DRUMMER CAFE

  I'm not sure I understand what you mean that the second tap falls on every other Quarter note. Do you mean that the sticking alternates every other Measure?

  r r l l r r l \  l r r l l r r \ l l r r l l r \ r l l r r l l \ repeat

You guys are wrong.

Double the 5 in the same time as you normally would.  I do this stuff all the time.

RLRLR LRLRL RLRLR LRLRL  5's

rrllrrllrr llrrllrrll rrllrrllrr llrrllrrll  10's or go to a "press" roll

really cool sounding

It gets hard when you go into odd time measures or add rests.

Maybe I don't get side's meaning of "groupings"

Permutating diddle inversions will definitely lead to some complicated sticking within the realm of quintuplets which I probably mistakenly call "5's" (it's easier though isn't)...you will be getting some polyrhythms going on and have to "feel thru" the time.  Heavy stuff.

I thought you just meant playing single 5's and then doubling them.  But if you are going to group the 5's with say for example 3's (3 beats of snare, 3 beats of kick) you will be grouping "inside" the 5's across measures, which is heavy doo doo you are getting into.  It's hard enough doing that stuff within conventional groupings of 4's (sixteens) and 6's (sextuplets).

I normally don't deal with sevens except for fast singles...interesting idea about permutating in some diddles though with these 5 and seven note groups.

Polyrhythms and odd groupings are in my book, the toughest stuff I attempt.

Ok, I like to think I have a pretty good theoretical grasp on this stuff, but you guys are confusing me!!

Side, what your saying, IMO, is completely symmetrical.  Your saying 5:4, but you are simply writing quintuplets, which is just 5:1, which is NOT a polyrhythm at all.  Yes, it is difficult sticking, but still not polyr's.   Now if you were to play in cut time an 8th note quintuplet and play both quarter notes with the bass, that would be a polyrhythm, it would be 5:2.  But a 16th not quintuplet over one quarter note is not poly, it's just an odd grouping, as is a triplet.  

From what I gather you are just talking about advanced stickings over odd groupings, is that correct?

Yeah but you could make side's example a poly really quick, just add kick/hat and accents on that first right hand stroke.

5:1 ?

I think a quintuplet would be 5:4 with the quarter being the downbeat last I heard.

Wild stuff maynard.

Rlhubley is exactly right; I think Side and Felix are misunderstanding this a bit ... as we are not on the same page.

If you play a five-note grouping, such as five sixteenth notes, you would call it a quintuplet. If you play one of these quintuplets it would take up the span of one quarter note. If you then apply it to 4/4 time, you could only play 4 quintuplets per measure. THIS IS NOT A POLY-RHYTHM.

If you played these quintuplets with your hands while you played eighth-notes on the kick drum at the same time .... the 5 notes (quintuplet) per quarter-note in the hands, and the 2 notes (eighth notes) per quarter-note in the feet ... it's this relationship which creates the polyrhtym of 5:2 ... THIS IS A POLY-RHYTHM.

Poly means "many" ... Polyrhythm means "many rhythms". For there to be a polyrhythm there has to be two opposing rhythms played at the same time.

If you wanted to play 5:4 which means a ratio of 5 against 4, you would have to play your quintuplets in your hands while you play 4 sixteenth notes in your feet ... that would be a polyrhythm. Playing quarter notes in the kick drum while you play quintuplets is NOT a polyrhythm ... it's just 5:1 which is not a polyrhythm.

Playing 5's or 7's is called Odd Note Groupings. You can check out a lesson on my website which is a good example of a odd note grouping.

Quintuplet Patterns

OK, I see what's happened. First of all, I never said the word "polyrhythm" anywhere; someone else did. I do know what a polyrhythm is, and I didn't use the word quintuplet because I wasn't just talking about fives. But I did type 5:4 which is a way of *saying* polyrhythm. So I had to dig through and find my Chaffee book to figure out where the miscommunication happened.

If any of you have Gary Chafee's "Rhythm and Meter Patterns," turn to page 15 where he talks about "other numerical subdivisions of the quarter note." He writes that one quarter note can equal 5 subdivisions. He writes it as five 16ths per quarter, or five 16ths with the 5:4 bar spanned across them. So I'm not wrong in using the term 5:4. (either that or both me and Gary are wrong ) But I can see where it could lead to confusion.

If I could notate in this message board, I'd show you all what I mean very easily, but I can't. Intersting thing is that you've all commented on the way it's been described, but none of you have talked about whether you've tried it. It's a hell of a lot of fun! I'm just taking Chaffee's lessons and expanding them... instead of single strokes, I'm doing doubles and triples, or, put another way, instead of RL, I'm doing RR, instead of RLR I'm doing RRR.

Comprede?

thanks rlhubley...

But (all due respect) you're wrong in calling it 5:1. A group of five 16ths over a quarter note value, according to Chaffee, is written as 5:4. I believe because the "4" relates to "quarter note." In your definition of 5:4, you're talking about a polyrhythm (5 notes within a 4/4 measure [4 quarters]), which is not what we're talking about, although I can see how the confusion might happen. Gotta get the idea of polys outa yer head.

It makes no sense to call it 5:4 if you are only playing quintuplets in 4/4 time. 5:4 denotes a polyrhythm ... and it's not a polyrhythm.

If Chafee says what you seem to be saying, it's not correct; it's a typo or a misprint.

Your not playing 5:4 or 7:4 ... you are just playing odd groupings which simply called Quintuplets or Septuplets. There's absolutely no need to notate it as 5:4 or 7:4 unless you are adding accents that makes it sound like a polyrhythm of 5 against 4 or 7 against 4.

sweeeeetttt!   As usual, the great hubley is not wrong!!  HA HA HA  LOL at my own sarcasm, and self-esteem issues that make me have to congratulate myself.   Which is really just sad.  

well, I'm not taking this one any further.   Just let it be noted that I humbley disagree.  

A very thorough reply Bart! And thanks for the time.

Once again: Nowhere did I say I was talking about polyrhythms. Let's put the idea of polyrhythms to rest, that's something entirely different.

What I'm talking about is your first example, which I (and Gary) call "groupings." This is the term that I used in my original post, and the term that is in the book I mentioned. Using the term quintuplets is limiting, IMHO, because then you're only referring to fives. I think my use of the 5:4 is what caused the confusion and made people think this was a polyrhythm. It is not a polyrhythm that I'm talking about, and I'm not going to say that word anymore today.

Bart, in your first example, where you have "5" over the 16ths... Gary notates it as 5:4. I'm sorry if that freaks you all out but that's the way he does it and that's the way I learned to notate it. Go into a drum store and look at the book. In it, he gives his reasons why: "The first [note] refers to the number of notes in the grouping, while the second indicates the amount of time allotted for these notes." That's just the way he does it, and you can't fault me for learning it that way.

Now... back to the original post look at Bart's first example and instead of playing those in simple RLRLR LRLRL RLRLR LRLRL try using double strokes. It hurts the brain. It goes:
RRLLR RLLRR LLRRL LRRLR

What that does is it fools your brain a bit because you're PLAYING THE SECOND NOTE OF THE DOUBLE ON THE QUARTER NOTE. Sorry for the shouting, but this was the whole trick to the exercise. Then try it with triplets (but it won't fit in common or cut time, you have to do six quarters before it comes around again).

Anyway, again, thanks Bart. The thread turned out to be even more mentally challenging than the exercise. But it was fun. I like mental challenges.

I tried your pattern this morning side.  It's cool, but I keep "automatically" wanting to put a diddle figure in to cycle the measure back to my right.

RRLRL RRLRL etc.

But it sounds nice and gnarly just the same.

OH and one more thing...if anyone plays these figures, even correctly, the whole band will turn around and yell

YOUR WRONG!   too funny

No problem Felix... btw, my girlfriend thinks you're funny.

Hey, this is a great discussion..a little "old" I see.. but I'm New here so I thought I'd bring it back up..
It's just a matter of semantics (right word?) when Chaffee puts 5:4 over the figure. 5 in the same time as 4. The parenthesis just go over the 5 sixteenths. So it's 5 sixteenths in the time of 4 sixteenths.
 Anyway nice to be here.....gonna go look around...


                                                                   Joe