The pros and cons of counting rhythms
Counting is a way of working out how a rhythm would sound without needing to first hear it performed, it works by counting beats over a metronome. For example, if you assign the quarter note to a duration of one beat, it receives one count.
The count defines a grid of equal duration periods of time, and we count longer notes by considering how many counts each note is worth. If the quarter note is equal to one beat:
- A half note gets two counts.
- A dotted half note gets 3 counts.
- A whole note gets 4 counts.
Thus, if you have a rhythm consisting of two half notes in 4/4 time, starting on count one, the first half note spans counts one and two, while the second one spans 3 and 4. Notice that the counting for the same note duration changes depending on where the note is in the bar.
If one were to simply count notes up from zero to the total number of beats used in a piece of music, you'd end up at large numbers and this would become combersome. Instead, it is more common to count rhythms in relation to the bar. A bar of 4 quarter notes is counted '1, 2, 3, 4':
In 3/4, one counts up to 3 for every bar:
And in 2/4, you count up to 2 for each bar:
These can be practised by putting on a metronome at a low tempo, and read from the above examples, performing each count in time with the metronome click. Learn to count the different time signatures first, and then try it with some other rhythms.
These can be practised by writing out some examples for yourself on manuscript paper, either by making up different sequences, or finding some examples in sheet music to copy:
- Work out the counting for the sequence and write it above the notes.
- Practice performing it repeatedly to a metronome until the pattern of the rhythm starts to become muscle memory.
- Once you can perform the rhythm easily, discard the conscious counting and perform the rhythm from muscle memory.
The function of counting rhythms is not to perform this process while playing music, because that would put a lot of workload onto the conscious mind. It is slow and would quickly get in the way as you play more complex music.
What I would instead advise is to use counting as a way of practising rhythmic figures, seeking to internalise the possibility space of rhythms that may be created with them. The point of counting is to guide correct repetition and build muscle memory and / or audiation.
The process of counting itself is a means to an end that one should be seeking to discard.
Counting shorter notes
The process for counting shorter notes is the same, but each beat is split into smaller units, represented by a different sound. It is common to use the word 'and' to represent a beat split into two, with the counting being '1 and 2 and ...'.
For time signatures where the quarter note is equal to one beat, an eighth note is equal to half a beat, and this gets one half count. A quarter note gets one (two half counts), a half note gets 2, and so on. Which sound corresponds to that varies depending on where a note is in the sequence.
Work on the below rhythm, and then make some more as previously discussed. I'd recommend initially practising these by counting to a metronome at a doubled tempo, so that the click of your metronome aligns with the half count, to ensure that your notes are being played at the correct time.
When the beat is farther subdivided, additional sounds are added to represent those subdivisions. For example, a 16th note subdivision in 4/4 time is counted as '1 e and a', where one of these represents a 16th note, two an 8th, and so on:
As you gain more experience with rhythm you'll instinctually know how long some notes are, and this will enable you to not count all of the subdivisions of longer notes.
Counting other kinds of rhythm
Counting ties
A tie is a curved line drawn between the heads of two or more notes. To count ties, you combine the values of the tied notes, and play over this total duration:
Ties are frequently used to join notes across the bar line, including to to create very long notes.
Ties can also join from or to notes of shorter durations like eighth notes.
Counting rests
A rest represents a silence of a given duration. For every kind of note, there is an equivalent rest, and you can find the symbols for these in the article The essence of rhythm notation.
Counting rests is the same as counting notes, but we don't voice them. A quarter rest (shown below) represents a gap the length of a quarter note. Have a go at clapping this rhythm, counting as normal, but don't clap the rests.
And here are some examples of rests of other durations, and their counting. The half rest is a rectangle that sticks up from the line. A whole rest hangs down, looking like a hole in the line.
Eighth rests, equivalent to the eighth note, look like this, and are counted the same as 8th notes:
Counting partial bars
Music sometimes starts or ends with a partial bar. To count them you take a whole bar, and then slice off the part that isn't there. You may find it easier to count the omitted notes anyway, and treat them as rests.
Counting compound time rhythms
But, to count music in compound time signatures, I'd recommend:
Note that compound time is often taught with the counting '1,2,3' for 3/8, '1,2,3,4,5,6' for 6/8 and so on. It works, but can be misleading as it does not communicate the individual triplets, or how 3/8 differs in intent from 3/4.
Counting 2/2 etc
-----
Time signatures with a '2' at the bottom represent a rhythm where the beat is assigned to the half note, and it's easiest to see how this works considering how you would count them.
For example, 2/2 is counted like 2/4 and the half note aligns with the numbered count. Thus, quarter notes are counted like 8th notes would be, and 8th notes counted like 16th notes would be.
If you were to take something in 4/4, and move it to 2/2 at the same tempo, it would be played twice as fast (unless you are told otherwise with a metronome mark).
However, while this counting demonstrates the intended function, in practice you can count 2/2 like you would count 4/4, and adjust the emphasis and tempo to align with the half note. The note values are otherwise equivalent.
Common misconceptions and issues with counting rhythms
As of the time of writing, counting is the most commonly taught approach to reading rhythms, however it also comes with quite a number of downsides:
Correct counting does not equal correct performance
Just because you are saying the syllables of a count correctly does not mean that the rhythm you are producing is correct. The time duration between the counts could be inconsistent. Because of this, having an audio reference like a metronome or experienced musician, and the skill of hearing if a note one is performing is early, late, or in time is still critical.
Counting isn't always representative of human performance
A big limitation of counting versus learning rhythms by ear is that counting forces everything into a mathematical straight jacket. The rhythm produced from counting is often not what an experienced player would perform, as they will alter the timing for expressive reasons.
Different musical idioms vary their rhythms in unique ways, and those details can only be learned by listening to and imitating musicians experienced with playing a given genre of music.
This issue is widely apparent in compound time rhythms, they are often swung. The first note in each triplet is extended in length, with the other two played in the remaining time, as it puts emphasis on the downbeat. That's called either 'lilt' or 'swing', depending on the musical idiom.
This means that how they are written, and how they are performed, is not the same. Thus, if you were to count each of the subdivisions of a compound time rhythm against a metronome, the result will not sound right.
Learn it from someone experianced with the tradition you are playing.
Bar lines don't define phrasing
It can be easy to assume that the bar lines in music also define the phrasing of the music, which it doesn't:
- Bar lines mark fixed periods of time, measured in beats.
- Phrases may align with the bar lines, but don't have to.
Counting is simply a way of tracking the lengths of notes consciously, and how we phrase and emphasise music is independent. Unfortunately, sheet music doesn't normally notate phrases, they need to be recognised from structure, and how this is done is discussed in Musicality: how to make your ocarina playing sound good.
In cases where a phrase begins in the middle of a bar, counting may feel awkward. You may for instance encounter music with a phrase like the following:
If you wish to practice something like that by counting, it may feel more natural to count in relation to the phrasing as follows. Counting is just a tool for practising rhythms and there is no harm in adapting it as long as you know how and why you're doing so.
Counting tuplets is unintuitive
It is unintuitive how to apply counting to any rhythm that does not follow a regular 'division by two' structure, for example in the case of tuplets. A tuplet temporally changes the subdivision of a rhythm, for example taking 3 notes, and playing them in the time duration of two notes of the same value, by equally dividing the time.
It is possible to count tuplets by finding a common divisor for the whole rhythm. For example in the following case, it is possible to count this rhythm using a subdivision into 3:
The subdivision needed depends on the note durations that are used within the entire rhythm, and being able to apply this to any random rhythm you encounter would entail learning numerous different counting systems, then being able to quickly identify which to use depending on the subdivisions that a given rhythm uses.
Instead, a more practical approach is to isolate the tuplet as a figure, precede it with a context, and then work out how to count just this. Practice it until it has become muscle memory, and then perform the figure within the original rhythm without counting it.
Another approach is to learn to play tuplets by ear, and this is actually the most common teaching method I've seen, combined with word associations. Three note tuplets sound similar to a word like 'tri-pa-let' or 'jaf-a'cake'.
Too many subdivisions!
You may have already realised that counting has challenges with notes of very short durations, as each level of subdivision doubles the amount of information to keep track of. For example, here is one way that you might count a bar of 32nd notes in 3/4:
When performed, 32nd notes are usually very brief, frequently so much so that it may be impossible to consciously count them at the final performance tempo, or even anything close to it, depending on how quickly you can think.
If you wish to count such things, they can be approached much the same as with tuplets. You separate the 32nd note part into a figure prefixed with some notes to put it in a content, and then count it repeatedly at a slow tempo until you can perform it from muscle memory, then discard counting and use a metronome to gradually speed it up to the final tempo.
However, practising in that way leaves a considerable divide between the practice tempo, and the tempo at which you will eventually be performing the rhythm. That split makes it difficult to then imagine what the end result will sound like without having an audio reference available.
Have a go with these 32nd notes, tapping them alternating between two fingers. Gradually increase the tempo with a metronome, and once you get used to how it feels stop counting the subdivisions.
Closing thoughts on counting rhythms
Western music developed at a more technologically primitive time. If a mechanical metronome and your own ability to count are your only tools available, it is easy to see how counting rhythms would become the default teaching approach.
We today have considerably more technology available to us, such that it is trivial to convert any notated rhythm you encounter into audio you can hear.
Counting can be useful tool in the practice of music, providing a means of logically understanding what rhythm notation literally describes, to work out how a rhythm would sound without needing to hear it, or as a means of consciously practising against a metronome.
However, I do not believe that counting should be put on a pedestal as 'the only valid method of teaching rhythm', a mentality that a subset of music educators obsessively push and defend.
The process of counting rhythms has a number of obvious failings, and I feel that rudimentary counting is often taught to beginner musicians, allowing them to read simple rhythms, who are then left stranded not having a clue how to proceed when they try to read more complex notation.
This is why I opted to teach rhythm by ear in Serious Ocarina Player: it is obvious to see how the approach may apply to any extant rhythm notation. Educators should be seeking to empower learners to pursue things independently, and I do not think it OK to begin with an approach that leaves people asking 'How do you count this?'.
The process of learning rhythm involves training the subconscious brain to predict when a series of notes should be played in time, counting does this through conscious repetition against a metronome. Learning rhythms by ear instead achieves the same thing by directly imitating correct audio performances of rhythm figures.
Both approaches can be used to deeply internalise the possibility space of rhythms that music notation can represent. What I would suggest is to try different approaches, learning rhythms by ear, and counting, then apply them as you feel works best for your own music practice.
But know that there will always be aspects of human performance that are impossible to represent through counting, because they would require subdividing time into units so small they would exceed the capacity of the logical mind.
While it is possible to mathematically analyse it, the art of music is not mathematics. Music is a form of human artistic and emotional expression, and any learning approach which allows you to express yourself is valid.
