How to "count" this 12/8 bar...

utdrummer

Senior Member
If this belongs in "technique", please move...my bad. Ladies and germs...this question popped up on another site and it got so many differing replies it totally frustrated the OP...simple question...how to "count" this while playing. I always counted something like this as--1 trip a let, 2 trip let, 3 trip a let, 4 trip let. Am I wrong? Or is there a better way to count this? Thanks in advance for your professional opinions...dave
 

Attachments

  • 12:8 triplet groove.jpg
    12:8 triplet groove.jpg
    17.7 KB · Views: 6,226
The way I would count that would be "1-2-3 4-5-6 1-2-3 4-5-6." When it's in an "8" meter that means the 8th note becomes your down beat and usually will have a triplet feel to the pattern. I count 6 because it's easier than trying to go 10-11-12 when counting and saying "trip-let" after every number gets a little irritating for me, so numbers just seem to work better and it's easier to keep track of where I'm at in the bar. Hope this helps.
 
Yep, our rhythmic solfege pretty much sucks for anything but duple-meter quarters, 8ths and 16ths. I would count it 1&a 2&a etc, or maybe 1-trip-let 2-trip-let etc, and forget about the 16ths altogether. I only count to twelve to explain to a student why a triplet feel in four is called 12/8.
 
The official way to count it is: "1 2 and 3 4 5 6 7 8 and 9 10 11 12". Whatever the denominator in the fraction representing the time signature is--that's what gets the numerical count. If you had a bar of 3/32 time with 6 64th notes in it, for example, it would be counted "1 and 2 and 3 and".
 
Depends a bit on the tempo and the overall fell of the song.

A medium or slow tempo, with a rolling feel, I'd more likely use "1-2-3-4-5-6-1-2-3-4-5-6"

Once it's gets too fast to properly get in the counts, then I'd think 1-2-3-4 and just feel the triplets in-between.

If the other instruments are playing a strong shuffle feel, and no one is playing the middle note outside of the hi-hat, I'd use "1-tuh-tuh, 2-tuh-tuh, 3-tuh-tuh, 4-tuh-tuh"

Although at PIT we were taught 1-ti-ta, 2-ti-ta, 3-ti-ta, 4-ti-ta, but I always found that more of a tongue twister than anything else.
 
Ask a guitar player, they seem to know everything about music. Heck, they even invented music. Haha! Ok, I'm being sarcastic.

I'd count it either 123 223 323 423 or 1 trip let 2 trip let 3 trip let 4 trip let. It's one of those things you really have to feel, plus be able to count.
 
I agree with DED.

I would subdivide with the high hat as Travis suggests, one two and three four five six, one two and three four five six or perhaps one, two and three four five six, seven eight and nine ten eleven twelve. But if I were counting it in four, I would count one and a two and a three and a four and a. It's just easier for me that way. I never got the ti and ta thing, and have never taught it that way. Truthfully, if playing this, you shouldn't have to count it. Sit down with some 6/8 12/8 grooves and get a feel for them.
 
Personally I tend to just count quarters when I play.. But in these terms I would say counting something like "1 trip-e-let 2 trip-let 3 trip-e-let 4 trip-let", possibly would be the easiest way to go =)
 
Really I just can't see why such a simple and basic pattern would even need to be counted. For the most part I see counting as placing unnecessary mental stuff between the drummer and the drumming.

And I know I'm going to get in a little trouble for saying that.
 
on a side note i don't see the point in training counting 12/8 meters with eighth notes when they simulate eighth note triplets which usually are always superimposed over the quarter note. feel the dotted quarter note as the quarter note pulse as it's intended to be, and the eighth notes and sixteenth notes as eighth ntoe triplets and sixteenth note triplets. that's really how you see 12/8. even other odd-meters such as 5/8 should be broken down (for example: quarter note, dotted quarter note or inversely dotted quarter note, quarter note).
 
I say again, the proper textbook way to count this is in 12, with the sixteenth notes getting the "and" count of beats 2 and 8. If this was intended to be counted as triplets, then the meter would have to be 4/4 and the groups of three eighth notes would have a number 3 above them, indicating a triplet subdivision of a quarter note.

...now, with that said, you can count it however you want. As you can see, there are about as many interpretations about how to count it so far as there have been people replying to this thread. Count it however you need to in order to play it, but be aware that there is an objective, established, music theory textbook answer, even if you don't count it that way for your own purposes.
 
I say again, the proper textbook way to count this is in 12, .

Technically true, but counting to 12 ends up a real mouthfu!!

And it's too easy for numbers with mupltiple sylables to accidentally get counted as two noted (sev-en, elev-en, thir-teen)
It's easier to break it down into smaller groupings.

Much like I never count 17/8 "1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17" I'd break it down into manageable groupings.
 
Technically true, but counting to 12 ends up a real mouthfu!!

And it's too easy for numbers with mupltiple sylables to accidentally get counted as two noted (sev-en, elev-en, thir-teen)
It's easier to break it down into smaller groupings.

Much like I never count 17/8 "1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17" I'd break it down into manageable groupings.

I usually count in my head, visualizing the numbers, so they have no syllables and there is no "mouthful" to contend with. And if I'm doing something in an odd meter, I also break it down into 2s and 3s, however the weight of the irregular pulse falls.

I wasn't saying that you HAVE to count in 12. I was simply shedding light on the fact that it's the proper theoretical way to count the measure, despite what you choose to actually do...
 
The official way to count it is: "1 2 and 3 4 5 6 7 8 and 9 10 11 12". Whatever the denominator in the fraction representing the time signature is--that's what gets the numerical count. If you had a bar of 3/32 time with 6 64th notes in it, for example, it would be counted "1 and 2 and 3 and".

I have also heard people recommend counting: "one two three four five six sev' eight nine ten 'lev twelve."... to cut down on the syllables. I think it may have been in a Carmine Appice book (ultimate realistic rock).

I tell people that the time signature12/8 is 12 eighth note counts (12/8), which for sake of ease can be counted as two bars of 6/8. I wonder if any one sees a problem with this.

Of course the goal is to completely understand theory, counting, time signatures etc, but ONCE that is established, I think it is ok to deviate when beneficial for the sake of ease (as in this case above).
 
I appreciate all the responses and they all have valid points. Like I said, this was lifted from another drumming site I have been on for about a year and "overall" the drummers there seem to be a bit newer in their craft if I can say so just by listening to their responses to more challenging questions. The reading of the doubled 8th note in the pattern threw the newbie and he was unsure of how to play and count out loud this cymbal pattern. I imagine everyone on this site has played this in blues tunes for years and is second nature--not counted but felt as some have said. I'll post some of these responses in hopes it will clear up his original question. Thanks...great players, responses, and site.
 
The answer here relies on understanding the difference between simple time and compound time. For some reason, most musicians, including professional musicians, do not understand this difference. I recommend reading "Lies My Music Teacher Told Me" for a simplified and accessible introduction to this info. If you're the scholarly type and you don't mind reading a rather lengthy text, then you can check out the classic "Principles Of Rhythm." You can also refer to just about any college text book on music theory.

Anyway, to directly answer your question, 12/8 typically means there are 4 beats per measure with the dotted quarter note being used as the beat. Now that I've told you this, if you look again at the example you posted, this fact will probably be very obvious. By the way, we call this "Compound Quadruple." The way that I count such a measure would be "1 la li, 2 la li, 3 la li, 4 la li." If you were playing with a conductor, it would match perfectly with him since he would most likely be conducting in 4. For the 16h notes in the measure, you can insert "ta" or "da." This entire approach is taken directly from the text book that was used in my college music theory class. It is called "A Creative Approach To Music Fundamentals" by Duckworth.

I hope this clears up some of the confusion. The example you posted is actually quite simple. No reason to complicate it by misunderstanding a basic concept of music theory. Best of luck.
 
Good point Matt. 12/8 is a compound, quadruple meter and it can be conceived of in twelve; but is most readily thought of in four. I think this would also pertain to what DED is talking about. In other words, if you have 17/8, you are probably going to see that as a breakdown of the seventeen into smaller subunits. It becomes clearer when you are dealing with 9/8, compound triple, or 15/8 compound quintuple. But would 17/8 still be conceived of as a compound meter say broken into 4x4x4x5?
 
There's no point in counting out a simple groove such as the one you wrote. It's based on 4/4 time, with a triplett feeling, and probably is moving pretty quicky. You'd wear yourself out, mentally, just trying to keep counting to 12 in every bar. You just need to make sure the groove flows. IMO it's much more important to know where you are in the piece you're playing. Any counting that I would be doing would be telling me where I'm at, keeping me in the phrasing of the piece.
I also play orchestral gigs, and have done a lot in 12/8. It's a cleaner way for a composer to write. Just imagine a piece in 4/4 where every beat had a triplett marking.
 
Back
Top