Shawn! It was so fun (and deeply confusing) to talk to you about this topic. I’ve been thinking/reading about it ever since- and, I stumbled on some interesting research about the active debate in the neuroscience community about whether humans can truly multitask. Here’s a quote from neuroscientist Earl Miller: "People can't multitask very well, and when people say they can, they're deluding themselves.” Sooooo... I think this pertains to your argument. Even if we THINK we are rhythmically multitasking, we may be deluding ourselves. If anyone can point me towards research about musical multitasking, I’d appreciate it!
Likewise, thanks Brian! I'd love to see the research too. It's so difficult to talk about subjective perception in objective terms. Two people can experience the same phenomenon, but describe it in completely different ways. Anyway, thanks for your wise words, the 'depth of field' analogy 'feels' right to me.
@@ShawnCrowder Perhaps these terms from music and auditory cognition research are helpful: _Phase alignment_ is a term to indicate people’s relative alignment between the interpreted beat and the music’s: what you choose to tap along to. This perception is a brain construct: research shows that people can stick to different beats than the accented one and that they can switch also mid-song - but as proggy musicians you’d already knew that :). _Temporal Gestalt_ is a neural representation emerging in the brain from the patterns it interprets from the acoustic events that come streaming in. Conceptually analog to the visual Gestalt of, say, seeing a school of fish as a single moving shape, this internal representation is what in this case captures “the pulse” or “the beat” of the heard rhythm. I guess being presented with 2 (or more) competing pulse patterns is more like an auditory Rubin’s vase: you can only see the vase *ór* the faces, not both at the some time. _Auditory object formation and selection_ is even more basic than a Gestalt: the brain makes up objects (e.g. “that’s guitar, sounds that’s hi-hat hits”) and then selects which ones to momentary attend and further process, upward in a hierarchy. _Attention modulation_ is the term often used to indicate how, more “top-down”, the brain picks which patterns and actions conscious attention is directed to. The analogy with a focusing lens or a searchlight is sometimes invoked, but the core idea might be processing cost. The hypothesis is that this attention arises as a singular: you can’t attend two competing patterns at the same time, the brain tries to converge away from ambiguity: it either finds a way to see both as one, or you switch from one to the other. I can try paste some literature references in a reply, not sure if the url’s would get stripped. For more, check e.g. the music cognition group at University of Amsterdam.
If Adam Neely is a musical Vsauce, then this channel feels like a kind of Vsauce 2. Visually and sonically it's so similar. I wonder if that was a conscious choice, or just two guys with similar tastes that have been working closely for years. This is in no way a criticism.
naresh Ben Levin or Brian Krock, although the former is *very* experimental in a way which Shawn largely refrains from and Adam only occasionally matches.
1000% and I often just lump them both in in that context, like Sungazer has the best music theory content on the internet and it's not even close Maybe it's reductionist to consider Shawn & Adam's content like that but gradually I've started watching their content equally over the past year or so and the dimensions each other's content adds to the other are kinda breath-taking
How I approach polymeter is always with a "parent" meter in mind, I lock in and think of that meter primarily, and place the other meter(s) beat one on top of that meter. You could say its thinking of both at once, but it really is just one meter with some weird displaced rhythm overtop. Something like 5/8 over 4/4 for example, saying "over" establishes the 4/4 as the parent meter, and I relate the 5/8 as being on or off the quaternote beat, and shifting beat one of 5/8 from the 1 of 4, to the + of 3, to then beat 2, to + of 4, and so on.
I like how at one point we go from talking about polyrhythms to talking about how the human mind perceives events in time! It's like Kant talking about Meshuggah.
I’ve often thought of it like a quantum superposition, where it can simultaneously be a mix of both time signatures until you decide to measure it - then you are forced to have a result one way or the other.
I stumbled across while working on Chopin's Nocturne in C Sharp Minor, Op. Posth. Chopin is of course filled with polyrhythms. As a pianist, I have to listen to multiple lines and voices all the time so that I can play all of them at once. The left hand is the rhythm section, the right hand is an incredible diva soprano who likes to lay back against the beat. I ended up at this video because the original autograph of this paticular nocturne has a lot more meters in it than the first edition. The first edition is all 4/4. The autograph (which Chopin sent to his sister), has an opening in cut time, the A section is in 4/4, and the B section is in 3/4 in the right hand and 4/4 in the left hand. I'd never seen that before. I think Chopin notated it this way because instead of a polyrhythm over one or two measures, there are two, four bar sections, each followed by two bars of 4/4 in both hands that contain the cadence. The editor of the Urtext I'm consulting speculated that the publishers of the first edition got rid of the polymeter because it was too confusing. However, in the process they lost Chopin's intention of a free flowing independent soprano line that floats above the 4/4 in the left hand. When both hands are in the same meter, it ends up sounding more metrical 🙂Still not sure how I'm going to figure this out, but I'm excited. To learn these types of passages, I create a composite rhythm like you describe, and train it into my hands so that the hands "trigger" each other as needed. Once it's locked in and up to speed, though, you kind of have to let it go and stop thinking. It becomes this strange sensation of feeling one rhythm in my body (the left hand rhythm section) and hearing the other rhythm with my ear as I "sing" the melody with my right hand. It's an experience that feels both bizarre and magical.
A distinction that would be interesting to dig into is what EXACTLY you mean when you use "hear" in this context. I think what we mean isn't the colloquial usage as in "sounds enters our ears as vibrations" because then I would say we do "hear" everything, but rather I think what we mean here is "consciously process". Looking at it like that, at least from the perspective of an engineer and musician, it makes more sense to look at it like software - our conscious thoughts are like the UI on screen, and the unconscious parts of our brain are like background processes. The UI of a program has one and only one thread responsible for updating whats on screen, but there can be an infinite number of background threads doing all sorts of asynchronous tasks simultaneously but they are opaque to the person looking at the UI. Seems like a neurologist or someone like that could give a really interesting perspective on this.
I've heard the term "audiate" used as an audio analog to "visualize". Though it does seem like "hear" is being used as "consciously process" like you said or "interpret", which are a bit different. I would think the visual analog to "hear" would be sort of like the way you view ambiguous optical illusions in different ways.
It's funny they used the depth of field analogy because it's exactly what came into mind as Shawn started to discuss hearing two time signatures. Amazing video!
I really enjoyed this discussion! The way I see it a time signature is more of your "anchor point" on which to base the rest of the notes you're going to play, more or less regardless of rhythm. Fun video!
the quality of your videos is increasing so much that i'm speechless! Content and videowise. So inspiring as a drummer, a teacher and a musician. Thx a lot. Cheers from Switzerland
Excellent video Shawn. It really becomes clear when you talk about everything being a linear occurence, as in - one "event" after the other/ two occurences simultaneously ".. a single, sort of stream, of events". Cheers.
I agree with you. I think a time signature is almost like an inertial reference frame in physics - a context in which to interpret observations. Growing up I have a strong memory of being disoriented by the beginning of "don't stand so close to me" by the police. The sustained bass notes and guitar chords on upbeats gave me one sense of pulse, then the drums entered and gave me a different one, and then the vocals start and I get a different one all over again.
I tap on desks with my fingers, I can feel the minute muscle movements in each arm producing triples and quad patterns- in both hands- now I can play the same triplets with a drum stick by internal rhythm of activating those finger muscles, in one hand I play those micro beats, in the other the macro beats, I posit the Piano player can hear and play in multiple time signatures at once.
You could have mentioned some Tigran! Entertain Me is so rich : 4/4 for the hands of the drummer, 35/16 (555533333) for everything else, in a polymetric way. I think the drummer thinks in 4/4, but you could probably "automatize" the 4/4 part and focus on the foot rhythm (which is rather easy by itself but combining the two is a crazy puzzle!) I can kind of do that by walking on the 4/4 grid and singing or clapping the 55553333 as I am walking. My inertia is enough to keep the 4/4 running without me actually having to feel it, and it kinda works. Doesn't work at all if I switch feet and hands, if I try to do that with left and right hand, or in front of the drums!
Nice video! Here in Latinoamerica there is a lot of folk music that uses polyrythms. For sure ones can listen multiple rhythms at a time, understanding the merge of both rhythms as a musical phrase. About polymeter, in my experience musicians that play this music know how to switch meter perception on their minds while playing so they are able to play fluently on every side of that polyrhythm. But never walking both downbeats at the same time.
Hi Shawn, thank you for this video. I completely agree with you. It‘s the personnel choice of everyone who to count the stuff you hear or play. I call this Phänomen an „enrhythmic mix-up“ like you have an „enharmonic mix-up“ regarding harmonies ;)
This was really interesting, thanks! I recently finished my PhD about polytemporal composition and all of this aligned with my research (phew!!). I ended up approaching it using clicks from a single laptop, but it feels like just the first step in terms of the possibilities that are out there; it's cool to see more of this kind of thing starting to come forward too. It Definitely going to head over to Brian and check him out!
I think its possible to feel a composite time signature instead of 2 different signatures. For instance if we play a 3 over 4 and take the 3 pulse as a new 1 of a different signature and make it into another pulse or signature for instance 5 then you are basically playing a 5/3 where the 3 is a part of another signature which is phrasing a poly rhythm itself and the 5 is the implied new signature... But the fun part is instead of taking the distance between 2 notes 3 which is what is should be according to the 5/3 groove if you treat it as a 4 note distance then your are basically playing a whole new thing with a little fast up rhythm... At this point you can always understand all the other nested rhythms/signatures? inside but then again what i faced was that i can at tops switch between the modes fast. but i can not hear the whole thing once if you are talking about observing the composite signature from different aspects at the same time. I stopped doing this cuz my head hurts lol but its a fun thing to do. And literally makes you dance with the metronome. The beauty of syncopation i guess. Edit: i commented this after going through the 8 minute mark. Without watching the full video.. but i just wanted to share this as this is exciting and relatable
I feel like people just want to argue semantics over what ends up being a moot point. It doesn't really matter if you can or can't experience two different time sigs at the same time. It's more important that, however you perceive the piece, you can play it correctly. Or at least, you can play it up to your own standards, I'm sure there are some musical endeavors that don't even require "correct" performance, which could be interesting.
Shawn does make an extrasemantic distinction in that he believes that a "total rhythm" is easier/only possible to learn. Maybe he should have started with that.
Never thought about the Chopin piece that way before. Also hilarious that you're unfamiliar with it, versus your foundational familiarity with works I've never heard before; it just goes to show that everyone has their own personal canon of work.
I think this feels somewhat like a trick question. It at least seems possible, from the listening end, to try and avoid counting along with the music in question, resulting in both rhythms sort of just blending together. This would probably count as a composite rhythm, however, which makes it feel like a bit more of a semantic discussion. By the same notion, the distinction between 'feeling' and 'hearing' the pulse feels important to point out, as you could theoretically rely purely on muscle memory while avoiding counting. If a performer was taught to play without counting, and they were playing intensive polyrhythms based purely on feel, it might be able to accomplish the same goal. The existence of music with a pulse that slowly increases tempo juxtaposed over a static pulse, or maybe a constantly changing pulse, would both complicate the discussion further, as a performer CAN accelerate the music based on feel while not actually counting along, and the listener can definitely perceive that experience. I think the basic question here is whether one can actually experience music without consciously recognizing either rhythm as the underlying pulse, or whether the two would be absorbed into a single composite rhythm, and from there whether or not that would actually qualify.
At the end of Benjamin Britten's Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra, there's a passage where most of the orchestra are playing the fast tempo of the fugue, but the brass play the Purcell theme at the original speed. Most players are obviously playing one time signature or the other, but doesn't the conductor have to hear both? Similar thing at the end of Vaughan Williams overture to The Wasps, where he combines two of the main themes (in different effective metres) together at the climax of the piece
‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️LISTEN!! This happens in EVERY SONG AS YOU MIGHT KNOW. In a Song You may hear over Five or six instruments along with THE SINGER VOICE which sings the melody of WRITTEN LYRICS. IN MY OPINION, I think it's very important to have Different Time Signatures when listening or composing a A non-Solo music as in Symphonies and orchestras and Songs etc. BECAUSE It's the way you add flavours and colours and protect the listener from getting bored. Also It's Important for BEAUTY and ART in general. Because art have not small amount of beauty along with other necessary elements in it. And about Time signature I think It's NOTHING MORE THAN A CONTROLING ELEMENT of instruments playing. It's a basic thing and a very organizing factor that encadres The music and give it the necessary factor of discipline and without it there is no music. It's the discipline of music. It's just makes sure how much times are in every bar. We can have any number of bars in a musical phrase the most important thing is to have the same number in each bar. Even composers can disrespect thiis rule by adding silences and playing with other things so the ONE or STRING beat can stay unknown hh. And this actually happens in other ways too. But to be honest TIME SIGNATURE is very important in that it put a cadre of time in a piece of music. AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO MUSIC TO BE CALLED MUSIC AND ART. This cadre of time is what makes music music. It's not somthing has to be united between different instuments. Each instrument should play whether in the same time but with different way or in totally different time. The most important thing is to CREATE HARMONY BETWEEN THE RHYTHMS while playing and make the music AWAY FROM being BORING AND makes it more BEATIFUL at the same time. Let's not forget THAT MUSIC IS NOT JUST FOR ENTERTAINMENT and beauty and expression BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY ABOUT (TEACHING, RAISING AWARENESS, CHANGING THINKING, CHANGING SOCIETIES, CORRECTING WRONG BELIEFS) many people forget about that MUSIC IS A MESSAGE A NOBLE MESSAGE ABOVE ALL. It's not just about the composer or music creator it is also about addressing the other. IT'S different thing but artists just focus on just ONE THING. unfortunately.
I like to think about the time signature as a way to organize the musical performance. For me it seems as if there is no need to have two ways of Organisation at the same time for one individual player. I would recommend to take the easier way so you can focus more on performing than organizing.
15:55 what I’ll do is set one playing on one hand and then try to hold that while playing the other rhythm on the other hand. So in a sense you can put one on muscle memory in the back of your head while actively trying the other. This only happens with faster rhythms like that last example though
He is a professional. He is also (in general) MUCH more intelligent than average. And he spent a SHIT-LOAD of time exploring this topic. I guess I just got your self-esteem triggered, too.
there are times when I can coherently listen to two completely unrelated songs at the same time and there are times when I can keep track of their tempos separately, but it's an incredibly weak feeling, and it self-destructs the moment I try to observe it, immediately going to one tempo or the other it's never happened within a single song, no matter what weird timing stuff it does
On the topic of monitoring separate rhythms, from both a percussionist and listener's perspective, I think there's also a certain threshold. For instance, at about 6:34 in the Tool song "Eulogy", I feel like the 3/16 groove of the hihat and the 4/4 groove of the snare/bass can be independently monitored due to their difference in register. From a percussionist perspective, however, I think it can either be learned as two separate rhythms or one composite rhythm -- when I first learned it as a teenager I definitely interpreted it as two separate rhythms to monitor, for instance. In other words, I think other elements are also heavily at play for this topic, such as timbre, register, etc. If you have two snare drums tuned the same way playing a 5/8 groove and 7/8 groove, it'll be hard if not impossible to distinguish. If you keep the same groove however, but put one on a ride bell and the other on a dry tom, then they become much more easily separable from a listening perspective. However, there is also a definite threshold that I think is dependent on rhythmic density. For instance, in the Porcupine Tree track "Sound of Muzak", the kick and snare are playing a 7/16 groove (3+2+2) while the hi-hat is playing quarter notes (with eighth notes ghosted in between), basically in 7/4, creating this interesting 7:4 polymetric and polyrhythmic pattern. When listening, for instance, I hear it all as a composite rhythm. However, when I learned to play it, I learned it as separating my hi-hat hand and my snare/kick entirely from each other, so it very much is playing two separate meters/rhythms, in a sense, which is weird, because my brain playing it, and my brain listening to me play it, basically interpret it both ways simultaneously, so what I hear from playing it is not what I mechanically feel when playing it, if that makes sense.
ruclips.net/video/ywcqultfYaM/видео.html I really like this example because here Jacob switches back and fourth between two different (felt) time signatures as the actual rhythmic pattern stays the same
Peace and blessings to all who read this. It's very understandable that Shawn, who can do a 22 on 21 polyrhythm, would think if he can't perceive two time signatures simultaneously, then no one can. However that 21 on 22 thing is exactly why he can't, because he is so intellectual. There's nothing wrong with that and I rather like his channel, but the way to perceive two time signatures at once is to perceive one time signature/pulse with the body (for which the 2 pulse is best) and the other with the brain (for which the 3 pulse is best). Thus only simple, easy to feel time signatures work. 2 on 3, and if you're really good, 3 on 4. 5 on 3 is too complex. Even though Shawn's thumbnail is probably meant to be wacky ("13/8 and 7/16") it's another example of his brain-only approach to time. Peace and blessings, drumming brothers and sisters.
I know I definitely can't process two independent pulses at the same time and I don't think I know anyone that can. But I wouldn't rule out that someone can do it. When babies and young kids are exposed to stuff they learn some wild shit. It's not like you have an organ that processes pulse and you only have one that can't be split or maybe it is. Need some brain science to crack that one. The idea of perfect pitch would be equally ludicrous if there were only a hand full of people in the world who could do it. This could be like that except the conditions required to develop the skills as a child are never or rarely ever met.
You could debate the existence of perfect pitch too - just shift the temperament around, then people who intimately understand A=440 have to consciously learn the new temperament if they want to distinguish it from A=440. By that logic, sufficient familiarity and recall of a certain temperament to pass as perfect pitch can be learned.
here's a question: can you hear No time signatures at the same time? can a free tempo piece truly be felt without automatically finding some paridolia sense of "1" in there?
Make it really really slow, well actually around 33 bpm. Check out Adam Neely’s vid on what is the slowest song and that should answer your question. With speed though brings up an interesting point, if you spaced notes out in such a way where nothing aligns that would create a very interesting piece
famitory I mean, depends on what's meant by a time signature, in that a pulse can be stretched and squashed quite a bit in, for example, Balkan dance music or Finnish traditional ballads or even the Viennese waltz-not just rubato, but microrhythmic changes in the structure of the pattern itself which would register as distinct "time signatures" in the strictest sense. But even so, there's still an overarching pattern, and to that end I think that the mind does tend to create a sense of an underlying relative rhythm even when there might be no pulse to speak of, even if that perceived rhythm is constantly slowing down and/or speeding up. A study on ambient music or noise or field recordings, or even just an informal survey on the subject might be useful in gleaning more about that.
I would say in most of Noise Music there are good examples for Music where one cannot make out a time signature. What also comes to my mind is Ambient Music where there is just a sphere of harmony that moves so slowly one cannot feel a rhythm or the one of a measure. And I think there are plenty more examples of music where the concept of rhythm or time signature doesn't make that much sense.
Some of these polyrhythms are like an audible illusion. They are similar to the gif of the ballerina... is she spinning clockwise or counterclockwise. You cant see it both ways, and she seems to switch partway as your focus changes. Or the image of a candlestick or people talking... blackbirds or whitebirds....
When you count triplets you say takata. But for me when it is going fast, the two ta's are to complicated (same movement with the mouth) so I say bataka and can going really fast :) You can try it out if you want :)
viewsync patsy cline's tennesee waltz and patsy cline's walkin' after midnight you are now hearing two time signatures at once it's mostly a mess, but somehow some parts of it kinda work I swear to god these were just the first results I got for "pop music in [time signature]" I've never heard of patsy cline before, I don't get it either
But what about a 3/4 against a 2/4 polymeter that's notated in 6/4? I myself am thinking of doing this in a piece that I am composing and the individual accent patterns of each and their composite accent would be this: 3/4: S w w S w w | S w w S w w | 2/4: S w S w S w | S w S w S w | + ------------------------------------------------------- Acc: S w M M M w | S w M M M w -> composite accent of 3/4 and 2/4 within 6/4 bars where M stands for medium and is where only 1 accent pattern accents that beat, not both. And you can see why using a 6/4 time signature seems appealing to me. 6 can be divided into duple triplets but also into a slower 3 beats. And it can also be individual beats, accounting for both 3 and 2 simultaneously. The slower the tempo, the more individual each beat becomes and the less it sounds like triplets in 2/4. And the part of this piece that I am composing where this 3/4 against 2/4 polymeter occurs is at a slow tempo. But this, isn't this an example of where you could simultaneously hear 2/4 and 3/4 in the same bars or measures?
Yes you can, I do it naturally, my GF noticed I was doing it tapping the beat out and asked how? I just said "left and right." I tried to explain it, it's like two sounds, separate but equal, but there is a wall between them?
For me, this made it harder to ascertain whether polymeter/polytempo actually exists, as opposed to everything being just big polyrhythms. No matter what individual tempo you and I might be feeling, it'll re-align eventually, therefore couldn't it be rationalised as an extended polyrhythm instead?
For me, Philip Glass' - Mad Rush is another piece that gives me the sense of 2 rhythms. It isn't as fast as Fantasie Impromptu but I still lose the composite rhythm of 2 in the left hand and 3 in the right hand. I could see how someone with better training might not have that issue though. ruclips.net/video/BA5CEeFBn3M/видео.html
i wanted to say "you hear them all at once" but trying to actually define "you," "hear," "them," "them all." and "at once" ... it's easier to say, "no, just one."
Hey Shawn, ビデオが好きだった、but I’m really surprised that you didn’t even mention any african music at all. The Dagara people of Ghana play music composed in multiple time signatures that can be felt simultaneously. You feel the bigger beat between the two rhythms, like if something was played in a 2/3, the bigger beat would be where the two rhythms meet back at the top of the cycle. A lot of African music is written this way, and polyrhythms and meters are the norm. I definitely recommend you check it out, and I can direct you to more people about the subject too.
@@ShawnCrowder Hah yeah, should’ve been a little more specific there, but check out anything that Bernard Woma has ever done, there’s gyil bewa music which is in a 2/3 with the big beat being felt rather than either the 2 or 3, there’s music from Burkina Faso (balaphons, N’Gonis, etc) which is felt this way too, there’s the embaire, a gigantic Ugandan xylophone buried in the earth in which the very nature of its music is polymetric. Check out haruna walusimbi and his african embaire ensemble, he collars with another musician and ethnomusicologist Mark Stone.There’s a few more examples and I’ll reply to this comment when I find them again. I’m a university student studying this kind of music (and jazz) in-depth, so I’m sure something will come to mind later. Some people you can talk to that are significantly more knowledgeable about this are Haruna Walusimbi, a Grammy award winning artist for his work with Bela Fleck the banjoist, I momentarily forget her name but she’s the director of U of W Oshkosh’s music department. I discussed this with a few of her students when I performed embaire music at PASIC ‘19. Hope this helps!
Wait what if I have two songs play on two seperate audio sources at the same time. Something simple that your very tuned into hearing the pulse of. You don't need to be focused in to be able to interact with either song pulse seemleasly. No your aren't conciously audiating two time signatures. But clearly your brain can process two time signatures at once. I believe your right though about not hearing multiple rhythms at once conciously. It's like the classic it's not independence it's interdependence but again subconsciously you are capable of handling two seperate rhythms completely unrelated. Anyone who can have a quick conversation well still performing a song accurately has done this. Language obviously has its own rhythmic framework. I mean I think you hit on all but it is an interesting way to look at it. No conciously you can't split your focus like that. Yes subconsciously you can probably process that information individually assuming it's low enough bandwidth. I think it's probably useful way of framing it.
Ok so how many languages can you understand? The Katakana on the shirt, your RUclips default language on these clips you’ve inserted in the video, and English???? Incredible stuff
Interesting video. I will compose a piece of music for you with 2 simultaneous time signatures. There will be two “1”’s which seems to be the problem here.
Captain Beefheart had a track with two different time signatures (played by different musicians) at the same time; some say it's genius, some say it's un-listenable.
Completely irrelevant, but your videos make me wanna learn drums so damn bad. I've wanted to since I was a little kid (18 now lol) but I just never took action and ended up playing a wind instrument instead, and now after having grown an obsession with odd time signatures and polyrhythms and percussion instruments, but also now being financially responsible for all my hobbies, I cannot afford anything to learn on :( Such is life I guess.
Surely 5 over 3 is just 15/16 and that's the time signature that 5 over 3 is in. I guess I just agreed with you, because I've made two time signatures one time signature. 🤦♂️
That 5/7 you did was pretty killin. I think of that transition as being a triplet type relationship. 3+2 into 4+3 using normal 4:3 type rhythmic ratios. Same getting to 11 so from 4+3 to 6+4, etc. Like an odd time rhythm tree that doesn't quite work. Would be sort of equivalent of using perfect 4ths and 5ths for intonation rather than equal temperament. Your vids are always great man. Both info and playing wise
This was my thought also. I don't quite understand the semantics of Shawn's point. If the 5 and the 3 can both be felt as groupings of 16ths in a 15/16 meter, how is that not practically the same as "hearing" both the 5 and the 3 simultaneously. I can focus in on either one or hear them concurrently. I'm not sure I understand the language of the argument
@@nicholasscott9672 yeah I know what you mean. But once you're in 15, in your mind you might be able to slip easily between 555, 33333, 645, or even half time 15, etc. But in essence all those different groupings could be construed as its own time signature. I do feel like rhythm and dance are related. It's definitely possible to feel rhythms as up and down. Often beats with a downward feeling have low pitches and upward feeling with higher pitches. And those two could be different groupings or time signatures. And so I do think that it's possible to feel those both simultaneously often a lot easier physically, as you can have seperate body parts move to each rhythm. But in your mind one usually starts to become the primary reference to which the other one is set against. But this is why im not a fan of counting, because it's too linear and doesn't represent motion in an analogue way. We don't feel rhythm in our mind we feel it in our body and our body can dance to multiple rhythms simultaneously. So I don't see why we use a technique that's mostly useful to conceptualise and communicate music verbally, when its practical application is a physiological one that's capable of far more complexity. There's a bunch of music where there isn't really a one, and he talks about that. But as soon as you don't have a one there's no singular reference for the rhythm and these counting schemes and even pulse become sort of irrelevant. Sorry for the caffeine induced rant!
The first 30 second of this are some mind mangling rhythm. I can only conceive of it in 9 groups of 4. But I have no idea what they're dancing to because nobody is playing a pulse and there's a bunch of displaced groups of three. ruclips.net/video/QBlYYzZ8bcA/видео.html
I don't think it's true that Mary Had A Little Lamb in 3/4 sounds the same as in 4/4. A performance in 3/4 would place strong accents at the start of the bars, play notes like that D in the third bar as a gentle upbeat, etc.. The audio example you gave is in 4/4, regardless of what the sheet music says.
I see your argument, but what a human plays is not necessarily the only correct way a piece can be played. Also, songs with a tonne of rhythmic displacement that never lines up can be (and in many cases, are better) notated in "wrong" time signatures. A song like Weird fishes/Arpeggi has accents every third semiquaver, and some instruments play alternating twos and threes, all against a 4/4 drumbeat. The piece is still in 4/4 though, even when the drums drop out. These brief moments when the main pulse is lost do not mean the song is now not in that time signature. The notation shawn uses (3/4) tells us that 3/4 is how the piece is felt, though with accents in different places. It is essentially a shorthand for an entire song's worth of context The 3/4 contextualises the "performance" for the listener, even without a backing, is what i'm getting at. Sorry for the wall of text.
@@michaelhird432 There are an infinite number of correct ways to play a piece, but that doesn't make all deviations from the score valid. The score in this case clearly tells the performer to convey a triple metre to the listener, and the audio doesn't do that. It's true that context, such as previous bars or other instruments, also affects how metre is perceived; but the audio features none of that context (except perhaps in the meta sense that, in the context of a video about perceiving metre, having the score on screen encourages the viewer to try and count it that way; which, sure, I guess, but that would be a very contrived example). I considered discussing the idea that there are legitimate reasons for time signature to not "accurately" reflect metre - perhaps including educational ones - but the entire video is about "hearing time signatures"; it seems pretty clear that we're talking about metre rather than notation.
"Sounds the same" as in "the sound waves coming out of the speakers are identical". But you're exactly right that if you were truly feeling it in 3/4 it would feel & sound very different, subjectively.
I wish I was better at switching how i feel a time signature. I can control how I hear a 3/4 over a 2/4 and swap between perceiving the time signatures, but I can't for the life of me feel 4/4 out of "pass the stinking butter". I think I need to do some polyrhythmic juggling.
Find a phrase with the same number of syllables, but that has the stresses on syllables 1, 2, 4, and 6 (instead of 1, 3, and 5). Here’s a really stupid one I just came up with: “Hey David, wipe your ass” (sorry to anyone named David; I’m not trying to be rude!). It should feel like 4/4, or maybe sort of a 12/8 feel.
You can do this with 5:4 vs. 4:5 as well. Once again, we’ll pick on the fictional David: “Hey David, don’t you wipe your ass?” = the pulse is in 5 (HEY DA-vid, DON’T you WIPE your ASS) Contrast with “Hey, the asswipe David’s calling” (HEY the ASS-wipe DA-vid’s CAL-ling). Sorry for the ridiculous examples (and for David’s stinky butt, I guess).
There are some crazy Indian people that do clap two different time signatures with their two hands while chanting some konnakol syllables on top. Isn't what they're doing hearing two time sigs at once?
I am surprised by the insistence on being able to hear time signatures. I never considered time signatures as anything but a convivence in musical notation. Granted, an incredibly useful one. Two numbers impart a ton of context to performers. You give a classical musician a 3/4 piece with a certain rhythm, and boom, you get a waltz with all the micro rhythms. The idea of multiple time signatures, polyrhythms, polymeter and polytempo are just to help musicians perform or understand things without resorting to notation with a level of precision that leaves no room for interpretation or any chance of getting it even nearly correct. Compare this to a computer. A time signature of 143/256? No problem. 4123/8192. Whatever. (MIDI uses microseconds per quarter note for global tempo). A computer can relentlessly subdivide events. Humans need shortcuts and approximation.
I think it's a confusion, indeed the x/y is just an abstract instruction for performers, who from training also start hearing it. What we all actually hear and perhaps want to hear, I think, is a groove: some pattern (however complex) that makes you (wanna) move.
I can't hear/feel both 5 and 3 pulses/time signatures simultaneously. But I can do that with 2vs3 and 3vs4. The Morrocan music for example, yes, simultaneously. Yes, both places at the same time. I am crystal clear and NOT confused as to what you mean. I can hear single notes as landing both on the beat and off the beat simultaneously. I know others that can do it as well. You say you "have an uncompromising view" othis but maybe you should be more open minded. Others can do things that you can't and you can do things that others can't. That is life.
No, not a 3 rhythm against a 2 pulse either, or vice versa. I'm talking about simultaneously perceiving two pulses/time signatures and simultaneously perceiving/feeling a single note as being on the beat in one signature and off the beat in another. You're correct when you say it's not possible FOR YOU. But it's possible for certain individuals.
My BEST GUESS as to why it is possible is that my body feels the duple pulse with triple subdivision while my brain thinks about the triple pulse with duple subdivision. Maybe. It's hard to explain. But this why I imagine this is impossible for a musician who is too intellectual. And my friend, you are extremely intellectual (NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! I love your channel!)
Wait - your first example wasn't two time signatures at once, it was a polyrhythm: two different pulse ratios whose "one" coincide. If you thought of these as time signatures, like 5/4 against 3/4, then they'd have to be in different TEMPOS/TEMPI for their downbeats to coincide. Otherwise their "one" would occur every 15 beats, or 3 5/4 measures or 5 3/4 measures. Then it sounds like you are mentioning additive rhythms, which combine to produce a single rhythmic and metric experience. I think if you listen to two songs being played at once, perhaps in different tempos and meters, maybe not even starting with their ones aligning, then you can get close to this phenomenon, especially if you know the songs well separately and can mentally juggle how they proceed without their asynchronous downbeats. It is also possible to NOT hear a time signature, or hear it incorrectly. There are various songs that intentionally, or unintentionally, trick the listener into thinking they are hearing one thing until the addition of something later tells them it was something different. Even then it is difficult to "unhear" what you heard originally, or "rehear" it correctly. I've examples of this, but that is a different topic. But there are also meters, or rhythms written within meters, or a sequence of changing meters, that defy the listener's ability to discern a single meter or series of changing meters without the benefit of knowing how it is notated or have learned how it goes. In this case you simply don't know where "one" is, and according to you, would experience zero meter. So... if such a person DID hear two or more meters, for which they couldn't find the respective ones, then they would be experiencing multiple meters they couldn't untangle. So it stands to reason the opposite can be true.
Yes it's a polyrhythm but he was talking about how you can frame it as being in either of two different time signatures (and yes, thus different tempos as well) by using tuplets. So it's either 5/4 with one big triplet or 3/4 with one big quintuplet. Besides, once you mess with these things enough they all start to blur together into the same thing seen from different angles, so it's kind of a distinction without a meaningful difference when examined in a vacuum like that without any other musical context.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Shawn! It was so fun (and deeply confusing) to talk to you about this topic. I’ve been thinking/reading about it ever since- and, I stumbled on some interesting research about the active debate in the neuroscience community about whether humans can truly multitask. Here’s a quote from neuroscientist Earl Miller: "People can't multitask very well, and when people say they can, they're deluding themselves.” Sooooo... I think this pertains to your argument. Even if we THINK we are rhythmically multitasking, we may be deluding ourselves. If anyone can point me towards research about musical multitasking, I’d appreciate it!
That would be very cool!
Likewise, thanks Brian! I'd love to see the research too. It's so difficult to talk about subjective perception in objective terms. Two people can experience the same phenomenon, but describe it in completely different ways. Anyway, thanks for your wise words, the 'depth of field' analogy 'feels' right to me.
John Verne 🤯
@@ShawnCrowder Perhaps these terms from music and auditory cognition research are helpful:
_Phase alignment_ is a term to indicate people’s relative alignment between the interpreted beat and the music’s: what you choose to tap along to. This perception is a brain construct: research shows that people can stick to different beats than the accented one and that they can switch also mid-song - but as proggy musicians you’d already knew that :).
_Temporal Gestalt_ is a neural representation emerging in the brain from the patterns it interprets from the acoustic events that come streaming in. Conceptually analog to the visual Gestalt of, say, seeing a school of fish as a single moving shape, this internal representation is what in this case captures “the pulse” or “the beat” of the heard rhythm. I guess being presented with 2 (or more) competing pulse patterns is more like an auditory Rubin’s vase: you can only see the vase *ór* the faces, not both at the some time.
_Auditory object formation and selection_ is even more basic than a Gestalt: the brain makes up objects (e.g. “that’s guitar, sounds that’s hi-hat hits”) and then selects which ones to momentary attend and further process, upward in a hierarchy.
_Attention modulation_ is the term often used to indicate how, more “top-down”, the brain picks which patterns and actions conscious attention is directed to. The analogy with a focusing lens or a searchlight is sometimes invoked, but the core idea might be processing cost. The hypothesis is that this attention arises as a singular: you can’t attend two competing patterns at the same time, the brain tries to converge away from ambiguity: it either finds a way to see both as one, or you switch from one to the other.
I can try paste some literature references in a reply, not sure if the url’s would get stripped.
For more, check e.g. the music cognition group at University of Amsterdam.
@@sytsew
damn, most useful, informed youtube comment i've read so far! thanks for sharing
If Adam Neely is a musical Vsauce, then this channel feels like a kind of Vsauce 2.
Visually and sonically it's so similar. I wonder if that was a conscious choice, or just two guys with similar tastes that have been working closely for years.
This is in no way a criticism.
that's a great comparison. I wonder who would be vsauce3
naresh Ben Levin or Brian Krock, although the former is *very* experimental in a way which Shawn largely refrains from and Adam only occasionally matches.
Adam has actually said before that he based his editing/presentation style off vlogs that Shawn had done!
@@MissYaBigMan didn't know that! I'm pretty sure Adam has also mentioned vsause as an influence as well.
1000% and I often just lump them both in in that context, like Sungazer has the best music theory content on the internet and it's not even close
Maybe it's reductionist to consider Shawn & Adam's content like that but gradually I've started watching their content equally over the past year or so and the dimensions each other's content adds to the other are kinda breath-taking
You ever write a script and get exhausted early knowing that someone's going to miss the point to try to seem smart?
How I approach polymeter is always with a "parent" meter in mind, I lock in and think of that meter primarily, and place the other meter(s) beat one on top of that meter. You could say its thinking of both at once, but it really is just one meter with some weird displaced rhythm overtop.
Something like 5/8 over 4/4 for example, saying "over" establishes the 4/4 as the parent meter, and I relate the 5/8 as being on or off the quaternote beat, and shifting beat one of 5/8 from the 1 of 4, to the + of 3, to then beat 2, to + of 4, and so on.
I like how at one point we go from talking about polyrhythms to talking about how the human mind perceives events in time! It's like Kant talking about Meshuggah.
Didn't you know?
Kant was a big Meshuggah fan.
This is a rarely spoke about topic, and clearly a mind boggling one. Thanks for putting this up.
I’ve often thought of it like a quantum superposition, where it can simultaneously be a mix of both time signatures until you decide to measure it - then you are forced to have a result one way or the other.
good method
REPETITION LEGITIMIZES
REPETITION LEGITIMIZES
REPETITION LEGITIMIZES
I stumbled across while working on Chopin's Nocturne in C Sharp Minor, Op. Posth. Chopin is of course filled with polyrhythms. As a pianist, I have to listen to multiple lines and voices all the time so that I can play all of them at once. The left hand is the rhythm section, the right hand is an incredible diva soprano who likes to lay back against the beat. I ended up at this video because the original autograph of this paticular nocturne has a lot more meters in it than the first edition. The first edition is all 4/4. The autograph (which Chopin sent to his sister), has an opening in cut time, the A section is in 4/4, and the B section is in 3/4 in the right hand and 4/4 in the left hand. I'd never seen that before. I think Chopin notated it this way because instead of a polyrhythm over one or two measures, there are two, four bar sections, each followed by two bars of 4/4 in both hands that contain the cadence. The editor of the Urtext I'm consulting speculated that the publishers of the first edition got rid of the polymeter because it was too confusing. However, in the process they lost Chopin's intention of a free flowing independent soprano line that floats above the 4/4 in the left hand. When both hands are in the same meter, it ends up sounding more metrical 🙂Still not sure how I'm going to figure this out, but I'm excited. To learn these types of passages, I create a composite rhythm like you describe, and train it into my hands so that the hands "trigger" each other as needed. Once it's locked in and up to speed, though, you kind of have to let it go and stop thinking. It becomes this strange sensation of feeling one rhythm in my body (the left hand rhythm section) and hearing the other rhythm with my ear as I "sing" the melody with my right hand. It's an experience that feels both bizarre and magical.
A distinction that would be interesting to dig into is what EXACTLY you mean when you use "hear" in this context. I think what we mean isn't the colloquial usage as in "sounds enters our ears as vibrations" because then I would say we do "hear" everything, but rather I think what we mean here is "consciously process". Looking at it like that, at least from the perspective of an engineer and musician, it makes more sense to look at it like software - our conscious thoughts are like the UI on screen, and the unconscious parts of our brain are like background processes. The UI of a program has one and only one thread responsible for updating whats on screen, but there can be an infinite number of background threads doing all sorts of asynchronous tasks simultaneously but they are opaque to the person looking at the UI. Seems like a neurologist or someone like that could give a really interesting perspective on this.
Lmao a wild Veritas has been spotted in it's natural habitat. Music and tarkov iz lyfe
hey i know that guy
I've heard the term "audiate" used as an audio analog to "visualize". Though it does seem like "hear" is being used as "consciously process" like you said or "interpret", which are a bit different. I would think the visual analog to "hear" would be sort of like the way you view ambiguous optical illusions in different ways.
I was thinking about that as well. The word 'compute' seems more fitting than 'hear'.
You are my time signature.
Coolist comment
It's funny they used the depth of field analogy because it's exactly what came into mind as Shawn started to discuss hearing two time signatures. Amazing video!
I really enjoyed this discussion! The way I see it a time signature is more of your "anchor point" on which to base the rest of the notes you're going to play, more or less regardless of rhythm. Fun video!
the quality of your videos is increasing so much that i'm speechless! Content and videowise. So inspiring as a drummer, a teacher and a musician. Thx a lot. Cheers from Switzerland
Excellent video Shawn. It really becomes clear when you talk about everything being a linear occurence, as in - one "event" after the other/ two occurences simultaneously ".. a single, sort of stream, of events". Cheers.
bless YOU SHAWN! Thank you ! hope are more than well!
To live is to die by metallica is a good example of polytempo where it's so obvious, its hard not to hear the two tempos at once
I agree with you. I think a time signature is almost like an inertial reference frame in physics - a context in which to interpret observations.
Growing up I have a strong memory of being disoriented by the beginning of "don't stand so close to me" by the police. The sustained bass notes and guitar chords on upbeats gave me one sense of pulse, then the drums entered and gave me a different one, and then the vocals start and I get a different one all over again.
I love Brian's depth of field analogy, I feel like it really helps explain what's going on.
I tap on desks with my fingers, I can feel the minute muscle movements in each arm producing triples and quad patterns- in both hands- now I can play the same triplets with a drum stick by internal rhythm of activating those finger muscles, in one hand I play those micro beats, in the other the macro beats, I posit the Piano player can hear and play in multiple time signatures at once.
You could have mentioned some Tigran! Entertain Me is so rich : 4/4 for the hands of the drummer, 35/16 (555533333) for everything else, in a polymetric way. I think the drummer thinks in 4/4, but you could probably "automatize" the 4/4 part and focus on the foot rhythm (which is rather easy by itself but combining the two is a crazy puzzle!)
I can kind of do that by walking on the 4/4 grid and singing or clapping the 55553333 as I am walking. My inertia is enough to keep the 4/4 running without me actually having to feel it, and it kinda works. Doesn't work at all if I switch feet and hands, if I try to do that with left and right hand, or in front of the drums!
You are really good at explaining rhythm theory. Love your channel
Nice video! Here in Latinoamerica there is a lot of folk music that uses polyrythms. For sure ones can listen multiple rhythms at a time, understanding the merge of both rhythms as a musical phrase. About polymeter, in my experience musicians that play this music know how to switch meter perception on their minds while playing so they are able to play fluently on every side of that polyrhythm. But never walking both downbeats at the same time.
Loved this video! Super clear!!
Another quality video my man!
Ayyyy LOVE the thumbnail! For a second I thought it was an Adam Neely video :) Okay now let me watch the video, I'm sure it's amazing 💓
very informative and well produced as always, keep up the great work :D
Hi Shawn, thank you for this video. I completely agree with you. It‘s the personnel choice of everyone who to count the stuff you hear or play. I call this Phänomen an „enrhythmic mix-up“ like you have an „enharmonic mix-up“ regarding harmonies ;)
Love iiit! Great conversation for any percussionist
This was really interesting, thanks! I recently finished my PhD about polytemporal composition and all of this aligned with my research (phew!!). I ended up approaching it using clicks from a single laptop, but it feels like just the first step in terms of the possibilities that are out there; it's cool to see more of this kind of thing starting to come forward too. It Definitely going to head over to Brian and check him out!
Very helpful. Thank you.
I think its possible to feel a composite time signature instead of 2 different signatures. For instance if we play a 3 over 4 and take the 3 pulse as a new 1 of a different signature and make it into another pulse or signature for instance 5 then you are basically playing a 5/3 where the 3 is a part of another signature which is phrasing a poly rhythm itself and the 5 is the implied new signature... But the fun part is instead of taking the distance between 2 notes 3 which is what is should be according to the 5/3 groove if you treat it as a 4 note distance then your are basically playing a whole new thing with a little fast up rhythm...
At this point you can always understand all the other nested rhythms/signatures? inside but then again what i faced was that i can at tops switch between the modes fast. but i can not hear the whole thing once if you are talking about observing the composite signature from different aspects at the same time. I stopped doing this cuz my head hurts lol but its a fun thing to do. And literally makes you dance with the metronome. The beauty of syncopation i guess.
Edit: i commented this after going through the 8 minute mark. Without watching the full video.. but i just wanted to share this as this is exciting and relatable
I feel like people just want to argue semantics over what ends up being a moot point. It doesn't really matter if you can or can't experience two different time sigs at the same time. It's more important that, however you perceive the piece, you can play it correctly. Or at least, you can play it up to your own standards, I'm sure there are some musical endeavors that don't even require "correct" performance, which could be interesting.
Best comment.
Shawn does make an extrasemantic distinction in that he believes that a "total rhythm" is easier/only possible to learn. Maybe he should have started with that.
I've actually mastered the art of hearing multiple time signatures. I can simultaneously hear 4/4, 8/8, 16/16, and even 32/32 all at once.
Never thought about the Chopin piece that way before. Also hilarious that you're unfamiliar with it, versus your foundational familiarity with works I've never heard before; it just goes to show that everyone has their own personal canon of work.
Has Adam been doing your thumbnails? Looking good man.
I think this feels somewhat like a trick question. It at least seems possible, from the listening end, to try and avoid counting along with the music in question, resulting in both rhythms sort of just blending together. This would probably count as a composite rhythm, however, which makes it feel like a bit more of a semantic discussion. By the same notion, the distinction between 'feeling' and 'hearing' the pulse feels important to point out, as you could theoretically rely purely on muscle memory while avoiding counting. If a performer was taught to play without counting, and they were playing intensive polyrhythms based purely on feel, it might be able to accomplish the same goal.
The existence of music with a pulse that slowly increases tempo juxtaposed over a static pulse, or maybe a constantly changing pulse, would both complicate the discussion further, as a performer CAN accelerate the music based on feel while not actually counting along, and the listener can definitely perceive that experience.
I think the basic question here is whether one can actually experience music without consciously recognizing either rhythm as the underlying pulse, or whether the two would be absorbed into a single composite rhythm, and from there whether or not that would actually qualify.
At the end of Benjamin Britten's Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra, there's a passage where most of the orchestra are playing the fast tempo of the fugue, but the brass play the Purcell theme at the original speed. Most players are obviously playing one time signature or the other, but doesn't the conductor have to hear both?
Similar thing at the end of Vaughan Williams overture to The Wasps, where he combines two of the main themes (in different effective metres) together at the climax of the piece
Thank you for posting on a Sunday. *ドラマー*
quantum pulses. both on and off beat i feel like this may be a thing i do in my head and you actually helped me come up with the term for it
Shawn and I are wearing the same shirt! We are so much like the same person... except like everything else 😆. Loved the video!
‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️LISTEN!! This happens in EVERY SONG AS YOU MIGHT KNOW. In a Song You may hear over Five or six instruments along with THE SINGER VOICE which sings the melody of WRITTEN LYRICS. IN MY OPINION, I think it's very important to have Different Time Signatures when listening or composing a A non-Solo music as in Symphonies and orchestras and Songs etc. BECAUSE It's the way you add flavours and colours and protect the listener from getting bored. Also It's Important for BEAUTY and ART in general. Because art have not small amount of beauty along with other necessary elements in it. And about Time signature I think It's NOTHING MORE THAN A CONTROLING ELEMENT of instruments playing. It's a basic thing and a very organizing factor that encadres The music and give it the necessary factor of discipline and without it there is no music. It's the discipline of music. It's just makes sure how much times are in every bar. We can have any number of bars in a musical phrase the most important thing is to have the same number in each bar. Even composers can disrespect thiis rule by adding silences and playing with other things so the ONE or STRING beat can stay unknown hh. And this actually happens in other ways too. But to be honest TIME SIGNATURE is very important in that it put a cadre of time in a piece of music. AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO MUSIC TO BE CALLED MUSIC AND ART. This cadre of time is what makes music music. It's not somthing has to be united between different instuments. Each instrument should play whether in the same time but with different way or in totally different time. The most important thing is to CREATE HARMONY BETWEEN THE RHYTHMS while playing and make the music AWAY FROM being BORING AND makes it more BEATIFUL at the same time. Let's not forget THAT MUSIC IS NOT JUST FOR ENTERTAINMENT and beauty and expression BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY ABOUT (TEACHING, RAISING AWARENESS, CHANGING THINKING, CHANGING SOCIETIES, CORRECTING WRONG BELIEFS) many people forget about that MUSIC IS A MESSAGE A NOBLE MESSAGE ABOVE ALL. It's not just about the composer or music creator it is also about addressing the other. IT'S different thing but artists just focus on just ONE THING. unfortunately.
i love this channel
I like to think about the time signature as a way to organize the musical performance. For me it seems as if there is no need to have two ways of Organisation at the same time for one individual player. I would recommend to take the easier way so you can focus more on performing than organizing.
Thanks,Peace
15:55 what I’ll do is set one playing on one hand and then try to hold that while playing the other rhythm on the other hand. So in a sense you can put one on muscle memory in the back of your head while actively trying the other. This only happens with faster rhythms like that last example though
I don't notice 2 time signature happening yet, but great video
Hey! The audio for the C# major triad in 10:49 is actually F# major, and the C major is actually F.
Yeah, calling out C# and C, but hearing F# and F in 2nd inversion broke my brain for a split-second.
Mind. Blown. !!
I like how he spends 8 minutes explaining why he is right😂
He is a professional. He is also (in general) MUCH more intelligent than average. And he spent a SHIT-LOAD of time exploring this topic.
I guess I just got your self-esteem triggered, too.
just curious, did you draw the illustrations? I love them!
yes, and thank you!
there are times when I can coherently listen to two completely unrelated songs at the same time and there are times when I can keep track of their tempos separately, but it's an incredibly weak feeling, and it self-destructs the moment I try to observe it, immediately going to one tempo or the other
it's never happened within a single song, no matter what weird timing stuff it does
Interesting did you have two songs playing a lot as a child and baby?
@@DanielHatchman I wouldn't remember but my dad apparently played classic rock all the time (I was a baby during the mid/late 90s)
it's like the rabbit/duck, old/young woman, or hollow box optical illusions, you either see it one way or the other but not both
On the topic of monitoring separate rhythms, from both a percussionist and listener's perspective, I think there's also a certain threshold. For instance, at about 6:34 in the Tool song "Eulogy", I feel like the 3/16 groove of the hihat and the 4/4 groove of the snare/bass can be independently monitored due to their difference in register. From a percussionist perspective, however, I think it can either be learned as two separate rhythms or one composite rhythm -- when I first learned it as a teenager I definitely interpreted it as two separate rhythms to monitor, for instance.
In other words, I think other elements are also heavily at play for this topic, such as timbre, register, etc. If you have two snare drums tuned the same way playing a 5/8 groove and 7/8 groove, it'll be hard if not impossible to distinguish. If you keep the same groove however, but put one on a ride bell and the other on a dry tom, then they become much more easily separable from a listening perspective.
However, there is also a definite threshold that I think is dependent on rhythmic density. For instance, in the Porcupine Tree track "Sound of Muzak", the kick and snare are playing a 7/16 groove (3+2+2) while the hi-hat is playing quarter notes (with eighth notes ghosted in between), basically in 7/4, creating this interesting 7:4 polymetric and polyrhythmic pattern. When listening, for instance, I hear it all as a composite rhythm. However, when I learned to play it, I learned it as separating my hi-hat hand and my snare/kick entirely from each other, so it very much is playing two separate meters/rhythms, in a sense, which is weird, because my brain playing it, and my brain listening to me play it, basically interpret it both ways simultaneously, so what I hear from playing it is not what I mechanically feel when playing it, if that makes sense.
On an unrelated note, I would love to hear you break down the drums on David Bowie's - Look Back in Anger, from Lodger.
ruclips.net/video/ywcqultfYaM/видео.html I really like this example because here Jacob switches back and fourth between two different (felt) time signatures as the actual rhythmic pattern stays the same
Absolutely right! Some dudes are still gonna say they can...😂
I was listening to three different time signatures at once while watching this. Easy.
Oh yeah, I was listening to the licc in 420/69 over quintuplet swing in 5/4 noob smh
@@chromaticswing9199 nice
Peace and blessings to all who read this. It's very understandable that Shawn, who can do a 22 on 21 polyrhythm, would think if he can't perceive two time signatures simultaneously, then no one can. However that 21 on 22 thing is exactly why he can't, because he is so intellectual. There's nothing wrong with that and I rather like his channel, but the way to perceive two time signatures at once is to perceive one time signature/pulse with the body (for which the 2 pulse is best) and the other with the brain (for which the 3 pulse is best). Thus only simple, easy to feel time signatures work. 2 on 3, and if you're really good, 3 on 4. 5 on 3 is too complex. Even though Shawn's thumbnail is probably meant to be wacky ("13/8 and 7/16") it's another example of his brain-only approach to time. Peace and blessings, drumming brothers and sisters.
@@MattMusicianX greetings :)
I know I definitely can't process two independent pulses at the same time and I don't think I know anyone that can. But I wouldn't rule out that someone can do it. When babies and young kids are exposed to stuff they learn some wild shit. It's not like you have an organ that processes pulse and you only have one that can't be split or maybe it is. Need some brain science to crack that one.
The idea of perfect pitch would be equally ludicrous if there were only a hand full of people in the world who could do it.
This could be like that except the conditions required to develop the skills as a child are never or rarely ever met.
You could debate the existence of perfect pitch too - just shift the temperament around, then people who intimately understand A=440 have to consciously learn the new temperament if they want to distinguish it from A=440. By that logic, sufficient familiarity and recall of a certain temperament to pass as perfect pitch can be learned.
here's a question: can you hear No time signatures at the same time? can a free tempo piece truly be felt without automatically finding some paridolia sense of "1" in there?
I’d think of that as a sort of “tidal” rhythm a la Coltrane /Pharaoh Sanders.
Make it really really slow, well actually around 33 bpm. Check out Adam Neely’s vid on what is the slowest song and that should answer your question. With speed though brings up an interesting point, if you spaced notes out in such a way where nothing aligns that would create a very interesting piece
Yes
famitory I mean, depends on what's meant by a time signature, in that a pulse can be stretched and squashed quite a bit in, for example, Balkan dance music or Finnish traditional ballads or even the Viennese waltz-not just rubato, but microrhythmic changes in the structure of the pattern itself which would register as distinct "time signatures" in the strictest sense. But even so, there's still an overarching pattern, and to that end I think that the mind does tend to create a sense of an underlying relative rhythm even when there might be no pulse to speak of, even if that perceived rhythm is constantly slowing down and/or speeding up. A study on ambient music or noise or field recordings, or even just an informal survey on the subject might be useful in gleaning more about that.
I would say in most of Noise Music there are good examples for Music where one cannot make out a time signature. What also comes to my mind is Ambient Music where there is just a sphere of harmony that moves so slowly one cannot feel a rhythm or the one of a measure. And I think there are plenty more examples of music where the concept of rhythm or time signature doesn't make that much sense.
Some of these polyrhythms are like an audible illusion. They are similar to the gif of the ballerina... is she spinning clockwise or counterclockwise. You cant see it both ways, and she seems to switch partway as your focus changes. Or the image of a candlestick or people talking... blackbirds or whitebirds....
Lol, that Adam Neely styled thumbnail
Remember drawing a cube in elementary school? Then blinking while looking at it and it's facing a different direction?
When you count triplets you say takata. But for me when it is going fast, the two ta's are to complicated (same movement with the mouth) so I say bataka and can going really fast :) You can try it out if you want :)
viewsync patsy cline's tennesee waltz and patsy cline's walkin' after midnight
you are now hearing two time signatures at once
it's mostly a mess, but somehow some parts of it kinda work
I swear to god these were just the first results I got for "pop music in [time signature]"
I've never heard of patsy cline before, I don't get it either
Could you link to the moraccan song? Its so lit
Added to the video description. ruclips.net/video/wAXtFe_KQmM/видео.html
@@ShawnCrowder thanks fam! Thanks for your work as well!
But what about a 3/4 against a 2/4 polymeter that's notated in 6/4? I myself am thinking of doing this in a piece that I am composing and the individual accent patterns of each and their composite accent would be this:
3/4: S w w S w w | S w w S w w |
2/4: S w S w S w | S w S w S w |
+
-------------------------------------------------------
Acc: S w M M M w | S w M M M w -> composite accent of 3/4 and 2/4 within 6/4 bars
where M stands for medium and is where only 1 accent pattern accents that beat, not both.
And you can see why using a 6/4 time signature seems appealing to me. 6 can be divided into duple triplets but also into a slower 3 beats. And it can also be individual beats, accounting for both 3 and 2 simultaneously. The slower the tempo, the more individual each beat becomes and the less it sounds like triplets in 2/4. And the part of this piece that I am composing where this 3/4 against 2/4 polymeter occurs is at a slow tempo.
But this, isn't this an example of where you could simultaneously hear 2/4 and 3/4 in the same bars or measures?
Yes you can, I do it naturally, my GF noticed I was doing it tapping the beat out and asked how? I just said "left and right." I tried to explain it, it's like two sounds, separate but equal, but there is a wall between them?
For me, this made it harder to ascertain whether polymeter/polytempo actually exists, as opposed to everything being just big polyrhythms. No matter what individual tempo you and I might be feeling, it'll re-align eventually, therefore couldn't it be rationalised as an extended polyrhythm instead?
For me, Philip Glass' - Mad Rush is another piece that gives me the sense of 2 rhythms. It isn't as fast as Fantasie Impromptu but I still lose the composite rhythm of 2 in the left hand and 3 in the right hand. I could see how someone with better training might not have that issue though.
ruclips.net/video/BA5CEeFBn3M/видео.html
looks like I'm not gonna get much sleep tonight!
i wanted to say "you hear them all at once" but trying to actually define "you," "hear," "them," "them all." and "at once" ... it's easier to say, "no, just one."
10:45 Unless you've been raised by Rick Beato...
Wait what... I've only ever seen marry had a little lamb notated in 17tuplets.
Hey Shawn, ビデオが好きだった、but I’m really surprised that you didn’t even mention any african music at all. The Dagara people of Ghana play music composed in multiple time signatures that can be felt simultaneously. You feel the bigger beat between the two rhythms, like if something was played in a 2/3, the bigger beat would be where the two rhythms meet back at the top of the cycle. A lot of African music is written this way, and polyrhythms and meters are the norm. I definitely recommend you check it out, and I can direct you to more people about the subject too.
Morocco is in Africa... But I guess you mean West Africa? I'd love to hear the music if you have recommendations.
@@ShawnCrowder Hah yeah, should’ve been a little more specific there, but check out anything that Bernard Woma has ever done, there’s gyil bewa music which is in a 2/3 with the big beat being felt rather than either the 2 or 3, there’s music from Burkina Faso (balaphons, N’Gonis, etc) which is felt this way too, there’s the embaire, a gigantic Ugandan xylophone buried in the earth in which the very nature of its music is polymetric. Check out haruna walusimbi and his african embaire ensemble, he collars with another musician and ethnomusicologist Mark Stone.There’s a few more examples and I’ll reply to this comment when I find them again. I’m a university student studying this kind of music (and jazz) in-depth, so I’m sure something will come to mind later. Some people you can talk to that are significantly more knowledgeable about this are Haruna Walusimbi, a Grammy award winning artist for his work with Bela Fleck the banjoist, I momentarily forget her name but she’s the director of U of W Oshkosh’s music department. I discussed this with a few of her students when I performed embaire music at PASIC ‘19. Hope this helps!
@@ShawnCrowder oh, and some lamellaphonic music too, like the majority of Akogo music I’ve heard is in a 2/3.
Wait what if I have two songs play on two seperate audio sources at the same time. Something simple that your very tuned into hearing the pulse of.
You don't need to be focused in to be able to interact with either song pulse seemleasly. No your aren't conciously audiating two time signatures. But clearly your brain can process two time signatures at once.
I believe your right though about not hearing multiple rhythms at once conciously. It's like the classic it's not independence it's interdependence but again subconsciously you are capable of handling two seperate rhythms completely unrelated. Anyone who can have a quick conversation well still performing a song accurately has done this. Language obviously has its own rhythmic framework.
I mean I think you hit on all but it is an interesting way to look at it. No conciously you can't split your focus like that. Yes subconsciously you can probably process that information individually assuming it's low enough bandwidth. I think it's probably useful way of framing it.
This is the *edited* version?
@@TheStuFAhh I see a few gramatical errors thank you! This darn half shattered phones hard to type on. Best wishes!
Ok so how many languages can you understand? The Katakana on the shirt, your RUclips default language on these clips you’ve inserted in the video, and English???? Incredible stuff
Interesting video. I will compose a piece of music for you with 2 simultaneous time signatures. There will be two “1”’s which seems to be the problem here.
Captain Beefheart had a track with two different time signatures (played by different musicians) at the same time; some say it's genius, some say it's un-listenable.
I think you could get something interesting from talking to a DJ that doesn't use any auto sync about hearing and feeling tempo.
Especially a DJ using real records.
Completely irrelevant, but your videos make me wanna learn drums so damn bad. I've wanted to since I was a little kid (18 now lol) but I just never took action and ended up playing a wind instrument instead, and now after having grown an obsession with odd time signatures and polyrhythms and percussion instruments, but also now being financially responsible for all my hobbies, I cannot afford anything to learn on :(
Such is life I guess.
واهيا العريس ضوي بالشمع البلدي وايلا جاك الزين ضوي بالتريسينتي
If you feel two signatures you can't also feel only one.
*yogev gabai has entered the chat*
Question if there is no accented note and all the drums are at the same volume… can anyone choose their times signature or does it not exist?
Surely 5 over 3 is just 15/16 and that's the time signature that 5 over 3 is in. I guess I just agreed with you, because I've made two time signatures one time signature. 🤦♂️
That 5/7 you did was pretty killin. I think of that transition as being a triplet type relationship. 3+2 into 4+3 using normal 4:3 type rhythmic ratios. Same getting to 11 so from 4+3 to 6+4, etc. Like an odd time rhythm tree that doesn't quite work. Would be sort of equivalent of using perfect 4ths and 5ths for intonation rather than equal temperament. Your vids are always great man. Both info and playing wise
This was my thought also. I don't quite understand the semantics of Shawn's point. If the 5 and the 3 can both be felt as groupings of 16ths in a 15/16 meter, how is that not practically the same as "hearing" both the 5 and the 3 simultaneously. I can focus in on either one or hear them concurrently. I'm not sure I understand the language of the argument
@@nicholasscott9672 yeah I know what you mean. But once you're in 15, in your mind you might be able to slip easily between 555, 33333, 645, or even half time 15, etc. But in essence all those different groupings could be construed as its own time signature. I do feel like rhythm and dance are related. It's definitely possible to feel rhythms as up and down. Often beats with a downward feeling have low pitches and upward feeling with higher pitches. And those two could be different groupings or time signatures. And so I do think that it's possible to feel those both simultaneously often a lot easier physically, as you can have seperate body parts move to each rhythm. But in your mind one usually starts to become the primary reference to which the other one is set against. But this is why im not a fan of counting, because it's too linear and doesn't represent motion in an analogue way. We don't feel rhythm in our mind we feel it in our body and our body can dance to multiple rhythms simultaneously. So I don't see why we use a technique that's mostly useful to conceptualise and communicate music verbally, when its practical application is a physiological one that's capable of far more complexity. There's a bunch of music where there isn't really a one, and he talks about that. But as soon as you don't have a one there's no singular reference for the rhythm and these counting schemes and even pulse become sort of irrelevant. Sorry for the caffeine induced rant!
The first 30 second of this are some mind mangling rhythm. I can only conceive of it in 9 groups of 4. But I have no idea what they're dancing to because nobody is playing a pulse and there's a bunch of displaced groups of three.
ruclips.net/video/QBlYYzZ8bcA/видео.html
I can taste two time signatures at the same time
I don't think it's true that Mary Had A Little Lamb in 3/4 sounds the same as in 4/4. A performance in 3/4 would place strong accents at the start of the bars, play notes like that D in the third bar as a gentle upbeat, etc.. The audio example you gave is in 4/4, regardless of what the sheet music says.
I see your argument, but what a human plays is not necessarily the only correct way a piece can be played. Also, songs with a tonne of rhythmic displacement that never lines up can be (and in many cases, are better) notated in "wrong" time signatures. A song like Weird fishes/Arpeggi has accents every third semiquaver, and some instruments play alternating twos and threes, all against a 4/4 drumbeat. The piece is still in 4/4 though, even when the drums drop out. These brief moments when the main pulse is lost do not mean the song is now not in that time signature. The notation shawn uses (3/4) tells us that 3/4 is how the piece is felt, though with accents in different places. It is essentially a shorthand for an entire song's worth of context
The 3/4 contextualises the "performance" for the listener, even without a backing, is what i'm getting at.
Sorry for the wall of text.
@@michaelhird432 There are an infinite number of correct ways to play a piece, but that doesn't make all deviations from the score valid. The score in this case clearly tells the performer to convey a triple metre to the listener, and the audio doesn't do that. It's true that context, such as previous bars or other instruments, also affects how metre is perceived; but the audio features none of that context (except perhaps in the meta sense that, in the context of a video about perceiving metre, having the score on screen encourages the viewer to try and count it that way; which, sure, I guess, but that would be a very contrived example).
I considered discussing the idea that there are legitimate reasons for time signature to not "accurately" reflect metre - perhaps including educational ones - but the entire video is about "hearing time signatures"; it seems pretty clear that we're talking about metre rather than notation.
"Sounds the same" as in "the sound waves coming out of the speakers are identical". But you're exactly right that if you were truly feeling it in 3/4 it would feel & sound very different, subjectively.
I wish I was better at switching how i feel a time signature. I can control how I hear a 3/4 over a 2/4 and swap between perceiving the time signatures, but I can't for the life of me feel 4/4 out of "pass the stinking butter". I think I need to do some polyrhythmic juggling.
Find a phrase with the same number of syllables, but that has the stresses on syllables 1, 2, 4, and 6 (instead of 1, 3, and 5). Here’s a really stupid one I just came up with: “Hey David, wipe your ass” (sorry to anyone named David; I’m not trying to be rude!). It should feel like 4/4, or maybe sort of a 12/8 feel.
You can do this with 5:4 vs. 4:5 as well. Once again, we’ll pick on the fictional David: “Hey David, don’t you wipe your ass?” = the pulse is in 5 (HEY DA-vid, DON’T you WIPE your ASS) Contrast with “Hey, the asswipe David’s calling” (HEY the ASS-wipe DA-vid’s CAL-ling). Sorry for the ridiculous examples (and for David’s stinky butt, I guess).
There are some crazy Indian people that do clap two different time signatures with their two hands while chanting some konnakol syllables on top. Isn't what they're doing hearing two time sigs at once?
Yay
The same applies with polytonality. In theory there is two harmonies sounding at the same time, but in the aural realm... Not really
I can't count and play at the same time.. help please!
And then theres a guy haing 2 different odd metronomes in left and right ear
If you can percieve two rates of time at the same time, you're a 4th dimensional being, contact NASA immediately
Didn't know Walter White was a talanted drummer
I am surprised by the insistence on being able to hear time signatures. I never considered time signatures as anything but a convivence in musical notation. Granted, an incredibly useful one. Two numbers impart a ton of context to performers. You give a classical musician a 3/4 piece with a certain rhythm, and boom, you get a waltz with all the micro rhythms.
The idea of multiple time signatures, polyrhythms, polymeter and polytempo are just to help musicians perform or understand things without resorting to notation with a level of precision that leaves no room for interpretation or any chance of getting it even nearly correct. Compare this to a computer. A time signature of 143/256? No problem. 4123/8192. Whatever. (MIDI uses microseconds per quarter note for global tempo). A computer can relentlessly subdivide events. Humans need shortcuts and approximation.
I think it's a confusion, indeed the x/y is just an abstract instruction for performers, who from training also start hearing it. What we all actually hear and perhaps want to hear, I think, is a groove: some pattern (however complex) that makes you (wanna) move.
I can't hear/feel both 5 and 3 pulses/time signatures simultaneously. But I can do that with 2vs3 and 3vs4. The Morrocan music for example, yes, simultaneously. Yes, both places at the same time. I am crystal clear and NOT confused as to what you mean. I can hear single notes as landing both on the beat and off the beat simultaneously. I know others that can do it as well. You say you "have an uncompromising view" othis but maybe you should be more open minded. Others can do things that you can't and you can do things that others can't. That is life.
No, not a 3 rhythm against a 2 pulse either, or vice versa. I'm talking about simultaneously perceiving two pulses/time signatures and simultaneously perceiving/feeling a single note as being on the beat in one signature and off the beat in another. You're correct when you say it's not possible FOR YOU. But it's possible for certain individuals.
My BEST GUESS as to why it is possible is that my body feels the duple pulse with triple subdivision while my brain thinks about the triple pulse with duple subdivision. Maybe. It's hard to explain. But this why I imagine this is impossible for a musician who is too intellectual. And my friend, you are extremely intellectual (NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! I love your channel!)
It's also much easier to do with a rhythm that is extremely repetitive.
Has Adam started designing your thumbnails? :P
Wait - your first example wasn't two time signatures at once, it was a polyrhythm: two different pulse ratios whose "one" coincide. If you thought of these as time signatures, like 5/4 against 3/4, then they'd have to be in different TEMPOS/TEMPI for their downbeats to coincide. Otherwise their "one" would occur every 15 beats, or 3 5/4 measures or 5 3/4 measures. Then it sounds like you are mentioning additive rhythms, which combine to produce a single rhythmic and metric experience.
I think if you listen to two songs being played at once, perhaps in different tempos and meters, maybe not even starting with their ones aligning, then you can get close to this phenomenon, especially if you know the songs well separately and can mentally juggle how they proceed without their asynchronous downbeats.
It is also possible to NOT hear a time signature, or hear it incorrectly. There are various songs that intentionally, or unintentionally, trick the listener into thinking they are hearing one thing until the addition of something later tells them it was something different. Even then it is difficult to "unhear" what you heard originally, or "rehear" it correctly. I've examples of this, but that is a different topic.
But there are also meters, or rhythms written within meters, or a sequence of changing meters, that defy the listener's ability to discern a single meter or series of changing meters without the benefit of knowing how it is notated or have learned how it goes. In this case you simply don't know where "one" is, and according to you, would experience zero meter. So... if such a person DID hear two or more meters, for which they couldn't find the respective ones, then they would be experiencing multiple meters they couldn't untangle. So it stands to reason the opposite can be true.
Yes it's a polyrhythm but he was talking about how you can frame it as being in either of two different time signatures (and yes, thus different tempos as well) by using tuplets. So it's either 5/4 with one big triplet or 3/4 with one big quintuplet. Besides, once you mess with these things enough they all start to blur together into the same thing seen from different angles, so it's kind of a distinction without a meaningful difference when examined in a vacuum like that without any other musical context.