Stick Control - How to count the short rolls in 6/8

Status
Not open for further replies.

Auspicious

Silver Member
Hello

I am looking at the 6/8 notation from stick control page 27, I don't really have a clue how to count these notes currently.

Ok I need to educate myself about the 6/8 notation but it can take some time and watching extremely boring Youtube videos. I just want to practice the pages of the book right now. Is there a quick bypass just to go fast on so I can resume the pads?

I don't understand what the hell is it..

Exercise #1, there is a triplet and a 16th note triplet but it's a signature of 6/8
Exercise #2 I have the multiple bounce roll but they call it a 7 stroke closed roll with LRL
Exercise #3 there a 16th note with a 8 over it.. the next page there is one with a 10 and I think I've seen 11 too.

I don't know what to do with this right now.

:(

1cnb6Mz.jpg
 
You can count it as 2/4 with regular triplets. The one at the bottom would then be a mixture of eighth note triplets and 32nd notes.
I guess you know it already, but just in case: in a 7 stroke roll, the last stroke is on beat 1 of the next measure, so you would play sixteenth note triplets as LLRRLL and the final R is on beat 1.
 
There are 6 eight notes in the bar. So the first thing is to count in six. In the first example the first three notes are not a triplet - they are beats 1 - 2 - 3 of the bar. The sixteenth notes are 4and 5and 6and. So count in six. Once you get that - then the rolls (7 or 9)have to fit in those note values - the three eight notes - and end on the one of the next bar. So play the rolls as double strokes and be cognizant of the hand they start and end on.
 
At slow tempos (to learn the sticking) count it in 6. At faster tempos, I would tend to count it in two, with triplet subdivisions. It's easy to breakdown the two beat into one and two and. This is common to see in classical and marching band charts. You can further subdivide the eight note roll into one e and uh, two e and uh at slower tempos. When you learn the figure it will just flow easily. You don't need to count this in six eighth notes. Most of the 6/8 I play is too fast to do that. It's much easier if you can just feel the two beats per bar.
 
Last edited:
6/8 is a two-beat measure and should be counted in two, not in six.
I would advise to count | 1 and a 2 and a |
There is nothing complicated in doing it that way, and that's the right way to do it.
Remember: the eighth notes in 6/8 are not triplets, they are just regular eighth notes. The same applies for the sixteenth notes.
 
Hello

I am looking at the 6/8 notation from stick control page 27, I don't really have a clue how to count these notes currently.

Ok I need to educate myself about the 6/8 notation but it can take some time and watching extremely boring Youtube videos. I just want to practice the pages of the book right now. Is there a quick bypass just to go fast on so I can resume the pads?

I don't understand what the hell is it..

Exercise #1, there is a triplet and a 16th note triplet but it's a signature of 6/8
Exercise #2 I have the multiple bounce roll but they call it a 7 stroke closed roll with LRL
Exercise #3 there a 16th note with a 8 over it.. the next page there is one with a 10 and I think I've seen 11 too.

I don't know what to do with this right now.

:(

1cnb6Mz.jpg
Bear with me, this is a bit long... The 6/8 time signature literally indicates 6 numbered counts per measure, with those counts assigned to 8th notes (despite that there are only 6 of them per bar; it's just referencing what type of note... umm, shape (?), gets assigned the number counts. That means you count the 8ths 1-2-3-4-5-6, and sixteenths 1-&-2-&-3-&-4-&-5-&-6-&.

So, to your question, the correct counting for the exercises are:

1- First two measures, 1 2 3 4&5&6&. Second two measures, since you're playing a roll in the second half of them rather than single strokes, you can continue to count the hand movements rather than the literal notes, leaving the count at 1 2 3 4 5 6, and making sure you double-stroke or buzz roll on 4 5 6. Or, you can count those rolls with the literal note value of the dotted quarter (three 8th notes, in any time sig), leaving the count as (and I'm typing it like I'd say it), "1 2 3 fooouuur, 1 2 3 fooouuur", drawing the "fooouuur" out through counts 5 and 6, all the way to the 1 of the next measure.

2- Same as the second half of the first exercise, except, it'd be awkward to count hand movements there because, even though it's the same written rhythm, there's more hand movements in a 9 stroke roll as there is in a 7 stroke. (Exercises 2 and 3 should be flipped.) So, I would still count it "1 2 3 fooouuur", doing the correct type of roll to fill counts 4, 5, and 6 (more hand movements than counts). In 2/4, it would be written the same way but with a little "3" above the set of 8th notes.

3- Ok, this is weird... Same as the first half of the first exercise, except with a set of eight single stroke 16th notes in the space reserved (per the 6/8 time sig) for only six. This makes the count very awkward- 1 2 3 4e&a5e&a. You would count that latter part in the duple meter that the "8" indicates, but squeeze it into the 4&5&6& space of the latter half of the measure, and saying/thinking that is very convoluted when in a triple meter. So, I suggest learning the count just to understand it, but when playing it, feel it like it's written in 2/4 and switching from a triplet to a set of 32nd notes. The set of eight 16th notes has to have the little "8" above it to tell you to squeeze those eight notes in the space that, in 6/8, is designated for six of them- opposite of how triplets are notated in 2/4, 4/4, etc. When putting triplets in a duple time sig, it requires the "3" (sometimes a "6" if it's a sextuplet)- this is familiar to most of us- and when putting duples/quads/etc in a triple sig (which 6/8 is), it requires a 4, 8, etc- much less common. If this was written in 2/4, there would be a "3" above the set of eights notes, and the sixteenths would be thirty-seconds with no "8" above them.

All that said, with the groupings of notes in three and six, a 2/4 triplet feel is implied- but still technically not counted that way. 6/8 was chosen to simply not have to put little 3's over every grouping (more on that below).

6/8 is a two-beat measure and should be counted in two, not in six.
I would advise to count | 1 and a 2 and a |
There is nothing complicated in doing it that way, and that's the right way to do it.
No offense, Alain- technically, not true. It's often felt like a two-beat measure, but the 6/8 time sig literally indicates it's counted in six beats, hence the 6/8 designation (six total beat counts, assigned to notated 8th notes). "1 and a 2 and a" is one way to count 8th note triplets in 2/4. Yes, they can be interpreted the same, esp. when a piece of sheet music like this one groups three 8th notes (or six 16th notes) together with the note beams, and in that case, it's a way of notating the triplets-in-2/4 or 4/4 feel without having to put little 3's all over the page. But this isn't the rule, as there is plenty of 6/8 pieces that do not have a triplet feel. In those cases, the 8th notes are usually grouped by their note beams in pairs (a measure full would look just like "1& 2& 3&" from a measure of 3/4) rather than threes. The time sig indicates how it's counted, not the feel, but if the player sees that there is an intended triplet feel due to groupings of three, then it can be played that way. But saying that makes the counts change is completely incorrect.

Remember: the eighth notes in 6/8 are not triplets, they are just regular eighth notes. The same applies for the sixteenth notes.
This is true, even when grouped in threes with the note beams, which is exactly why they're technically not counted like triplets.
 
Last edited:
The "top number = what to count to" definition is strictly for the convenience of music teachers explaining time signatures to little kids, as quickly as possible. It's not correct technically or in common practice.

In actual music theory, meters/time signatures are described as simple, with a two-note "straight 8th" subdivision, or compound, with a three-note, triplet-feel subdivision. There are also odd meters that use combinations of simple and compound subdivisions.

They are further described by the number of beats per measure, using duple, triple, quadruple, quintuple, etc-- meaning two, three, four or five beats per measure.

So theory people describe 2/4 as simple duple; and 3/4 as simple triple, and 4/4 as simple quadruple.

6/8 is described as compound duple, 9/8 (usually) as compound triple, 12/8 as compound quadruple, 15/8 as compound quintuple.

For the "top number = number to count to, so 6/8 means count to six" explanation to make any sense, you have to find some theory people calling 6/8 simple sextuple, 9/8 simple nonuple, 12/8 simple duodecuple, and 15/8 simple quindecuple. And explain to everyone what compound meter actually means, since that definition doesn't allow for it.
 
Last edited:
Bear with me, this is a bit long... The 6/8 time signature literally indicates 6 numbered counts per measure, with those counts assigned to 8th notes (despite that there are only 6 of them per bar; it's just referencing what type of note... umm, shape (?), gets assigned the number counts. That means you count the 8ths 1-2-3-4-5-6, and sixteenths 1-&-2-&-3-&-4-&-5-&-6-&.

So, to your question, the correct counting for the exercises are:

1- First two measures, 1 2 3 4&5&6&. Second two measures, since you're playing a roll in the second half of them rather than single strokes, you can continue to count the hand movements rather than the literal notes, leaving the count at 1 2 3 4 5 6, and making sure you double-stroke or buzz roll on 4 5 6. Or, you can count those rolls with the literal note value of the dotted quarter (three 8th notes, in any time sig), leaving the count as (and I'm typing it like I'd say it), "1 2 3 fooouuur, 1 2 3 fooouuur", drawing the "fooouuur" out through counts 5 and 6, all the way to the 1 of the next measure.

2- Same as the second half of the first exercise, except, it'd be awkward to count hand movements there because, even though it's the same written rhythm, there's more hand movements in a 9 stroke roll as there is in a 7 stroke. (Exercises 2 and 3 should be flipped.) So, I would still count it "1 2 3 fooouuur", doing the correct type of roll to fill counts 4, 5, and 6 (more hand movements than counts). In 2/4, it would be written the same way but with a little "3" above the set of 8th notes.

3- Ok, this is weird... Same as the first half of the first exercise, except with a set of eight single stroke 16th notes in the space reserved (per the 6/8 time sig) for only six. This makes the count very awkward- 1 2 3 4e&a5e&a. You would count that latter part in the duple meter that the "8" indicates, but squeeze it into the 4&5&6& space of the latter half of the measure, and saying/thinking that is very convoluted when in a triple meter. So, I suggest learning the count just to understand it, but when playing it, feel it like it's written in 2/4 and switching from a triplet to a set of 32nd notes. The set of eight 16th notes has to have the little "8" above it to tell you to squeeze those eight notes in the space that, in 6/8, is designated for six of them- opposite of how triplets are notated in 2/4, 4/4, etc. When putting triplets in a duple time sig, it requires the "3" (sometimes a "6" if it's a sextuplet)- this is familiar to most of us- and when putting duples/quads/etc in a triple sig (which 6/8 is), it requires a 4, 8, etc- much less common. If this was written in 2/4, there would be a "3" above the set of eights notes, and the sixteenths would be thirty-seconds with no "8" above them.

All that said, with the groupings of notes in three and six, a 2/4 triplet feel is implied- but still technically not counted that way. 6/8 was chosen to simply not have to put little 3's over every grouping (more on that below).


No offense, Alain- technically, not true. It's often felt like a two-beat measure, but the 6/8 time sig literally indicates it's counted in six beats, hence the 6/8 designation (six total beat counts, assigned to notated 8th notes). "1 and a 2 and a" is one way to count 8th note triplets in 2/4. Yes, they can be interpreted the same, esp. when a piece of sheet music like this one groups three 8th notes (or six 16th notes) together with the note flags, and in that case, it's a way of notating the triplets-in-2/4 or 4/4 feel without having to put little 3's all over the page. But this isn't the rule, as there is plenty of 6/8 pieces that do not have a triplet feel. In those cases, the 8th notes are usually grouped by their note flags in pairs (a measure full would look just like "1& 2& 3&" from a measure of 3/4) rather than threes. The time sig indicates how it's counted, not the feel, but if the player sees that there is an intended triplet feel due to groupings of three, then it can be played that way. But saying that makes the counts change is completely incorrect.


This is true, even when grouped in threes with the note flags, which is exactly why they're technically not counted like triplets.

and to add to this...a little bit of a visual reference. I am an admitted rhythmic notation Nazi - like some people are gramar Nazis...and I just don't like it when thw way rhythms are counted are mixed up. It can cause the same kind of confusion as baad grammar/punctuation. So, I am not tryign to come off as a jerk, but just explaining this the way I do to my students to help make it clear


1anduh - Score.jpg
 
I read that today:
A time signature is compound if the top number is greater than three and can be divided by three.
Correct-- the bottom number will be 8, and the top number is divisible by three, and the primary felt and counted pulse will be a dotted quarter note, which is three 8th notes long, and creating a three note subdivision. That's what 6/8 is, that's why it's counted in 2.

For those Stone exercises-- you'll play that triplet-feel rhythm for the whole measure on the open and closed 7 stroke roll exercises-- just play multiple bounce strokes on the closed rolls, and double strokes on the open.

On the 9 stroke rolls, you'll be fitting four notes in the space of beat 2-- in effect, if we were in 2/4, it would be like playing an 8th triplet on 1, and 16th notes on 2-- with the double strokes or multiple bounce strokes to make the roll.

For the single stroke rolls, play the same rhythm as the open rolls, but with alternating singles-- equivalent to a sixtuplet or eight 32nd notes if we were in 2/4. It's very simple and easy to make the equivalency with 2/4 when you count in 2, and completely ridiculous (especially the 9s) and impossible to do at the correct speed if you count in 6.
 
I've been following this thread. A lot of the posts, while technically correct, would be impractical in use. I've been playing and reading for a long time. You can slow down and count in 6 while learning a piece, because you have the time. Most of what I've played in 6/8 is faster. So, counting it in two, with a triplet feel, is how I approach this. There are exceptions. Try counting to six fast, bar after bar. Counting 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 and just does not flow off the tongue. Out of interest, I would like to see someone try counting in such a fashion in 9/8 or 12/8. When you come across a time signature that has 8 as the lower number, it's generally a faster piece.
 
X, what does compound time mean?
I vaguely remember playing an orchestral or percussion piece in 9/8 years and years ago. Then I looked up 9/8 on the internet and saw that "Clair de Lune" is written in 9/8.
My question is: Why not just write a piece in 3/4? What does 9/8 add to the piece that you just can't do in 3/4? Is it so you don't have to notate all the 8th notes as triplets?
 
I vaguely remember playing an orchestral or percussion piece in 9/8 years and years ago. Then I looked up 9/8 on the internet and saw that "Clair de Lune" is written in 9/8.
My question is: Why not just write a piece in 3/4? What does 9/8 add to the piece that you just can't do in 3/4? Is it so you don't have to notate all the 8th notes as triplets?
I touched on this in my previous post, but in a nutshell, the difference in 6/8 and 3/4 is where the "beats" lie. Further complicating things, 6/8 with groupings in 3 rather than 2 imply a two-beat measure (when a feel of 2/4 with triplets is needed but the transcriber doesn't want to put little 3's over every grouping), even though it's technically not.

I've been following this thread. A lot of the posts, while technically correct, would be impractical in use. I've been playing and reading for a long time. You can slow down and count in 6 while learning a piece, because you have the time. Most of what I've played in 6/8 is faster. So, counting it in two, with a triplet feel, is how I approach this. There are exceptions. Try counting to six fast, bar after bar. Counting 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 and just does not flow off the tongue. Out of interest, I would like to see someone try counting in such a fashion in 9/8 or 12/8. When you come across a time signature that has 8 as the lower number, it's generally a faster piece.
What @crash said is true but only applies to that 6/8-as-2/4-triplets thing. Again, there's plenty of 6/8 that's a duple feel rather than triple (not so much in pop and jazz- more classical, probably some prog) so equating all 6/8 to triplets is a fallacy, because "counting it in two", when it's a duple feel rather than a triple, would be too weird while looking at groupings of two. Also, the counting to 6 thing isn't meant to rattle off the tongue- or brain, even- in real time. It's more for understanding it rather than mentally or literally verbalizing it. Once a player has a handle on it, the counting isn't necessary- just sees it and knows what to do. When I see either duple and triple groupings in 6/8, I don't count it out at all; I either just play it like 2/4 with triplets or 3/4 with duples.
 
Last edited:
I vaguely remember playing an orchestral or percussion piece in 9/8 years and years ago. Then I looked up 9/8 on the internet and saw that "Clair de Lune" is written in 9/8.
My question is: Why not just write a piece in 3/4? What does 9/8 add to the piece that you just can't do in 3/4? Is it so you don't have to notate all the 8th notes as triplets?
9/8 is just the native time signature for a piece in 3, with a three note subdivision-- compound triple. That's just what it is, so there's no reason to prefer 3/4 over it-- even though you could write it that way.

If you look at some piano music for Claire de Lune, it does have some straight 8ths in it-- "duplets" or whatever they would be called. But there are way more compound 8th notes, hence the choice to put it in 9/8.
 
Last edited:

The beams of the 8ths and the musical context of Stick Control strongly favors a 2 beat feel. All of the initial exercises could be written as triplets in 2/4. Who would count to 12 in a 12/8 Blues and perceive the pulse as the 8ths? It's easier to read / write as 12/8 than a bunch of triplets throughout.
I admit that the 32nd notes and quintuplets look a bit funny but maybe that was more common when it was written or it was included to familarize the student with that way of notating it.
Blue Rondo à la Turk could be written as 3/4 with eighth note triplets but the motive in the first three measures would be harder to read that way. Those two note groupings sound like a short modulation.
blue-rondo-ala-turk-for-ssa-vocal-jazz_page-1.png
 
Thanks for the answers so far, btu my comprehension is at a much lower level, I am still searching the meaning of some words. Just to tell you, right now, I read about de difference between a open roll and closed roll...

It's 1 piece at the time... yesterday I studied in details what is 6/8 and the difference between 3/4 and 6/8.. il order to understand some of the things you guys told me here.
 
Blue Rondo à la Turk could be written as 3/4 with eighth note triplets but the motive in the first three measures would be harder to read that way. Those two note groupings sound like a short modulation.
View attachment 103013
Thank you for posting this. Really enjoyed listening to this tune in the context of the discussion, and hearing Joe Morello's great drumming!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top