Synchronous Rhythm And Autonomous Rhythm In Equilibrium

Last Tuesday's solares began not quite as well as I would have liked.

It was supposed to start off with a simple warm-up of son montuno maracas rhythm, "slowandslow" embodiment rhythm variation, and infinity engine; and build from there. What I got instead was one out of three: the "slowandslow" embodiment rhythm variation. The infinity engine was a no-show. More disconcertingly the maracas strokes were played in direct correlation (1:1) with the embodiment rhythm instead of the proper twice the cycle speed.

Evidently the participants had failed to invest in themselves with practice. But at least they were honest about it. There was nothing to be gained from anything other than turning the workshop into an extended practice session. So I shelved the intended content and designed the practice session on-the-fly. For the practice session to be useful, it could not be a dry punitive exercise in drudgery; that would hardly be an incentive for later self-practice. The session needed to be interesting and challenging and rewarding.

A deeper evaluation of their proficiencies was needed, so I asked them to perform the embodiment rhythm and the son montuno maracas rhythm without music. It didn't take long to see that participants:

• were unaccustomed to playing on their own;
• relied on music as a crutch; and
• had never listened critically to the musicality of their playing i.e. it was purely mechanical in sound production.

These characteristics are not uncommon in developing percussionists. Therefore what had to be done next was principally well-established: to increase the quality of execution by improving musicality. The novelty was that I would use a balance of synchrony and autonomy exercises to achieve it. Synchronous practices would help diffuse my playing expertise through the group. Autonomous practices would promote the sense of individual ownership over their playing.

Synchronous Practices

Exercise 1: Side-by-side, facing the same direction
Paired practice. No music. Caribbean sway. "quick, quick, slowandslow". son montuno maracas rhythm. Changing partners at each iteration.

I deliberately didn't specify whether to execute this in phase or not, so participants freely experimented. Participants noted that their ability to synchronise with their partners improved with each iteration. When they partnered with me, their phrasing improved and their maracas began to sound less mechanical and more musical.

Exercise 2: Side-by-side, facing the same direction, "front" cue
Paired practice. No music. Caribbean sway. "quick, quick, slowandslow". Son montuno maracas rhythm. Changing partners at each iteration. One partner designated static, the other moving.

With the "front" cue, the designated participant moves from the side position to in front of and facing their partner.
With the "side" cue, the designated participant returns to the side position.

This exercise introduces perturbation by requiring movement and the suppression of mirror neuron stimulus in the face-to-face position. With respect to the latter: all participants were dextral, and as a result, a mirror image cannot be maintained between partners' hands when they faced each other.

Participants were given the scope to explore the effect of phase under their own initiative. Again, each participant's ability to maintain synchrony with their partner improved iteration upon iteration as they 'toughened up' against the disturbances (i.e. became more autonomous).

Briefing: concordance and opposition positions
Synchronous rhythmic activities are easier in the side-by-side 'concordance' position. There is less reliance on the visual sense and, consequently, proportionally more use of the aural and kinesthetic. Confusion due to mirror neuron activity due to asymmetry is also minimised. The converse holds when partners adopt the face-to-face 'opposing' position.

Autonomous Practices

Exercise 3: Side-by-side, facing the same direction, "turn" cue
Paired practice. No music. Caribbean sway. "quick, quick, slowandslow". Son montuno maracas rhythm. Changing partners at each iteration. One partner designated static, the other moving.

With the "turn" cue, the designated participant executes a half turn on the spot.

Partners begin by establishing synchrony. Upon issuance of the "turn" cue, the moving partner executes a slow half turn away from the static partner. This has the effect of decreasing the sound volume of their maracas (i.e. increasing autonomy) over the first quarter turn; and then increasing the sound volume (i.e. decreasing autonomy) over the second quarter turn.

Some participants experienced a sensation of 'tension synchrony' as if they were pulling against elastic when they turned away, and the elastic tension dissolved when they turned back to their starting position.

Briefing: "what's autonomous?"
Participants where not clear on the property of autonomy. This was because the requirement for autonomy is fleeting with Exercise 3 when the designated partner turns away from the static partner, presenting her/his body as a sonic baffle. The presence of 'tension synchrony' may have masked the sense of autonomy. I had a more involved exercise which would clarify that...

Exercise 4: Side-by-side, facing the same direction, "turn-back-turn-front" cues
Paired practice. No music. Caribbean sway. "quick, quick, slowandslow". Son montuno maracas rhythm. Changing partners at each iteration. One partner designated static, the other moving.

With the "turn" cue, the designated participant executes a half turn on the spot, to face the opposite direction
With the "back" cue, the designated participant moves diagonally-forward into a back-to-back position with the static partner.
With the "turn" cue, the designated participant executes a half turn on the spot, to face the static partner's back.
With the "front" cue, the designated participant moves diagonally-forward to their original start position.

Autonomy is explored:

• symmetrically after the "back" cue when both partners are unable to hear each other; and,
• asymmetrically after the second "turn" cue when the static partner can hear the moving partner but not vice versa.

Conclusion

At the end of the session, participants felt that they:

1. were playing more musically;
2. understood each other's music-making personality better;
3. were more capable of synchronising to others; and
4. had greater autonomy and thus were less perturbable.

This session served as a taster in the delicate power possible when synchronous rhythm and autonomous rhythm are held in balance.

Despite its inauspicious beginnings, the outcomes in synchrony, autonomy and self-realisation were encouraging. I foresee that solares will adopt this tack for the next few weeks, so that the good work done so far does not go to waste.

Loo Yeo