Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum A Method of Counting Music

Counting. It is one of the most important skills a musician can posses, yet it is not always taught well. Occasionally, it is completely ignored by the teacher and/or student. Rhythm, a principal building block of music, depends on it! Playing something "as you heard it" is no substitute for counting music.

How to count just about any piece of music!

1. Understand the key signature.

2. Find the shortest note in the piece.

3. How many notes from #2 can fit in a full beat?

4. Use a counting system that uses that many syllables or numbers on every beat.

5. Write the counting on the score.

6. Using the metronome, begin at a slow tempo. Audibly count as you play with a staccato voice. Play the notes as you count, don't count as you play the notes.

Hints/Examples:

If the shortest note gets the entire beat there is no need to subdivide the counting. Ex. The shortest note is a quarter note in common time. Count, "1 2 3 4"

Ex. Eighth notes are the shortest notated in common time. Count, "1 & 2 & 3 & 4 &"

Dividing in threes (in 4/4). Count, "1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3" for every measure. Stress the 1's as you count.

Ex. Sixteenth notes in common time. Count, "1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4" in every measure. Counting could also be done, "1 2 3 4 2 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 4 2 3 4" but I find this to be a bit of a tongue twister.

A brief foray into multiple rhythms:

Counting the two most common multiple rhythms.


Students will never mis-play Chopin's Fantasie Impromptu again!

Hope this helps,

Wm

William,

Drawing on my band and orchestral experience, ensemble musicians will usually count multi-measure rests as 1 2 3 4, 2 2 3 4, 3 2 3 4, etc.

To subdivide within a measure, a frequent usage for triplets is 1-and-uh, 2-and-uh, 3-and-uh, 4-and-uh;

and for 16ths: 1-ee-and-uh, 2-ee-and-uh, 3-ee-and-uh, 4-ee-and-uh. This is not as much the tongue-twister that you prefer to avoid, and it helps to distinguish between multi-measure counting and intra-measure counting.

Brian.

There are also counting systems associated with the Eastman school (geared towards woodwind players) and Kodaly (which addresses some issues with folk music and the developmental stages of young children)

Forget the numerics and addition/subtraction/subdivision and try "Note Value Counting".

Here you say aloud syllable of words that coincide with the duration of the note being played.

It is important that a student or pianist can keep a steady beat in any given tempo. If not, counting won't help an iota. One has to conquer arrythmic tendencies which could mean getting exercise with large muscles (legs/arms) before expecting such precision from finger digits, and accurately sending the impulse message to a specific hand and a specific finger. If enough time has not been given to this absolute first step in beginning piano, it will never get better because there is not a precision task master engaged.

I won't bore you here with the "Magic Words". Probably most adults would feel stupid doing something so easy.

However, it does compute grandly and efficiently.

Pianists with 10 fingers and 88 keys and two hands in movement does not work well with the metric counting 1 & 2 & (etc) because they must still assign or equate what the numerical means to the note in the present moment. No one can be in two places at once, so choosing the simplest thought combining vision with placement is essential.

Chorus, band, orchestra, ensembles work best with the metric counting because they usually have a conductor-director looking at a "SCORE" and combining many voices from many staves into one cohesive presentation beat by beat - starting and ending and staying together precisely.

The pianist must maintain their own thinking and sorting out the music with ONE brain and staying on track - anticipating/the present moment/reflecting on what was just done. Kind of like stringing beads on a thread. A mind body machine with physical mechanics on demand.

Demanding, isn't it!

Betty

Betty,

My daughter had a choir teacher who taught syllables for "counting."

quarter note = ta
half note = ta-a
eighth note = ti
triplet = ta-ke-da
sixteenth = I don't know. They never got to this.

Her piano teacher, though, teaches numerical counting. Is the syllable method very common among piano teachers? I haven't encountered it much, but I do find that it helps one get the feel of the rhythm.

Matt

Those syllables are used in Kodaly and are common in choral/voice. 16th notes are "ti-ka-ti-ka"

There are regional variations, though.

Matt H:

Yes, similar words to mine, glad you posted!

Yours: quarter note = ta
half note = ta-a
eighth note = ti
triplet = ta-ke-da
sixteenth = I don't know. They never got to this.

Mine: Subtracting from 4
4 beats) whole note - Say: "Hold That Whole Note"
2 beats) half note - Say: "Half Note"
1 beat( quarter - Say: "TA"

Each "chit" added on the original circle (4 beats) whole note, REDUCES the count by half.
(Say this until it is obviously clear for you. Try drawing these on paper.)

Draw a circle. (4 beats)
add a stem (reduced to 2 beats) half note
shade in the notehead (reduced to 1 beat) quarter note
add a flag (reduced to 1/2 of 1 beat) eighth note
add another flag (reduced to 1/4 of 1 beat) 16th note.


Added dots INCREASE note values by half:
3) dotted half note - "Half Note Dot"

1 and 1/2) dotted quarter - "TA - i"

dotted eighth and 1/16 note combinations: Looong/shorts. These were former equal 1/8 notes that had a 1/16th note from the 2nd 1/8 note moved to the 1st 1/8 note. (3/16 + 1/16) They sound like they are "limping".

Start at 4 beats and this makes lots of sense. The open circle (note head) is just waiting for your inner math to take effect.

Far enough.

I've posted before on this subject under "magic counting" or "note value counting". If you use my name to search with you might find some more explanations during the time I've been a posting member.

I think it's really "nifty" to have both ways to count. I am not neglecting the metric because we do it later on after the student has completely mastered the syllabic counting of matching sounds to duration of the note value.

It works, it works, it works! I was so joyful when I discovered ways to do this. It so absolutely works! Helps kids master their first years tasks and set up a wonderful foundation for the future. Rhythm being as important as it is!

Good luck!

Betty

I remember learning and teaching from the PIE BOOK or something like that.

It related simple rhythms to words.

Pie = quarter note

Ap-ple = even 8th notes (should they be anything else?)

Choc-o-late = triplets

Huc-kle-ber-ry = 16th notes

So we had -

Ap-ple Ap-ple Ap-ple Pie

Ap-ple Ap-ple Choc-o-late Pie

Ap-ple Ap-ple Huckleberry Huckleberry Pie

YUM!

And it works. Used it in teaching for years without the book. With a metronome. People relate to the rhythm of words I guess.

First just say it.
Then say it repeatedly with metronome
Then play it on a single note
Then play it with the notes written.

I think those who are beginning to work in counting by "syllabic deduction" will find it works to easily and accurately.

I hope people will explore it more for their own use.

It does require some training to use, and to check for accuracy, and it must have a steady tempo to construct it upon.

I'm convinced that kids enjoy it and can use it very efficiently, so much that counting has not been a problem for my beginners ever since finding "note value reading" as a solution to teaching counting.

Sometime in the future, students learn to use the mathematical metric counting, as they should to be able to conform to the theory and standards of the world. But, it is one, creative, exacting tool that really works very reliably.

Good subject!

Betty

All the different ideas are great. I think it doesn't really matter what you use, or what they count, or even if they use numbers at all, as long as they can see the rhythm and know how it goes isn't that the point?

cjp_piano,

I think many would be undisciplined in counting with no particular instruction or not using words to count with as they "construct" a music piece for the first time. I want them to be counting with their inner voice until it becomes automatic and dependable.

So many pianists are arrythmic and don't know it. Also, some teacher's produce this kind of student without realizing it because they too are arrythmic.

I think it takes a lot of time to learn to count by the 1-e-+-uhs and we stumble around trying to fit them in the measure properly.

In some songs, I "witeout" the measures because the kids stop at the bar lines to regroup.

Are you perhaps talking more about adults while I am talking about kids as students. I am speaking too about basic counting as a beginner, not a person already well versed in rhythmic activity.

The adult pianist could use any method of counting that has previously worked for him, the new to the piano student needs basic beat and sub-division of whole notes down to quarter noes. Eighth notes, and dots added to extend durations would be next. Sixteenths would be for the hand and finger developed student who can respond quickly. Each of those durations need to be "drilled" into being.

I notice you said "as long as they can SEE the rhythm and know how it goes isn't that the point?"

Well, yes, and no. Besides visual learning, there is tactile learning, and aural learning. I think the see/feel/hear is all part of teaching counting. Working with each sense separately is really bringing the counting picture home to the student.

Do you teach beginning piano students?

Betty

Betty, you're so thorough, I love you!!

I think my point was misunderstood. I wasn't saying DON'T use anything to teach rhythm. I was saying it doesn't matter which system you use as long as it works for them. I'm talking about adults AND young kids, and YES, I do teach beginning piano students, lots!

My point was that it doesn't matter if they learn sixteenths notes as "1-e-and-uh", or "ta-pi-tay-ti" or "huckleberry", just as long as they know how it goes. When I read a piece of music, sometimes it's difficult to say all the correct rhythm counting syllables or words, but I sure can play the rhythm correctly! Why? because I see the rhythms on the page and know how it's suppose to sound.

I wasn't saying visual learning is the only kind of learning that should be involved. But obviously the first thing you do when figuring out a rhythm of a new piece is LOOK at it.

I like how you said you white-out the bar lines because students sometimes interpret them as "stop and take a break!" ha ha . . .good idea!

I agree. I don't think the system matters.

What's important is that it's consistent, logical, and can be applied usefully to elementary, intermediate, and early-advanced literature.

I know I am not a teacher, and thus shouldn't be posting here, But I thought I should add another example of counting, in an other language:
4/4: 1 2 3 4/1 2 3 4/etc. Read as: u-nu do-oi tre-ei pa-atru/etc. Each syllable 'expands' to fit the lowest subdivision of notes ex: from the usual doi (2) you get do-o-o-oi. I find the ways you count very interestin [partially because I find linguistics interesting ]
@Betty I once posed the question 'why isn't absolute time used in all pieces?' and nearly got impaled . I like the ideea of erasing bar lines [though one can argue that it would mess the rhytm in some pieces, I find them somewhat useless in others]. Satie is to be mentioned here.

cjp_piano said: "Betty, you're so thorough, I love you!!"

About thorough: Sorry about that, my habit in writing and talking is that the more the better, just to clarify, and not to forget something pertinent. I know I over do it. One could say excessively. I too like reading things written succinctly, some people have a gift for it.

About "I love you!"
Let's spread that love around a little - I see that you are indeed lovable and friendly and with a sense of humor.



Betty

Galex: @Betty I once posed the question 'why isn't absolute time used in all pieces?' and nearly got impaled.

Betty: I'm so sorry, Galex. I sometimes blunder or exceed my manners. I'm glad you didn't actually get impaled - but I understand that my words can be abrupt and too opinionated. I'm glad you told me.

Galex: I like the ideea of erasing bar lines [though one can argue that it would mess the rhytm in some pieces, I find them somewhat useless in others].

Betty: I think rhythm will NEVER be messed up if you associate every note with a steady pulse matched to the lower number in the time signature fraction. All quarter notes - TA TA TA TA - keeps moving through the piece regardless of bar lines. We really don't need to be counting the metric way - note value counting is quite superior for a pianists needs.

It is good phrasing that is needed to help with rise and fall and expressiveness. The placement of phrasing in the music is important.

Measures(bar lines) don't require us to do anything, they are best seen as light gray.

When we are looking for a starting point to divide a piece into practice passages, measures are indeed handy, make that necessary.

Music with the first measure in each line identified with a number are wonderful, otherwise, you have to do that by writing it in yourself.

The "witeout" is a constant in my tool box near the piano. I really use it a lot with beginners, as well as editing other things that often need changing, such as fingering.

If it would be painting a wall, a brush that small would take a month of Sunday's to do. Thankfully it's little dabs of wite out that can work wonders on a piece of music.

Long live witeout!

Betty

Erasing bar lines works only if the music starts on the down beat, and the time signature does not change in the middle of the music, I think.

Betty: I'm so sorry, Galex. I sometimes blunder or exceed my manners. I'm glad you didn't actually get impaled - but I understand that my words can be abrupt and too opinionated. I'm glad you told me.


I think I expressed myself wrong. I was trying to say that I once asked a teacher somewhat along the lines of : 'what if we erase the bars, what would happen?' and he went kind of berserk on me for posing a question which he considered almost heretic. I believe he thought that people that change stuff in music deserve a public execution. [well, I may be exagerating ]. I was just expressing my astonishment that you have the same point of view as mine of what I was trying to say to that teacher, and better yet, encourage it.

Oh, and I apologise for my rather crude level of English that sometimes makes me harder to understand. Damn these language barriers!

Galex:

Oh, then I'm glad that we're in agreement - he would not want to see all the color coding we do at lessons - it creates a "Picasso" - very abstract in content when it's finished, but each color and designation means something important.

He would execute me. It's called "music mapping" in general and is beginning to come into place in music lessons - probably about 20 years ago I first saw it and took up the vibrant colors to create a secondary learning tool places on the music symbols as reminders of what is happening here.

What is good about herecy and public execution? I can not think of a single good thing about it.

Let's encourage those things that should be encouraged!

Glad you straightened me out with the interpretation of what you had posted.

I'm glad there is no need between us for band aids!

Betty

You've mentioned mapping before a couple of times (I used "search!") Do you think it would be worth a separate thread, and explaining in a little more detail?

I direct a handbell choir, where people who read music are a minority. They mark their notes, some by circling, some not. We don't have a standard convention. Maybe it's something I need to think about.

Yes, they do count, and do subdivide, but I work that constantly.