Can you ever have too much musicality?

[Cornish Pixie]

Hi peeps, this is a question more for the followers, when dancing with a lead do you ever think too much musicallity is enough. For example there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.

Sometimes though i think that my follower mite find this a bit too much, so i lead moves to a normal time ignoring bits that could be interpreted, to me this is sacrilage. so i wondered if there is a need, or is it acceptable to just go crazy and forget about doing any moves whatsoever.

I also find it hard to get the balance right between interpreting bits myself and allowing my partner a go, any tips?

(i realise these questions are largely dependant on ability but its more aimed at followers that are comfortable with interpreting the music)

cheers nick

[Caro]

...there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.

Sometimes though i think that my follower mite find this a bit too much, so i lead moves to a normal time ignoring bits that could be interpreted, to me this is sacrilage. so i wondered if there is a need, or is it acceptable to just go crazy and forget about doing any moves whatsoever.

I think that's just great (well, provided your follow is comfortable with it, i.e. doesn't give you the rabbit caught in the lights look).

I also find it hard to get the balance right between interpreting bits myself and allowing my partner a go, any tips?

It's been a few months since we last danced, but from what I remember you have no problem whatsoever to adapt to your follower and give her as much space as she wants (and sometimes, she wants a lot ).
FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country

[Jamie]

I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality. Noel is a good example of this, he dances nothing but what he hears in the music, I'd much rather dance with Noel than someone who prefers moves over musicality.

[rubyred]

I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality.

Oh YES, I do moves when I am led into them, but it is so delicious to have your whole body taken by the beat of the music, such fun and a beautiful way to express yourself. My most memorable dances are ones when there are very little moves and more expression and interpretation.

[Cornish Pixie]

I prefer to dance with leads who use the "no moves" approach and go for pure musicality. Noel is a good example of this, he dances nothing but what he hears in the music, I'd much rather dance with Noel than someone who prefers moves over musicality.

Yes i see your point with noel, hada a dance with him the other day, always wondered why all the ladys love dancing with him so much, now i kno,lol

[Cornish Pixie]

FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country

[robd]

FWIW, you're one of my favorite leads in the country

Don't get carried away CP, she says that to all the men

Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance. I want to start a thread on this topic but am still formulating it within my head. If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more. It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does. Dancing with someone of the ability of say, Cat (and yes, I know that's a pretty high comparative bar) and you can see that it is possible for someone to express what's happening within the music through their body but also not let that affect the receptiveness to the lead.

It's a bit like variations on the basics in WCS (or MJ for that matter) - if you do that variation all of the time it ceases to become a variation and loses some of its impact because of that.

[Caro]

Don't get carried away CP, she says that to all the men

He's just jealous CP, cause that's not true at all

Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance.

Fair point. To come back to the early question of CP, i.e. is it ok to dance a whole track ignoring the beat (i.e. dancing to other things in the music), this might be an overkill... The beat is probably, at least at some points in the piece of music, the 'main' thing going so it might be pushing a little to ignore it completely to dance to the more subtle stuff all the time...

It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does.

very true... and very hard to achieve well too. There are probably stages in every dancer's development where one goes from expressing himself/herself too much, to the detriment of the partnership, before one manages to reconcile one's interpretation of the music with a partnered dance...

[pjfrad]

Is it possible to have to much musicality? Short answer no, but....

It all depends on what you define as musicality. If you define musicality as using your body to highlight music, get breaks, etc... then yes it is possible to have to much because you are forgetting about your partner.

Musicality should be about the whole dance, it's about the moves you select, how you do those moves, how you fit them to the music as well as what the individuals do within these with their own bodies and style.

For example there are certain songs that i know so well or are structured in a certain way that for the whole of the dance i could avoid leading a single move in standard time, instead i would be altering the timing and doing a lot of interpretation with my body.

Altering timing, changing moves, getting hits, all good, however instead of thinking about interpreting everything with your body, think of how you might be able to interpret things with the followers body or how to highlight a piece of music by making the follower do something.

Peter

[Lory]

If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more.

It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on'

There are probably stages in every dancer's development where one goes from expressing himself/herself too much, to the detriment of the partnership,

I couldn't agree more.. I had a wonderful dance with Marc Forster last night, it was very understated but the feeling created was just wonderful, it was just as though we were having a non-verbal conversation he listened to me and picked up on the accents I was choosing to highlight (which weren't always the 'obvious' one's) and he replied with a complimentary musical answer and visa versa. As Jamie said, I don't think we did 'any' moves, as such!


In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

[Trouble]

In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

I bet he is a selfish lover..

Anyway, musicality really only works IMO when you have two people feeling it and connecting. There are no hard and fast rules about when to do it and how much but it only works if your both connecting and feeling each other.

I mean, we only ever give head to get it, musicality is the same, you give it in the hope to get some back and there can never be too much of it!!!!!

[robd]

I bet he is a selfish lover..

And a satisfied one

[LilyB]

... Addressing the question asked I think that yes, there can be such a thing as too much musicality. One of the (many) things that separates the better dancers from the competent ones in my view is the use of contrast within the dance. I want to start a thread on this topic but am still formulating it within my head. If you are hitting everything then it can be less effective than just selectively hitting elements within the music. Less can be more. It's also critical that the musicality happen within the dance otherwise it's just 'one person's crazy **** going on' - in some settings this may be appropriate but IMO the best dances are those where the muscality (from both partners) doesn't adversely affect the lead and follow and on too many occasions I feel that in fact it does. Dancing with someone of the ability of say, Cat (and yes, I know that's a pretty high comparative bar) and you can see that it is possible for someone to express what's happening within the music through their body but also not let that affect the receptiveness to the lead.

It's a bit like variations on the basics in WCS (or MJ for that matter) - if you do that variation all of the time it ceases to become a variation and loses some of its impact because of that.

Totally agree with you there, Rob, especially the bits in your post that I have highlighted.

[frodo]

...In contrast, I danced with a very stylish dancer, who was very good at interpreting the music 'himself' BUT, he didn't include me I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

What Marc did sounds like it requires far more skill.

[Miss Flicts]

I'd say he put on a good 'show' for me musically, but basically, when anything worthy of interpreting came on, he lead me to stay stationary, while he did 'his bit'!

So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

If he likes to do solo shines he could adopt a 'me-you' approach and offer his partner equal floor time to do her own thing too (if she wants to).

I'm with Lory - if a leader goes into a solo 'bit' I just do some body movement and step on the spot. You can't start doing your own solo moves at the same time for a few reasons:

• It's polite to watch and appreciate your partner's shine/move/spin
• It's difficult to establish the end of the break and reconnect if neither of you is stationary or you've lost eye contact - it's the follower's responsibility to be ready unless she's actually been offered playtime by the leader
• It can look a real mess if you're both doing different shines at the same time

It's all about give and take. I personally like dancing with guys who like to do their own thing - as long as they also give their partner a chance to the same and it's all fun and collaborative .

[Gadget]

So anyone have suggestions on what else could he have done. After all a stationary open position does allow quite a bit of freedom.

What Marc did sounds like it requires far more skill.

Not that much skill - just a different skill from what you are probably used to. He started "dancing" from a 'club' background - if you want to dance with someone in a club, you have to both try and read each other's movements without hand-holding.

Start by trying to step on the mirrored foot as your partner, landing yours as they land theirs - if you get a partner to practice with, do it without physical contact and get them to put in some timing variations to match the music (syncopations I think they are called, but that may be a bit narrow a term)

Once you get that, the rest should be fairly intuative.

[Lory]

I'm with Lory - if a leader goes into a solo 'bit' I just do some body movement and step on the spot. You can't start doing your own solo moves at the same time for a few reasons:

• It's polite to watch and appreciate your partner's shine/move/spin
• It's difficult to establish the end of the break and reconnect if neither of you is stationary or you've lost eye contact - it's the follower's responsibility to be ready unless she's actually been offered playtime by the leader
• It can look a real mess if you're both doing different shines at the same time

It's all about give and take. I personally like dancing with guys who like to do their own thing - as long as they also give their partner a chance to the same and it's all fun and collaborative .

Thank you, you've explained my views brilliantly!

The way he held my hand, down and still, I'd have felt like I was fighting against him, if i did anything (apart from wiggle). And as Miss Flicts said, it'd been quite rude to 'do my thang' when he was clearly, showing me, 'his thang'

I can't explain it very well at all I'm afraid, but he gave me very little to do at all really, whilst he did loads of spins and turns infront of me and a couple of times he broke hold and walked off, did some dramtic lunge thing and then came back to me again. As I said, he was a good dancer and he'd have probably made a beginner feel great but I doubt by the end of the dance, he could have known if I was a good dancer or not?

[David Bailey]

I can't explain it very well at all I'm afraid, but he gave me very little to do at all really, whilst he did loads of spins and turns infront of me and a couple of times he broke hold and walked off, did some dramtic lunge thing and then came back to me again. As I said, he was a good dancer and he'd have probably made a beginner feel great but I doubt by the end of the dance, he could have known if I was a good dancer or not?

I bet every male forumite there is now wondering "Was that me?"

[Andreas]

(well, provided your follow is comfortable with it, i.e. doesn't give you the rabbit caught in the lights look)

This is exactly the point when it is too much. If it completely throws the other person then musical interpretation can be very destructive.

[Miss Flicts]

This is exactly the point when it is too much. If it completely throws the other person then musical interpretation can be very destructive.

I agree - I think the whole thing depends on who you are dancing with and how well you know their style. It just requires a bit of common sense on the part of the leader.

If you dance with someone often or you've seen them confidently enjoying solo playtime on the dancefloor, then you know they like it.

If you've not danced much with someone and haven't seen them doing any solo bits with anyone else, then don't put them on the spot. Simple!