Видео

@@yoanalexander Great question! To the best of my knowledge, the recognized styles of linear "Salsa" dancing are On1, On2 and Puerto Rican style On2. When it comes to On2, the footwork is based on "Contratiempo", but the most popular timing is the Eddie Torres timing (or "Modern Mambo") which is slightly different from actual "contratiempo". However, some still dance "On2" using the original "Contratiempo" timing. (An example is how Joel Dominguez and Maria Palmieri teach.) The style known as "Power 2" is linear and uses "Contratiempo". "Power 2" is a timing that was promoted by dancers such as Angel Rodriguez of the dance company "Razz M'Tazz". It is also similar if not identical to the timing used by "Classic "Mambo" dancers at New York City's Palladium Ballroom back in the late1940s and 1950s. However, the NY2 (or Eddie Torres timing of 123-567 seems to be the popular way of teaching "On2" nowadays. Since there are basically at least 3 timing variations for dancing "On2", it's possible to use "Contratiempo" timing. It's just up to the person. As for Puerto Rican style "On2", I'm not exactly sure if they use the "Eddie Torres" timing or "Contratempo".

Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it!0

@@AvanteTeam Thank you for your comment! I understand what you are saying, and many others have said similar things. However, if you're referring to "Latin Hustle", that is what it has been called since the 1970s. I didn't give it that name.

@@AvanteTeam Thank you for that comment! I really appreciate it!

@@AvanteTeam Well said! Excellent comment and very informative! Those are the elements that were developed into what came to be known as "Casino". I couldn't agree with you more! Those are the very important roots of what has been referred to as "urban Son". However, all of that is outside the scope of this video series. This video series is not about exploring the roots of Cuban dances, it's about understanding the development of linear Salsa styles and why they differ from other Salsa dancing styles in Latin America.

@@salsagoals You should do one, your production is incredible. Where do you get your information from? Estoy seguro que debes hablar español, no creo que los libros de Alejandro Carpentier o Fernando Ortiz, o Graciela Chao estén en inglés. In any case, we could exchange resources, most of what I have is in Spanish.

@@AvanteTeam Thank you for your comments and I'm glad you appreciate the videos! I started learning about Cuban musicology back in the mid-90s with the book "The Salsa Guidebook" by Rebeca Mauleon. From there, I kept investigating various sources (books, documentaries, interviews, online forums, etc). The only book I have in Spanish discusses "Casino" dance history (by Bárbara Balbuena).

@@AvanteTeam I agree with you 100%! But, I am referring to the finished product of Casino as developed at the "Casino Deportivo" around 1956 (more or less). I'm not talking about what Casino was based on. Like so many things, Casino was an update to something that came before it. Casino was reportedly a direct update to urban Son and Chachachá, (as I mentioned in my previous comments to @nmanVI) that reportedly came together in the late 1950s. Son and Chachachá existed way before Casino was developed as you mentioned. As I understand, Casino is an evolution of Son. However, I'm referring to the updated style of Casino itself, not the elements that it was updating. The point of this video is that the linear style of dancing in the U.S. (which was based on the "Mambo" dancing style popular at places like the "Palladium ballroom" in New York City) apparently wasn't inspired by Casino. Instead, it started becoming popular around 1948 and initially was based on Son dancing itself. The one thing that the U.S. Salsa dancing styles have in common with Casino is that both have a basis in "Son" which is why there are some similarities. The difference is that "Casino" was a more direct update to "Son" (and Chachachá) whereas "U S. Mambo dancing had a much weaker, more indirect connection to Son because it was exposed to a lot of other diverse dance influences due to the multicultural environment in which it developed.

@@salsagoals 100% correct, your channel is GOLD. As I mentioned earlier, I have all that information, but if I want someone to be VERY WELL INFORMED about all of this, I would send them DIRECTLY to your channel, that way they won't have to read the 300 articles, books, videos, films, and more multimedia files, and would still have accuracy on the matter. Man, you are a genious, also the very simple way you have to explain and present of all this, why are you doing this? You are also going against the industry, admirable.

Exactly! I agree 100%. However, this video doesn't discuss the origins of Casino itself. That is outside the scope of the video. I do mention that Casino was a direct update to urban Son. I didn't mention Chachachá by name like I probably should have, but this video wasn't intended to explore the roots of Casino in detail. The video asks the question, "Was linear Salsa dancing inspired by Casino?" In other words, did dancers from the U.S. see Casino dancing and then try to copy it? The subject of Chachachá Ruedas, Danzón, and the influence of European court dances is another subject altogether.

​@@salsagoals Amigo, how are you so well informed and still use the name "salsa", is that for visualization purposes? Also, I'm very curious of why you are making all of these videos, which have VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION, but people opt to ignore it. I have my resources, they match most of what you say, but that is information that is not easily found. I'm very confused right now, I haven't found any single place that has all of this information, I insist, I didn't find anything new on your videos, but I found a lot of information that took a lot of time to find and analize it, well basicly 2 years, a lot of it by luck. I insist, you must have 1,000,000 suscribers

@@AvanteTeam Thank you for that comment! I really appreciate it! This information is just based on my perspective after many years of research and observation. It's all designed to help newcomers make sense of "Salsa" and dance concepts as well as to examine certain questions that aren't really covered often to the best of my knowledge. It's also intended to just be a basic introduction to these issues. Hopefully, viewers can then do more research and develop their own perspectives. I focus on the music that falls under the internationally-recognized label of "Salsa" since that is what it is commonly referred to, especially here in the United States.

@@mhm8922 Thank you so much for your kind words! I'm glad that the information made sense!

​​​​​@@rowanabado Thank you for the comment! This video is not an ad for a course This video is actually part 1 of a 3-part series. This video just lays the foundation for what comes afterwards by first giving a perspective on what "musicality" involves. That course is optional for those who want additional information beyond these videos. That's why it's referred to as a "special bonus". But the main focus is on the information presented in this 3-part video series

Thanks for the comment, & I apologize for the confusion. This video is actually related to other "timing-based" videos on this channel, and I've explained the concept of the "dominant steps" in many of those other videos. But this concept can be confusing, especially if you don't understand what I mean. However, it's very important to understand what I'm about to explain to comprehend where I'm coming from. This is not a "technical" explanation of how to execute the basic "Salsa" stepping pattern. Otherwise, those steps on 3 and 7 would be included. However, I am not giving a "technical" explanation of the pattern. Instead, I'm giving a "musical" explanation to show how the steps match up with the rhythm of the music that we are dancing to. That's why those steps on 3 and 7 are not included. In fact, here is an entire video which explains the concept more clearly: ruclips.net/video/50P7bqfQjg8/видео.htmlsi=J2ruFeJfpKTa3D7c By "dominant steps", I'm referring to 4 out of the 6 steps in the pattern, specifically the "break step" as well as the step where you take that same foot and bring it back to the center. For the "New York 2," (123-567), I am not including the steps on beats 3 and 7 as "dominant steps". Although those steps are important, they don't necessarily factor into the steps which I call the "dominant steps", and the video that I shared with you just now explains why. Also, I group the "break step" on beat 2 with the "middle step" on beat 5 (and the step on beat 6 with the step on beat 1) because they are each the "dominant step" for that same leg The steps on beats 2 and 5 are taken with the same leg. (The same goes for the steps on beats 6 and 1). Each set of dominant steps refers to steps that are taken with the same leg, not with opposite legs. The "break" step is always the first and most important "dominant step". The "middle step" is the second "dominant step" that simply continues the rhythmic sequence that the "break step" started. In addition, I didn't just randomly decide to make up this concept of the "dominant steps" because I felt like it. There is a reason why I utilize this concept, and it has to do with the origin of the stepping pattern. So, please be on the lookout for my next video (coming soon!) because it's really going to go into a lot more detail and explain this concept more fully so that you understand exactly why I call those steps the "dominant steps".

@@salsagoalsI must thank you for your interesting videos analizing salsa dancing. I understand now why you choose 1 & 5 as (secondary) dominant steps to 2 & 6, in the New York on2 style. I agree with.you that the dancing pattern in this style is different to the on2 mambo, and the on1 style. I think that the difference lies in where that pause is. By pause I mean the time where there is not stepping. In on2 mambo, son, and on1 dancing the pause occurs before the break step, on the contrary, in New York on2 style the pause comes between middle steps. I have asked my self that if this situation is somehow awkward for a fluid dancing. But, I think is very interesting if it can be performed accurately. Finally, regarding the way you select the dominant steps to me is not totally useful because it can not be applied to all possible dancing patters. That is why you are finding things wrong with New York on2 pattern. In this style, if you center on the steps when you depart from the middle before the break steps and come back to the same step, you have perfect alignment. Those steps are 1 & 3 and 5 & 7. There are other possible dancing patterns which are different to the styles mentioned above. For example, stepping 8-1-2 and 4-5-6 with breaks on times 2 and 6, and the other indicated times occur as middle steps. Also, if you alternatively DEFINE the dominant steps as the times where the dancer put more emphasis, in New York style case, you would naturally select "1 & 2" and "5 & 6" as dominant steps. Of course, they ocurre with different legs. But still you will see that they are well posed in the two compasses of the music Thanks for addressing my question.

Thanks for the comment and I'm glad the concept makes a little more sense now. Also, I didn't just decide for myself which steps are the "dominant steps" based on my own preference. Rather, it's based on the way that the timing was originally defined in the dance of the "Cuban Son" (which is where the "Salsa" basic stepping pattern that we use today originally came from). I'm not just making all this up for fun. There's a reason why I call them the "dominant steps". These "dominant steps" are determined by how they match the rhythm that is being highlighted in the music (either "a tiempo" or "contratiempo"), not which steps the dancer is trying to emphasize. I'm giving a "musical" explanation of the step, not a "technical" one (where you indicate which counts to step on and which foot to use). I'm not trying to explain "what" count we step on, but rather "why" and "how" that count matches some aspect of the rhythm (because it's all about connection with the music when we dance). Sure, it may seem like we can rearrange the "dominant steps" to make them both fit into the same measure of music. However, the rhythm of the music determines which steps are the "dominant" ones, which is why the "break" step is being counted before the "middle" step (not other way around unless you're dancing "On3" maybe). The "dominant steps" are defined by the rhythm of the music. Since the rhythm in each bar of music always starts on beat 1, the first "dominant step" is that first "break step" that takes place in the bar. The "middle step" doesn't happen at the beginning of the measure (or "compas"), it happens either in the middle of it (for On1) or at the end (for traditional "On2" such as "Power 2"). Also, remember that the Eddie Torres "New York 2" timing is not the original, traditional way of dancing "On2". It's a great timing, but the "NY 2" is still a slightly modified version of the "Contratiempo" timing (234-678) also known as "Power 2". This was the On2 timing that was sometimes used at places like New York's "Palladium Ballroom" (and before that, in Cuba with the dance of the Cuban "Son"). Therefore, the definition of those "dominant steps" doesn't come from the "NY 2" step. It comes from the original Cuban "A Tiempo" or "Contratiempo" patterns which are still used today. Actually, these "dominant steps" are the same in practically all the "Salsa" basic step patterns that are used today (On1, Power 2, etc.) and they follow the same rhythmic rules (either all "A Tiempo" <1,3,5,7> or all "Contratiempo" <2,4,6,8>). However, the ”NY 2" is the exception, because it differs from these other traditional timings (for the reasons shown in the video). That doesn't mean it's wrong, just that it might be different from what some expect because it changes the rhythmic dynamic that the other steps follow. And this could be why some have criticized the timing for being "out of sync" with the music. (It also could be why some have trouble learning the "NY 2" because it feels awkward.) I'm not finding things wrong with the "NY 2" myself. Personally, I think it's fine because I understand the advantages that the rhythmic unevenness gives it over other steps. However, some who dance other Latin American styles may criticize the timing of the footwork, possibly due to that same rhythmic unevenness. So all I'm doing is attempting to explain a possible reason why they might do that so that we can understand where they are coming from and address the issue. More videos on this subject are coming soon!

@@salsagoals Thanks for answering. I have a doubt, you say that the dominant steps are chosen just by musicality, in such case, you will be implying that in salsa the dominant musical times are "2, 5, 6 and 1" and I dont think that is so. Salsa is a mixture of different instruments and they are accentuating different times which gives flavor. I think the dancer can choose what steps to select as dominant. He can even select to step between times as for example when dancing with the clave.

​@@alejandrolimache9518Great point! However, the rhythmic timing of the music is defined by the music, not by the dancer. Regardless of what the dancer does, the music itself has a specific timing that each instrument emphasizes. Although these dominant steps are on 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1) in the NY2 step, that's not where the "dominant beats" of the timing are in the music. In the music, the "dominant" "contratiempo" beats are on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8). For example, instruments like the campana emphasize the "A Tiempo" beats (or the "strong" beats of the rhythm). The conga tumbao pattern emphasizes the "Contratiempo" beats (or the "weak" beats of the rhythm). The "dominant steps" of almost every traditional "Salsa" basic pattern emphasize one of those timings, but not both simultaneously. The Eddie Torres "NY2" pattern is the exception because it mixes both timings. (i.e. the "break step" is on a "contratiempo" beat, but then the "middle step" is on a strong "a tiempo" beat). The "dominant steps" aren't on the same rhythmic page as they are in other traditional timings, and this could possibly make the step look a little "out of sync" rhythmically to some (particularly some who dance other non-linear styles of "Salsa"). This issue is not about which beat the dancer tries to emphasize. Since "Salsa" has many different instrumental patterns going on, the dancer can choose the timing they want. In fact, they can emphasize whatever beats they want. But, being in sync with the timing of the music is another issue. If we want to be in sync with the music in a way that others will be able to recognize, then it's important to dance with the same consistent timing as the music. Your comments seem to focus on the steps the "dancer" chooses to highlight, but I'm focusing on the rhythm that the "music" is highlighting. I agree with your comments, but I'm talking about something different. I'm not talking about the intention of the dancer, I'm talking about the timing of the music (whether you choose to use "a tiempo" or "contratiempo" timing, the point is to be consistent with that timing). Yes, the dominant steps of the "NY 2" are on either 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1). But that's just where they happen to land for the "NY 2". In traditional "Contratiempo" they land on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8) which is the way this timing was originally (both in the music and the dance). Therefore , the timing of the "dominant steps" in the NY2 is a deviation from the way the timing was originally supposed to be. This is what might cause the rhythm of the "NY2" basic stepping pattern to seem "off" for some.

Thanks, and very accurate points! I appreciate the feedback!

My apologies. It was definitely not AI generated. However, I will try to avoid that background song in the future.

@@philipjean-jacques5322 Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed the information!

Thank you for watching!

Thanks! I'm glad you liked the video!

Why do you say it is misinformation? The influence of Jazz on "Salsa" isn't my opinion, it is a documented audible fact. I didn't make it up. I'm simply pointing out the fact that Jazz itself is an African -American form of music. In part 2 of this video series, I also point out some simple ways to identify that Jazz influence so that one can hear it for themselves. The fact that Jazz influenced the development of "Salsa" music is pretty well known. I encourage you to research what many musicologists have said regarding the various elements present in "Salsa" music. However, keep in mind that "Jazz" only influenced and enhanced the pre-existing melodies and harmonies in the music. The foundation is undeniably Afro-Cuban.

Interesting! Thanks!

Interesting! Thanks for your comment and I'm lad you enjoyed the video. I haven't seen the instructional video that you mentioned. Is there any kind of link to it? I would definitely like to see it.

I don't see a link but the dance choreographers are Miranda Garrison and Kenny Ortega which now I believe are LA On1 dancers and the 1st time I seen any kind of salsa dancing back in the 80's. I grew up watching I Love Lucy hearing and watching Desi Arnaz when I was 12 I got my 1st Tito Puente album by the time I was 16 I saw LA Salsa but new I was getting a NYC feel from Titos mambo

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

Thank you so much for the comment! I'm glad that you are enjoying the videos!

Thanks for your comment! You are correct, and I wish I were able to use video examples instead of just illustrations. But the principles are pretty clearly explained from a musical and rhythmic standpoint. Hopefully, though, I can use more video examples in the future. You make a great point.

I agree 100% and that's what Part 3 of this video series shows. Even though the word "Salsa" has been associated with this music since the 1930s, it began to be used as a commercial label for the entire family of mostly Cuban rhythms in the 1960s, and Fania records made it an official label in the 1970s. Nevertheless, as part 1 of this video discussed, the foundation of the music is undeniably from Cuba, likely the Cuban Son-Montuno (Guaracha-style).

That's a great video, and there are a lot more where that came from. I also like the song "Rumba en el Patio" from Conjunto Kubavana. ruclips.net/video/lN8U0uLw_Ak/видео.htmlsi=ig4stLhpgrQK-5M8 This song was remade by Salsa artists like Sonora Ponceña. But that just goes to show how unmistakably Cuban the foundation of Salsa is. I think the original Cuban version was from 1948, and at around 2:30 into the song, it sounds just like Eddie Palmieri's "Vamonos Pal Monte", except it was recorded 23 years earlier! There are other examples, but I recently discovered this treasure from Roberto Faz. I believe it was from 1959, though I can't find a reliable date: ruclips.net/video/264dTy-aBuY/видео.htmlsi=biYj2YOjPMOxuXtt With the slight upgrades and adjustments that "Salsa" musicians made to the Cuban rhythms, this song from Roberto Faz shows that Cuban "Son Montuno" was already at a high level and the "Salsa" sound wasn't too dramatically different from what Cuban musicians had already done.

Thanks for the comment! That may be true when it comes to the dancing. I'm talking about the music, however. Small elements of Bomba and Plena are definitely in many Salsa songs, especially elements of Bomba. Based on what I've heard, they are sometimes used from time to time as brief transitions or bridges before the rhythm goes back to the standard Cuban Conga Tumbao pattern. There are way too many examples of this for me to list here, but one good example is "Yo Soy de Ley" from 1980 by Roberto Roena (which is apparently a remake of a 1976 Cuban song called 'Mañana me Caso Contigo' by Conjunto Universal de Cuba): ruclips.net/video/AY3fKldv0og/видео.htmlsi=q9liE_MZNdEDmzHf Notice when the Bomba rhythm comes in at :38, then again at 1:13. Then, please listen to other Salsa songs and see if you can recognize when this rhythm happens. Of course, many other songs don't use the Bomba rhythm quite as much (or for as long) as this song does. This song is an exception. But it's a good example of Bomba being used in Salsa music. It still is used a lot but in much smaller doses. Also, Bomba doesn't replace the standard Cuban "Son Montuno" rhythm. It just seems to be like an embellishment to add some variety to the music.

Real Puerto Rican artists have always said that it’s just Cuban Music, yet the media keeps calling it by a different name on purpose. Cuba was looted by communists first and then by record labels

@@salsagoals That's not a motive to change the name. And That's hapen only in the 0000000000000000, 1 of the time.

@@jorgemdiezmero This video never said it was a motive to label the music "Salsa". That is a different issue altogether and "Bomba" is only one of the slight enhancements that musicians made to the music during the early days of "Salsa" music. The influence of Jazz, an African American genre, was much more widespread and noticeable than those small elements of "Bomba" or "Plena" that are sometimes used. Please don't confuse what I'm saying for things you may have heard from others because this video is not saying the same thing. The occasional use of Puerto Rican elements such as "Bomba" still do not change the music from being fundamentally Cuban at its core. Even still, elements such as "Bomba", while minor and only briefly used, occur in way more songs than what you mentioned. (There are many examples that I can easily send to you.) It is definitely much more than 0% like you stated and that is very easy to prove. In fact, I already sent you one example. But in order to know the overall percentage of "Bomba" used in "Salsa", you would have to actually listen to a lot of "Salsa" music. Unfortunately, some don't actually listen to enough actual "Salsa" music since they don't seem to like it very much. Especially if they think that "Salsa" is just Cuban music that was given a new name like you seem to be saying. I understand that viewpoint and have heard it many times before. However, the issue of the motive behind the name "Salsa" is an entirely different subject than what this video is discussing. Part 3 talks more about that. On the other side, there are those who think that "Salsa" is much more than just Cuban music. It's a controversial subject. However, this video is not about taking sides. I personally believe that "Salsa" is basically a re-interpretation of Cuban Son-Montuno (among other mostly Cuban rhythms). Slight embellishments were made to enhance the music somewhat, just like seasoning can enhance the flavor of a meal. However, those enhancements were minor and don't change the fact that the foundation of the music is Cuban. Also, they weren't enhancements that Cuban musicians couldn't have made themselves. Modern Cuban styles like Songo and Timba are proof of that. So when you keep trying to argue that "Salsa" is Cuban music, you're "preaching to the choir" so to speak. You're telling me something I already know and something this video series already explains . This is why, when you sent me that video of the Conjunto Kubavana song, I immediately sent you 2 more Cuban Guarachas in reply. Thank you for that song. I am always looking for more Cuban Son-Montunos which clearly show that Cuban musicians were already approaching the "Salsa" sound decades before the "Fania Records" era even began. This is also why these videos clearly state from the beginning that the foundation of "Salsa" is Cuban music. I understand the argument you are trying to make, I think you are just making it on the wrong channel.

Thank you for sharing your perspective and experience! Great comment!

Thank you very much! It took a while, but I'm happy to have finally made it!

Thank you! I'm glad you found it interesting!

Great point! For the "Eddie Torres 2" basic, the foot positions are different, but the sequence of steps is essentially the same with the same timing.

Thanks for your comment and I have heard that before . However, this video is about the clave pattern, not the instrument that is being used to play that pattern. Whether you use the clave sticks or clap with your hands, the pattern itself is the same. The clave pattern was not introduced to Africa from Cuba. It is based on an African bell pattern that existed already.

Thanks for commenting. That is correct and I agree with you that "Salsa" music has many musical elements as this video shows, especially starting at 3:30. However, the main foundation is Cuban, likely the Son-Montuno to be exact. That doesn't mean that it is only Cuban music and nothing else. The point of this video series is that the main foundational elements of "Salsa" are Cuban rhythms. Other musical elements such as North American Jazz, Rock, Pop, and other Afro-Puerto Rican influences were added to enhance and upgrade the music somewhat. But the base was undeniably Afro-Cuban. Those other elements were just upgrading a musical style that already existed. It's like Johnny Pacheco himself said in an interview. "Salsa is and always has been Cuban music" but with a New York twist. Here is that interview: ruclips.net/video/NE9VQXgMebo/видео.htmlsi=I8qMg_8sOBkPfAXY Please check out the description of my video for a link to the book "The Salsa Guidebook" by Rebeca Mauleón. This book is just one of many sources that discuss the well-researched origins of "Salsa" music. This video is part 3 of a series, so please be sure to watch all 3 videos completely for the full story. A lot of what you mentioned was already covered in parts 1 and 2.

Thank you for your comment! However, the point of the video is not to criticize the NY2, but to point out discrepancies that some can view as inconsistencies, especially if they are used to other more rhythmically consistent stepping patterns like On1 and Contratiempo timing. This doesn't mean that the NY2 timing is wrong, just that it can be confusing to some who don't understand the logic behind it and the advantages it has (particularly when it comes to the timing of turn patterns). The rhythmic timing of the "dominant steps" (or the step that you take your break step with and then return to the center) deviates from the consistency of timings like On1 or "Power 2" for the reasons clearly outlined in the video. This gives it a different look and feel from the other timings. Many of us don't mind (or even notice this), but others might. It's a matter of personal preference. But the explanation given on how the NY2 deviates from the rhythmic consistency of other timings is a fact, not an opinion. (How the "dominant steps" line up with {or deviate from} either the "strong" or "core" beats of the music {1,3,5,7} or the "weak", "contratiempo" beats {2,4,6,8} is a musical definition, not my personal opinion. Now, if someone views that as a good (or a bad) thing, that is where personal opinion comes in. Before posting this video, I posted a video about "On2 Pros?" which explained some of the advantages of these NY2 rhythmic deviations. That video is here: ruclips.net/video/fYIKmJflyGU/видео.html However, some still haven't seen that video. Instead, they focus on this one, and they seem to have missed the point of this video altogether. But that's why it's important to watch the entire video and get the whole story. I agree with you that these different timings have nuances that are logical and beautiful. In fact, if you saw the video until the end, that's kind of the video's ultimate message. You might want to go back and watch the video again, specifically from 7:25 onward. However, remember that while those nuances can be a "pro" for those of us who love On2, they can be a "con" for others who don't dance On2. Some dance other styles from Latin America like Salsa Caleña, Casino, etc. Also, some beginners want to learn the NY2, but they have trouble figuring out the timing of the basic stepping pattern. Look at some of the other comments on this video and you'll see that I'm not making this up. For example, check out the comments by @island-lava and @jmruizgil. Therefore, it's important to understand what inconsistencies "others" might be seeing so that you can explain how the timing works and possibly help them understand it better. While the NY2 turn patterns may be great and well-coordinated, some pay more attention to the rhythm of the footwork. Even though you dance On1 and On2 Contratiempo, and regardless of how much you appreciate those timings, others who are watching the footwork of NY2 dancers can have a different opinion, and the footwork can possibly look rhythmically disorganized for the reasons outlined in this video. I personally love dancing "On2". I only discovered these rhythmical issues when watching various videos of NY2 dancers social dancing. While reading the comments on those video clips, I noticed some commenting that "NY2" dancers weren't in sync with the rhythm of the music. Obviously, I don't agree with that, but I wondered why they would say that. Were they just hating on the style, or was there possibly a real rhythmic discrepancy that they were noticing? This led me to discover these rhythmic deviations of the NY2 pattern. Again, I'm not criticizing the NY2 timing at all. Rather, this video is about understanding why "others" might criticize the timing (or even have problems learning it) so that we can better address those criticisms or help them learn it more easily.

The video indeed mentioned that On1 and On2 contratiempo are consistent, while On2 NY is less consistent

Thanks for the comment! No, you technically aren't standing still during the 1 or the 5 while dancing the NY2 because your body is ideally still in motion. However, your "middle steps" do hit the floor on those counts (1 and 5) which might be why some think it's still dancing "On1".