Ok I am learning the Accolay Cooncerto so I can play it with my friend and violinist. The problem I have is this: the right hand plays triplets and the left hand plays regular eighth notes. Its kinda like Debussy's first Arabesque kinda thing. Are there any good excercises on practicing it?

I was shown a very helpful exercise for this.

Play two chromatic scales 1 third apart.

Put your right thumb on the E above Middle C.
Put your left thumb on Middle C.

Play the scale in contrary motion.

You'll be able to hear the different beats and how they mesh with each other.

Hope this helps!

John

John,
I tried your suggestion, and to be honest, I don't see how that helps with triplets vs. duples. Did you mean to play one hand in triplets and one in duples?

Hyon: I would try this little trick:

Say, "Not Diff-i-cult"
Tap, -R---R------R
------L-------L

Hopefully my little diagram matches up alright (and makes sense!). Once you can tap that easily with saying it, then don't say it and just tap it, then translate that into what you're playing.

That is exactly what the goal is play one hand the duple, and the other the triplet. Your diagram looks okay to me.

John

Morodiene:

Say, "Not Diff-i-cult"
Tap, -R---R------R
------L-------L

Being a Proper Englishman™, I prefer to use "Nice Cup Of Tea" as a rythmic guide

-Michael B.

Is this playing 4 against 3? the mnemonic I learned is "Pass the god-damn butter":

*/ / * / * / */
Pass the god damn butter, Pass...(etc)

- where * is RH and / is LH (or vice versa). Hope this makes sense.

Praa, I take great offense at your choice of words, and would appreciate in the future if you were a bit more considerate of others.
Thanks.

Praa, I don't take any offense at your choice of words and am surprised that any one in this day and age could take great offense at them.


John

Praa, I also take great offence at your choice of words. As anyone knows in these days of nutritional awareness, butter contains far too many saturated fats to be part of a healthy diet, and that a low-fat spread would be a much wiser choice.

-Michael B.

Kindly, do not impose your saturated fat-ist world view on the rest of us. My love of butter is just as valid.


John

Count out loud

"1, 2, and 3."

Make sure you say the word "and" out loud as you count.

The hand with the triplets plays on 1,2,3.

The hand with the eigth notes plays on 1, and.

All there is to it.

Tomasino

if butter is objectionable, try passing the spinach instead

I was taught the "gosh darn" version.

Maybe this will be of more help. If the link isn't open on your browser, click on it, or if it's not big enough, click on it.



Hope you can see it. Anyway,

for 3 against 2,

the hand beating 3 plays only "1,2,3."
the hand beating 2 plays only "1, and."

for 3 against 4,

the hand beating 3 plays only "1,2,3"
the hand beating 4 plays only "1, ta, tay, ta."

That's as clear as I can make it.
Tomasino

I'm surprised in this day and age of "tolerance" that people still choose to make fun of those who have religious convictions. But I suppose that hypocrisy is to be expected.

There`s no law that says you can`t make fun of someone who is religious. People are made fun of all the time for a multitude of reasons, that`s life :-/

Morodiene:
I'm surprised in this day and age of "tolerance" that people still choose to make fun of those who have religious convictions.[/b]

If one's religious convictions are real and sincere, it should not matter one iota what anyone else might think, say or write.

But I suppose that hypocrisy is to be expected.[/b]

Down there in Oz people of all social backgrounds are generally blunter and a lot more colourful in their speech and writing, and what might seem 'blasphemous' to an übersensitive American petal, might be standard conversational fare to an fair-dinkum Aussie. Therefore, in the interests of tolerance, perhaps an American could display more cultural awareness of their fellow anglophones from Down Under, rather than whining rather childishly about being 'greatly offended' by a fairly innocuous expression, which is basically bereft of all religious connotation in modern usage... Godammit!

-Michael B.

I posted to let you know that what you said was offensive, and I know I'm not the only person on this forum who would think so. Obviously, you don't care, but I couldn't have known that before posting. Now you have made that extremely clear.

You are indeed correct that I don't care in the slightest if you feel offended the use of that particular word, as IMNSFHO it is entirely your priggish choice to take such a stance. Mocking someone's racial origins, gender or sexuality is of course unacceptable and should be sanctioned both socially and legally. However satirising others' chosen irrational and unprovable belief systems (whatever particular flavour of God, Allah, Yahweh, Sky Fairy, Invisible Friend, etc, happens to be involved) is of course fair game in any society that values free speech, democratic ideals and justice....or perhaps you'd rather see the return of the Inquisition, or maybe even the full implementation of Shariah Law in your local neighbourhood?

It is obvious to even the most simple-minded individual that the original Australian poster meant no offence to you or anyone else, but was merely using his/her habitual vernacular. If you or others choose to be offended by it in your own little religious and cultural vacuums, then that is purely your decision, so get over it and yourselves. Please do not insult the intelligence of others here by pretending to be some kind of a 'victim.' As for the request that s/he be 'a bit more considerate' in future, that is just pure arrogance[1].

-Michael B.
[1] Though I will be politely asking drumour to tone down any references to butter and churned dairy products in general in all his future posts

I made a real effort to answer HYONCHINGONCHON's query about 2 against 3. I went to the trouble of writing some notes on a staff, scanning it, and getting it hosted, so that I could be helpful. It took a fair amount of time, and I think I made the issue of 2 against 3 clearer than anyone else. I wish someone would notice.

So I wish you would all stop overwhelming my effort with this tiff about offensive language.

Tomasino

Thanks to Tomasino for the excellent demonstration of 2 vs 3, which I mistook for 3 vs 4 in the original post. And deep thanks to Michael B for his defence of us blunt and colourful downunderites, but he needs to meet more Australians. We never say g**d**n. Only Americans do that. I got the mnemonic off a US-dominated forum ages ago & very useful it was too. Play slow scales with one hand in 3 and the other in 4, meanwhile chanting the mantra (you may substitute "headstrong", "shamefaced" or any other spondee of your choice). It works in no time.

Praa:
We never say g**d**n, but he needs to meet more Australians.

Hehe. Having lived in Earls Court and other parts of West London for reasonable periods, I've probably met more of them than you have... I considered your usage of the term was a perfect illustration of the Aussie characteristic of cultural openness and willingness to adopt aspects of cultures and make them your own

And a Happy Christmas to everyone[/b] at PW !

-Michael B.
PS. Tomasino, your efforts were indeed very illustrative and were appreciated, though I'll still go with "Nice Cup Of Tea," if that's not too offensive to you, obviously :p

How about satirising or mocking others' "chosen" irrational and unprovable beliefs in different forms of racial equality or the equality of the sexes? Why is that sanctioned in a society that purports to value free speech? And to leave aside the mocking and satirising, why is even honest scientific study of those subjects generally seen as undesirable and, ultimately, condemnable?

Since the langauge has been foud to be wanting on the forum
Instead of "pass the G**D**N butter" as a mnemonic for 4 against 3, how about using "that's a load of bullocks" instead?
I hope that doesn't outrage any beef farmers.
I personally find it very appropriate, having been taught "not very hard" as the mnemonic for 3:2.