguishing characteristic of the music and I have found that beginners can hear that when they may not be able to find the downbeat. 2. Given 1., why in the world would anyone place the cha-cha (two quicks) anywhere but on 4 & ??? 3. You can use a prep step on the 1 or start on the 2, it is a matter of taste. 4. Finally, sure for those of us who understand music and counts it is clear, but you should recognize that some people don't think that way and need another way to look at it like the cha-cha or cha-cha-cha or step-together- step-rock-back or whatever. From: Shahrukh Merchant <merchant@anuxv.att.com> Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 18:30:00 GMT >I think this horse is already dead -- but > 1. The music definitely has a 4 & 1 accent for cha-cha-cha?. That is the That's true for "real" Cha-Chas. There's a popular Cha Cha from the latter part of the big band era called "Tea for Two Cha Cha" by Jimmy Dorsey--many of you have probably heard it. Basically, he took a wonderful foxtrot ("Tea for Two") and converted it into an awful Cha Cha (IMHO...). For this arrangement, there is a *very* distinct cha-cha-cha on the 3 & 4 throughout the song. If I had to dance a Cha Cha to this song (which happens every so often since it was a popular enough song that it is played frequently in Jimmy Dorsey's arrangement by big bands today), I would probably grit my teeth and break on "1." The music of most Cha Cha's, however, make dancing the cha-cha-cha chasse' on the 4&1 seem more natural. From: hage@netcom.com (Carl Hage) Subject: Re: Cha on the 1 and the 2 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 21:19:49 GMT way@chaph.usc.edu (Josiah Way) writes: : : In a recent post, Carl Hage wrote about how "angry" he is ... Oops. An inappropriate slip of a single word in the heat of passion comes back multiple times to haunt you in the world of netnews. : What I have noticed is that commonly reletively new dancers know to : dance on the 2, but they just can't find the two. In other words, they will : count "2 3 Cha Cha Cha", just calling the 1 a "2". That's not bad dancing, : but rather simply inexperience. Time and familiarity will take care of that. The best way (for me) I have seen American Cha-Cha taught, is to break it down like: 1 2 3 - L R L - side back replace - S S S then add 4 & - R L - side close - Q Q then add 1 2 3 - R L R - side forward replace - S S S then add 4 & - L R - side close - Q Q ... (The back and forward steps are small with little body movement. You can accent the 1 by taking a strong (large) side step and holding it for the full S count.) This way you don't have to find the "2", and you learn good technique from the start. The 1 is essentially a preparation step. I noticed this method was used in an Aurthur Murray (or something) movie from the 1950's! In International classes, they usually seem to start with a preparation step to the right, then break forward. Of course, the hip and leg action is different from American style. The way I often see Cha-Cha-Cha taught is: 1 2 - L R - forward back 3 & 4 - L R L - run run run back then add 1 2 - R L - back forward 3 & 4 - R L R - run run run forward ... Typically, speed is built up on the run run run and the momentum needs to be stopped in the rock. This step tends to be very large, often with weight completely on the rock with the other foot in the air. Movement stops halfway between 1 and 2. When you break on 2 as above, movement stops at the start of 1 with the accent. Beginners often have difficulty with the "run run run" and I sometimes see: 1 2 - L R - forward (lean fwd over the toes) back 3 e & a 4 - L R L R L - scamper scamper scamper scamper scamper back 1 2 - R L - back (lean back over the heel) forward 3 e & a 4 - R L R L R - scamper scamper scamper scamper scamper forward ... With a large rock step, people get behind and need to speed up in the 3&4 to get back on beat, overdoing it with frantic shuffling. From: slow_fox@mindlink.bc.ca (Steven Lam) Subject: Re: Finding the "2" in Cha-Cha Date: Wed, 06 Jul 94 12:16:01 -0700 (PDT) In article <2vdqbd$92l@agate.berkeley.edu>, levinson@garnet.berkeley.edu (Ronnen Levinson) writes: (see above) Hmm.. After reading all these messages about starting cha-cha on 2, I just start to wonder whether I am doing the right thing in cha-cha.. You see, I start my cha-cha on 4 with a chasse. When I started learning cha-cha, it was taught with starting on 2. But my currently instructor insisted that I start it on 4 and I agree with her. It gives me more impact with the start of the dance. I just like to put in my $ 0.02 worth of opinion! :-) From: eijkhout@cupid.cs.utk.edu (Victor Eijkhout) Subject: Re: cha-cha Date: 06 Jul 1994 15:14:20 GMT In article <CsIwDu.Fy5@nntpa.cb.att.com> sysbill@tenforward.cc.uky.edu writes: > Arthur Murray teaches the cha-cha with a "starter step". Left foot > to the side and break with the right foot on 2. AM likes to have the > male start with the left foot. Is this limited to Arthur Murray? I thought Fred Astaire also taught it this way. Maybe it's even more general than that. Someone made an interesting observation about this the other day: the man's left foot is the stronger break, and starting this way it falls on 6, whereas 2 would be more natural. Now your 8 count patterns sort of straddle the musical 8 count units. This would be an argument against the starter step. From: ProDnzr@aol.com (Enio Cordoba) Subject: Cha Cha Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 20:53:11 GMT I'd hate to disappoint anybody who has spent years learning how to "break" on 2... The concept of the 2 beat is totally misunderstood. While most people "break" on 2, 99% of them don't understand why. -(pause here while everyone recovers from the shock) Some points to consider... 1) As a Latino who grew up hearing Latin music I had a devil of a time learning how to start on 2. Even with Ron Montez as my first teacher I found myself one day out on the competition floor full of confidence sure that I would win only to look over at Ron on the sidelines giving me the count with his fingers because I was "on" the wrong beat. Talk about wanting to crawl into a hole. 2.) As a professional who mastered breaking on the 2, I worked with the late Bob Medeiros who finally convinced me that the idea of latin was totally misunderstood by the dance community as a whole, particularly the East side of the Atlantic who set the standard. 3) Medeiros' points: The DEAD beat in Latin is the 2. Latin music accentuates the 1 & 3 not the 2 & 4. The most important part of the dance should be the CHA CHA CHA Thats"s why they call it Cha Cha Cha The least important part of Cha Cha should be the Break. That's why they don't call it the break dance. Latin dancers don't emphasize feet action- they emphasize body action. Why would latin dancers break on 2? Because they a) roll the hip back on 1, b) they don't emphasize the forward or backward break (rock); c) Instead they do: Weight change (close feet) 1, Weight change (close feet) 2, Weight change (close feet) 3, shuffle shuffle (forward/back or side/side). Many only do the entire dance side to side without forward or back breaks. I'll put it in an analogy: Imagine being in a foot race. You're in the starting position. You must wait for the words ready set GO! Yet they shoot off the starters' pistol on the word SET. Could you wait for the word Go? Not likely. The same thing happens in Cha Cha. The beginner is told to wait for the 2 beat which is a DEAD BEAT. Instead of teaching the emphasis on the BREAK, the best teachers teach (now follow this closely) START on the 1 by rolling the hip. Notice I said START not BREAK. Everyone HEARS the 1, yet you're told to wait for something you can't hear. It's easier to count cha cha as it is played 123 4and. (S S S Q Q) Again I repeat I didn't say break fwd on the 1. Many top teachers don't teach: Fwd back cha cha cha. That is not the cha cha cha. That is a PATTERN of CCC. (I'm getting tired of writing Cha Cha Cha). CCC is the body interpreting the rhythm that makes it interesting. Medeiros use to say that when ballroom dancers walked into latin clubs the latins use to laugh at them because they look so ridiculous. There are few dance schools in Central & So America. So how do these people learn to dance? They listen to lots of latin bands where the beat is predominant. (Not like Ross Mitchell playing "TALK TO THE ANIMALS" and calling that a CCC) Before these latins ever take a step they develop the body action by just standing there moving the hips & knees without ever moving their feet. By the time they hold a girl they look great without having to do any patterns. In summation it's not going forward on 2 that's wrong. It's the concept of starting on 2 that's wrong. Once you are an accomplished dancer starting on 3, 4, or any other beat is acceptable. (look at Waltz- the best ones commence on the 3 yet nobody says they are dancing 3,1,2) In waltz we call it a preparation step. The idea is to accent the 1 and 3 with the hips and the 4+ with the feet. If you change the beginner mentality from start feet on 2 to start hips on 1, you wouldn't have half the dance populace dancing CCC on the wrong beat. Awaiting all replies P.S. while in my writing I flame most of the British dance community. Some of them such as Wally Laird, Mic Stylianos, and Donnie Burns having researched the true origins of Latin music do have a complete understanding of the latin rhythms. From: ann_detsch@maillink.berkeley.edu (Ann Detsch) Subject: Re: Cha Cha Date: 6 Jul 1994 22:59:08 GMT In article <CsJGo3.4rs@nntpa.cb.att.com>, ProDnzr@aol.com (Enio Cordoba) wrote: > . . . The concept of the 2 beat is totally misunderstood. While most people >"break" on 2, 99% of them don't understand why. . . . > Some points to consider... (Part of post deleted) > The DEAD beat in Latin is the 2. > Latin music accentuates the 1 & 3 not the 2 & 4. > > The most important part of the dance should be the CHA CHA CHA > Thats"s why they call it Cha Cha Cha > The least important part of Cha Cha should be the Break. (Part of post deleted.) > Instead of teaching the emphasis on the BREAK, the best teachers teach (now > follow this closely) START on the 1 by rolling the hip. Notice I said START > not BREAK. Everyone HEARS the 1, yet you're told to wait for something you > can't hear. It's easier to count cha cha as it is played 123 4and. (S S S > Q Q) (Remainder of post deleted.) > Bravo! Thank you for such a clear, well-written explanation of what breaking on 2 really means. My country western dance coaches (and, yes, I only study with the best ;-) gave me similar instructions, although not nearly as eloquently or as detailed as yours. From: AHGberg@AOL.COM Subject: Latin American - The diamond danced on the 2 beat Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 17:36:46 GMT Hi Guys: Dancing is an expression of body movement to music. In order to know and appreciate "why" the 2 beat is danced in Latin American music you should know the "what" behind it in its evolution and history. No one has arbitrarily assigned the "2" beat to be danced on. That's simply the result of observing the dancing by authentic Latin American dancers to authentic Latin American music.. The Rumba music was the first music to emanate from Cuba and it migrated to Miami Beach and then travelled all the way to New York City and the first dance that was taught to that music was a box step called by American Teachers, Rumba", or sometimes "Rhumba". The music had an appeal. Just take a Foxtrot box step and "throw a little hip movement into it." What could be easier? It (the music) was not only new but different from what American Bands were playing. The music was played by Latin Americans using Bongo and Conga drums, Clave, Gourds a cow bell,and the construction of the music was built around the Clave Rhythm over a two bar simple phrase. The rhythm instruments dominated the music. When it was played in Cuba it was danced by Cubans and the dance was called "Cuban Rumba" only to differentiate it from "American Rumba".. The basic dance pattern of Cuban origin resembled a Diamond. Today this dance, the Cuban Rumba, is perpetuated by the international style. The English dropped the "Cuban" from the name but have consistently preserved the form wherein the basic step is in the shape of a "diamond" and danced on the 2 beat.. Cuban Rumba does not use a "box step" for its basic. (American Rumba using a box step is purely a teacher-contrived pattern so it could be conveniently and easily taught to "inept New York City Society Types"). International Style Cuban Rumba is danced to (Bolero Tempo) relatively slower music than the peppy music that arrived in New York City, (often referred to as Guaracha.) The Int'l Cuban Rumba starts with a preperation step on the Right Foot with the ensuing step, a Fwd Rock Left Foot on the 2 beat. When I was taught this dance in the late l940's it was explained to me that the hip movements called Cuban Motion were to be manifested on 4&1 as well as the fwd and bk "charges" taken on the 2 beats in the music. When we were taught to start the "Cuban Rumba" (We called it the Mambo!) we would sway to the music and change weight from side to side on the 4 & 1, with feet stationary, about shoulder width apart, and holding your partner securely, she would do the same thing. It was the Leader's option whether to start fwd left or back right but it started with the "sway movement/today called a preparation step".. But it would always be on the 2 beat. The purists preferred "preparation side left, bk rght so you could insert the basic in the two bar phrase beginning with the claves beat. In the very slow Bolero there were 3 hip movements which were counted 4&l and the dance that contained that element was referred to as "Triple Mambo". Those who danced rather "stiffly", without the three subtle hip movements, actually took three little steps.on the 4&1. About l951 the three little (steps) movements on 4 &1 took on the name of Cha Cha Cha and the dance took on the name of the "Cha Cha Mambo". When the music speeded up the "Cha Cha Element" disappeared because there was no time for the dancer to put in the Cha Cha Cha; it simply became a single change of weight with a Cuban Motion on 4 &1. It was called "Single Mambo". All of this dancing was structured on a "Diamond" pattern, turning slightly counter clockwise. When the Diamond turned more aggressively the Cross Body lead was born and most of the "break patterns " were preceded by this cross body lead. When the Mambo or Cuban Rumba was danced in the Palladium it started out as a very compact dance. The so-called, "front and back charges" were no more than a few inches in step length; but It was the rhythm that was more important than the shape of the pattern. No self respecting Palladium (52nd & Broadway in NYC) dancer would be caught dead dancing on anything but the 2 beat. If you took up too much space (more than you were entitled to) in the Palladium you frequently encountered very angry couples who resented your overlapping their dance territory. Fierce looks often preceded a physical encounter for infringement on someone elses dance turf. Altercations were not infrequent. When you hear a non latin orchestra attempting to play a Cha Cha it is almost pathetic. Without a Latin American beat in the music it is just a poor excuse for Cha Cha. C&W Cha Cha can be danced on the 1 beat simply because that would be the best interpretation of the music. Certainly there is no law that says you cannot dance on the 2 beat even to C&W but it just isn't there in the music to dance to. Once you have listened to and danced to great Latin American music you will be spoiled! Learning to dance on the correct (authentic) rhythm in Latin American music requires that you listen to that music for several hours, days, weeks and perhaps years. Once it gets into your head it will work its way to your heart and your bones, and from thence into your soul. Get some Tito Puente and some Cha Cha Rhythm Boys or Tito Rodriguez or Machito music. Listen and just feel the rhythms. Don't count them using number counts. Just listen and tap them out with your fingers or your hands or feet. Just feel the rhythm. After this music becomes a part of you you will understand and appreciate why the 2 beat. There is no book that you can learn this from. Counting will help only after you feel the rhythm(s). Then stop counting and just dance.....You will be on the right beat....believe me. Cordially, Arthur From: Starhawk k'Treva <kli@SDCC6.UCSD.EDU> Subject: Re: The Universal Unit System and I Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 21:10:49 GMT Victor Eijkhout, after a description of Skippy Blair's Universal Unit System, wrote: > > I would dearly love some feedback from ballroomers on whether > any of your teachers has ever mentioned this idea of > slightly delaying the '&' steps, eg the 4 *&* 1 in cha-cha. > Well, Victor, I am currently taking a bronze class in Cha Cha and Jive with Michael Kiehm of Starlight Dance Studio in San Diego, and he has touched on something very like this. He has, in fact, said that there are three ways (no doubt simplifying for us) to think about the "4 & 1" in Cha cha. Using the following breakdown of that musical span as a referrent--"4 e & a 1"--I'll list them. The first is the obvious "4 & 1". The next in terms of difficulty (he said) is "4 a1". The most difficult of the three is "4e 1". I have seen all of these, and my own opinion is that the harder it is (by the above scale), the cooler it looks. Now, I actually had seen the "4e 1" prior to his telling us and thought it cool enough to try and emulate. 'Course, it could be just the draw of "something different" that I am not doing. It seems to me that they each have merits, with each one probably better matched than the others with different songs/music. From: hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) Subject: Re: Counting Cha-Cha Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:32:49 GMT Icono Clast (icono.clast@toadhall.com) said: >There are two ways to count the dance: > ChaChaCha, On Beat: > One Two ChaChaCha (Break on One) > 1 2 3 & 4 > ChaCha, Off Beat: > Two Three ChaChaOne (Break on Two) > 2 3 4 & 1 Ron Nicholson (rhn@sgi.com) replies: >This is only "on beat" if you consider the break to be the emphasis >step, which I've heard is not authentic to the original Latino version >of the cha-cha. I consider this count as off beat. >This is "on beat" if you make the last step of the chachacha triplet a >strong emphasis step. Then the emphasis step lines up with the down >beat of the music. >We need a latin dance (and music) historian here. I'm not a Latin dance historian, but I play one on tv (8-). I recently picked up an album called "El Cha Cha Cha de Cuba" (Milan Latino/BMG 1995). It's got twenty traditional cha chas, including, according to the liner notes, the first cha cha ever written. (I'm not sure I buy that, but then I haven't seen anyone else claim the position, so who knows?) The song in question is "La Enganadora" by Enrique Jorrin. According to the liner notes, The "danzonette," the Cuban dance, and the mambo originated from the "danzon," and from the fifties of this century, emerged the Cha cha cha combining the French orchestration of the quadrille and the rhythmic power of the "Son." Enrique Jorrin, creator of the Cha cha cha, responded in an interesting way when he realized that performers of the "danzon" produced a distinctive and repetitive sound. Many spectators at these dances would request the orchestra to highlight the Cha cha cha sound made by the feet of the dancers. The master Jorrin noticed this and with a stroke of genius composed the first piece of this genre, "La Enganadora." ... The liner notes include an excerpt from the Diccionario del la Musica Cubana de Helio Orovio, which quote Jorrin as saying: ... I had barely started composing [danzones with a particular structure] when I observed the steps of the dancers. I noticed the difficulties that most of them had with syncopated rhythms. Dancing off-beat and syncopated melodies make it very difficult to synchronize dance steps with music. The Cha cha cha was born of these melodies which were almost danceable in their own right, and of the equilibrium between melodies with the beat and melodies against the beat. Unfortunately, the songs on this album conflict in their use of the cha cha cha. Specifically, in songs where "cha cha cha" is part of the lyric, it moves around a bit. Most confusingly, "La Enganadora" has a "cha cha cha" lyric which matches 3 & 4 -- but it's the only song of the twenty on the album, most of them easily recognizable as cha chas, that does so. And the lyric is not supported by the music, which is so even throughout (one-and-two-and- three-and-four-and) that any interpretation would otherwise fit. As for the rest of the songs on the album, all but two of the ones with "cha cha cha" in the lyrics are on 4 & 1. These include "La Basura" by Orquesta America; "Blancas Nieves" by L.M. Ibanez; "El Peletero" by Orquesta Sublime (which starts with "cha cha cha" matching 3 4 1, then switches to 4 & 1); and, surprisingly, "Rico Vacilon" by Orequesta de Enrique Jorrin. (In addition, "Ritmando el Cha Cha Cha" by Orquesta Riverside has a distinct instrumental emphasis of 4 & 1.) Also, Jorrin's "Los Marcianos" has the lyric "cha cha cha cha" on & 4 & 1. In other words, Jorrin himself waffled on the placement of the "cha cha cha" lyric. Oddest of all is Orquesta de Neno Gonzolez's "El Diablo Tun Tun," which has the "cha cha cha" lyric on & 4 &. Unfortunately, the liner notes for this album don't answer one crucial question: are these the original recordings? Without that information, it's hard to assess what the original cha cha rhythm was. Another useful data point can be found on the album "Mucho Cha Cha -- Tito Puente" (RCA/BMG 1992) and also on "The Best of the Tropical Series" vol 1, which is the album I actually have it on. The song is Puente's "Chanchullo," which the liner notes list as a "cha cha cha instrumental," and which was recorded in 1959. This song begins with hands clapping out 1 2 3 4 & 1. Interestingly, whenever "cha cha cha" appears in Spanish-language prose, there's an accent mark over the last cha, so the pronunciation is "cha cha CHA." This would tend to support the 4 & 1 rhythm, since the 3 & 4 rhythm doesn't accent 4. On the whole then, I'd say that if there's an "original" cha cha rhythm, it's most probably 4 & 1, what Ike calls "off beat." Unfortunately, I think we'll have to agree that the jury's still out on the final verdict. Henry Neeman From: hneeman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Henry Neeman) Subject: Re: Cha-Cha question???? Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 23:56:43 GMT Glenn (Avalongrb@aol.com) says: >... As far as making it feel different... dance to the music...the >rhythm. Some cha chas break on 1 and some cha chas break on 2. ... >Most LATIN cha chas break on 2. That is why they feel different. ... I think saying that a song "breaks on 2" confuses the issue. As Enio Cordoba (ProDnzr@aol.com) has pointed out in the past, in Latin music the strong beat is 1 and the "dead" beat is 2. That is, the 2 is the least important beat of the measure. Traditional cha cha rhythm has its strongest accent on 1, and two sharp, high pitched bongo strikes on 4 &, like so: "ONE two Three Four! And!" So, it makes sense to put the "cha cha CHA" on 4 & 1. Once you've done that, the only place to put the break step is on 2. This arrangement meshes well with the basic idea of Latin dancing, which emphasizes body actions over steps. Generally, you don't dance lots of wild body actions during the break step, because it's not very important. So referring to music according to where the break step is gives the break far more attention than it deserves; the important question is not where the break is but rather where the chas are. The reason the break step gets so much lip service among Americans and Europeans is that we come from a dance tradition that emphasizes steps over body actions, which is why step-based body *flight* is so important in the smooth/standard dances, which were largely developed and codified in Europe. We can throw a couple of monkey wrenches into this business. First, as Glenn rightly points out, there are songs for cha cha dancing for which the break should be danced on 1 -- the Glenn Miller (I think) cover of "Tea for Two" is a classic example. And these songs, unlike the "break on 2" songs, do in fact have an emphasis on the break step, since they also have a strong accent on 1; it's just that they also have a noticeable percussion hit on 3 & 4. So, if you dance to a song where you break on 1, you express the music differently than if you dance to a song where you break on 2, and not just in the sense of when you break, but also how: if you break on 1, the accent is on the break, not on the last "cha" step. The second problem is that a lot of contemporary cha cha music has added a pop music touch: a strong snare accent on counts 2 and 4. (Ednita Nazario's "Tres Deseos" is a good example.) In some cases, these snare accents can so overwhelm the bass accent on 1 that you wind up with a completely different feel, and you find yourself putting a strong emphasis on the break step. I think this kind of music is fine for social dancing, but I think it'd be downright cruel to play at a competition, where you'd leave the dancers with an impossible choice: emphasize the CHA on 1, and annoy the judges who want to see you dance to the music, or emphasize the break on 2, and annoy the judges who want to see traditional styling. Ultimately, I agree with Glenn: dance the music, not the rules. Henry Neeman From: m-balzer@ux7.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Anthony Balzer) Subject: Re: Counting Cha-Cha Date: 5 Apr 1996 23:36:03 GMT Michael Steffen <mjs@asgna.com> writes: >This is Victor's response to Jacques' response to Victor. >>Jacques Gauthier <gauthier@CAM.ORG> writes: >> >> ...the *leader* has to take a strong step >>on a strong beat. Since the 2 is stronger than the 6, the leader >>has to step forward therre. >> >>It is an empty statement that no matter what you do *somebody* is >>going to rock forward on 2. >> >>> Seems to me that either way one of the two dancers is stuck doing it the >>> "wrong" way around. >> >>Only if you consider the leader's and folower's roles to be equivalent. >> >My thought on this is that I believe that Victor's notion of who should be >making the strong step on the strong beat is exactly backwards. I believe >that the Lady is the supposed to be the point of focus in Ballroom dance and >therefore she should have the greatest opportunity to emphasis the strong >beat with the strong step, not the man. To me the fact that he is leading is >irrelevant, the fact that he is showcasing her is what should matter. >Therefore the man's left-side prep step is perfectly appropriate. IMHO, >which by the way is far more humble than some as I readly admit that I am no >expert and that this is just what makes sense to me. > >My other thought on this (which is, I realize, pretty much beside the point) >is that unless you are competing or doing an exhibition type performance it >really doesn't make a damn bit of difference whether you break forward on 2 >or on 6, and that in fact I believe that a majority of social dancers would >be hard pressed to tell you which beat is a 2 and which one is a 6. >Furthermore, I would venture to guess that if someone where to make a video >tape of a professional couple dancing a routine where he is breaking forward >on 2 and then make another tape of the same couple doing the same routine >where he breaks fwd on 6 you could show those two cuts minus the first >measure to 100 dancers and not 5 of them would notice the difference if they >were not asked to look for it. Even more telling I bet that you could play >30 seconds of each tape for a panel of Ballroom Judges and ask them to place >the two and afterwards not one judge would say that he/she made the decision >based on this difference. Oh well, like I said this is probably beside the >point as it represents a practical consideration in the midst of a >philosophical discussion. First of all, I can't believe I am responding to this... Oh well, I'll bet Robinne can believe it. :-) I just got the Salsa videos that Eddie Torres sells. Eddie the "Mambo King" spends a *lot* of time telling you to break on 2 and 6. He stresses that the Man should break back on 2, and forward on 6. He even has an exercise on his accompanying audio cassette where he just counts the "6,7" over music to train men to start dancing with a forward rock on 6. So evidently, this issue is very important to Eddie Torres. Mark PS - Every teacher I've ever had teaches Mambo 2,3,4, 6,7,8 with man breaking forward on 2. Then starting on 2, the count would be Q,Q,S, Q,Q,S. Eddie Torres teaches it 6,7, 1,2,3, 5,6,7... with the man breaking forward on 6. Then starting on 6, Eddie's count is Q,S,Q, Q,S,Q. (with the dancing foot being off the ground on the 4 and 8) It's funny watching him count 2,3,5 as his dancers try to dance 2,3,4, especially in turns. Why does he count it Q,S,Q ? Is it important to delay the weight change on the slow? I always heard the opposite. What gives? rec.arts.dance #40418 (45 more) From: Enio Cordoba <ProDnzr@aol.com> Subject: Cha Cha -My Last word Date: Sat Dec 07 01:37:54 CST 1996 Ron Nicholson writes: >In the U.S. there is a large population of folks who only dance >occasionally, and only for fun or enjoyment, but aren't interested >in spending any significant amount of time or money in learning to >dance "correctly". >There are teachers who cater to this audience. What would you call someone who taught kids that 2 +2 is 5? A teacher? No I would call them a pretender. A wannabe who probably never will. >If the "break-on-1" varient helps them get a higher percentage of >newbies smiling and sort-of-moving to the (technically incorrect) So is putting a golf ball by using your hand to drop it in the hole. >music in a 20 minute to 1 hour group lesson, why should I complain. >Maybe some of them will stick around and eventually learn to dance >cha-cha correctly, instead of giving up on dancing as too difficult >(and thus not helping to pay for dance floors, bands, DJ's, etc.) >As for (c), most of the "break-on-1" quick-teach seems to happen >in the free-lesson-before-a-dance setting, where there is no hold >on any of the audience. But correct Cuban motion is one of those >things on which many students can spend tons of money before >getting it right. So (c) actually works the other way. This discussion has gone on now for as long as I've been on this list, yet the point seems to escape most that it has NOTHING to do with dancing correctly but teaching correctly. Would you go to a golf "pro" who taught you to drive with a putter or putt with a driver? It is not harder to teach somebody to "break" on two- it is nearly impossible to get somebody to START on two. How easy would it be to find words in a dictionary where the words were not alphabetical? To start a group on two all I have to do is tell them to count one two three and do a chasse to right on the 4 &. It's not the break that I focus the students on, it's the chasse action. After 2 minutes of just hitting the 4& 1. I add the left chasse on 4 & 1 then after 2 more minutes we add the forward break. After 8 minutes they are all dancing on time. Of course they must be able to find the one beat which is a helluva lot easier than finding the 2! The reason everybody has trouble breaking on the two is because they are focusing on the step with off beat. Take the emphasis off the break and focus on the cha cha. When someone walks in and is a blank slate, teaching A is no harder than teaching B. What makes you think a newbie reasons the rock step is the starting point? Teaching someone who learned from a lousy teacher is another story. Why do most W/C Swing instructors teach a "starter step" in West Coast with a step that is circular in nature, and starts with a triple, triple and a rock back? >My point is that there is a difference in what one might teach >to a rhythmically challenged group in a few minutes if you want >them to have enough fun to come back next week/month, and what one >should teach someone who has chosen to learn to dance well. It's >simple marketing. And even bad dancers help pay the rent on the >good places to dance. Would you want to play tennis with someone who hits the ball over the fence on every return? You can say "Well, they're having fun" But it's not TENNIS. Same for cha cha on 1 or waltz on 2 or swing on 2. As for Mambo/Salsa they are two different styles because they are MANY different rhythms. Dancing on 1, 2, or 3 you are not necessarily going against the rhythm (regardless of what the New Yorkers say). Dancing on 1 in cha cha IS! Enio