These videos are so informative. As a new salsa dancer it’s helping me a lot. I’ve been wondering why ‘NY on 2’ has been driving me crazy after beginning my journey On 1. Having never danced before, and without any dance vocabulary or musicality in my background, On 1 and Son feels so much more intuitive/natural, at least to me. Thanks for all the uploads!
Talking about all of these in abstract is interesting, but without video showing how the different steps interact with the music, it's tough to see what point you are trying to make. My personal tactic is to be sure to hit the 2 and the 6, and the other four steps are fuzzier.
Thanks for your comment! You are correct, and I wish I were able to use video examples instead of just illustrations. But the principles are pretty clearly explained from a musical and rhythmic standpoint. Hopefully, though, I can use more video examples in the future. You make a great point.
Very nice vid. And like the previous comment I too started On 1 but later switched to On 2. I prefer it and find more enjoyment when I dance that way. And even though when I play music at my place and dance by myself with the On 2 rhythm in my head whenever I dance socially I often have to switch to On 1 due to the general preference of most dancers I run into. Although I've been told as a man if I'm a solid lead I should be able to convert a dancer (and I have done this before) it is often not so easy. But whenever I find a fellow On 2 dancer I feel like we connect better on the floor. Thanks for the vid 👍
I watch band players. They tap on 1 and break on 2. For a dancer that would translate into , tapping on1&5 and breaking on 2 & 6 You would still be dancing on 1 because the 1 is being marked, but on 2 because the break happens on the 2. Watch live bands and the musicians when they keep on beat by tapping their feet.
I'm a musician since young age and started dancing as a hobby very recently. Finally someone has put on a video something I was watching every time Facebook recommended me videos of a couple dancing 'on2' (concept that was foreign to me before started dancing). I can see that everything falls more or less into tempo (they dance faster or slower depending on the song) but the feet did not match the song's beats at all in majority of cases to the point sometimes I wondered if there was any point on having music in the background? Like I could play any song, any style and they'd still be dancing the same (faster or slower depending on the tempo). I see it as something more danced with the arms instead of the feet (hence so many spins and combos). It achieves a certain look as if the couple is floating but there's something missing for me :S ..... Saying that, I've seen videos of Eddie Torres and Eddie Torres Jr. and they are absolute beasts on the dancefloor. But I think one thing is what they taught/teach and another what people do on the dancefloor. My favourite style is Salsa Caleña but it lends itself very well to be danced to pachangas, sadly nobody in Cardiff, UK dances that style and very rarely they play a song with that type of percussion in it. So I'll keep dreaming someone teaches me how to dance like that :(
Wow! love the video. I was inspired to learn salsa from the movie Salsa with Roby Rosa the evil salsa lady i found an instructional video with her in it dancing with a guy with a ponytail and suit on it was a smooth dance im not sure of this womans name or what style it was but they appeared to be floating if i had my guess it was probably Puerto Rican style kinda like with a kick feel then step since movie was about Puerto Rico. My 1st wife was Puerto Rican from NYC and so i imagine i picked up on some NYC On2 but that seemed to have a kick then step also i call that the PR step and we were always told that we were out there floating. So now im confused don't know if im On1 NYC On2 PR Isla Cubano or On3 if there's such a thing. I like Old School salsa so ballet in my salsa i dont like I'd do hip hop salsa b4 id do ballet salsa ( New Contemporary Salsa) give me feed back if you can brother👍🏿
Interesting! Thanks for your comment and I'm lad you enjoyed the video. I haven't seen the instructional video that you mentioned. Is there any kind of link to it? I would definitely like to see it.
I don't see a link but the dance choreographers are Miranda Garrison and Kenny Ortega which now I believe are LA On1 dancers and the 1st time I seen any kind of salsa dancing back in the 80's. I grew up watching I Love Lucy hearing and watching Desi Arnaz when I was 12 I got my 1st Tito Puente album by the time I was 16 I saw LA Salsa but new I was getting a NYC feel from Titos mambo
I respectfully disagree with the point of the video. I dance both On1 and On2 contratiempo. There are no inconsistenices. Both have different nuances that are logical and beautiful.
Thank you for your comment! However, the point of the video is not to criticize the NY2, but to point out discrepancies that some can view as inconsistencies, especially if they are used to other more rhythmically consistent stepping patterns like On1 and Contratiempo timing. This doesn't mean that the NY2 timing is wrong, just that it can be confusing to some who don't understand the logic behind it and the advantages it has (particularly when it comes to the timing of turn patterns). The rhythmic timing of the "dominant steps" (or the step that you take your break step with and then return to the center) deviates from the consistency of timings like On1 or "Power 2" for the reasons clearly outlined in the video. This gives it a different look and feel from the other timings. Many of us don't mind (or even notice this), but others might. It's a matter of personal preference. But the explanation given on how the NY2 deviates from the rhythmic consistency of other timings is a fact, not an opinion. (How the "dominant steps" line up with {or deviate from} either the "strong" or "core" beats of the music {1,3,5,7} or the "weak", "contratiempo" beats {2,4,6,8} is a musical definition, not my personal opinion. Now, if someone views that as a good (or a bad) thing, that is where personal opinion comes in. Before posting this video, I posted a video about "On2 Pros?" which explained some of the advantages of these NY2 rhythmic deviations. That video is here: ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.html However, some still haven't seen that video. Instead, they focus on this one, and they seem to have missed the point of this video altogether. But that's why it's important to watch the entire video and get the whole story. I agree with you that these different timings have nuances that are logical and beautiful. In fact, if you saw the video until the end, that's kind of the video's ultimate message. You might want to go back and watch the video again, specifically from 7:25 onward. However, remember that while those nuances can be a "pro" for those of us who love On2, they can be a "con" for others who don't dance On2. Some dance other styles from Latin America like Salsa Caleña, Casino, etc. Also, some beginners want to learn the NY2, but they have trouble figuring out the timing of the basic stepping pattern. Look at some of the other comments on this video and you'll see that I'm not making this up. For example, check out the comments by @island-lava and @jmruizgil. Therefore, it's important to understand what inconsistencies "others" might be seeing so that you can explain how the timing works and possibly help them understand it better. While the NY2 turn patterns may be great and well-coordinated, some pay more attention to the rhythm of the footwork. Even though you dance On1 and On2 Contratiempo, and regardless of how much you appreciate those timings, others who are watching the footwork of NY2 dancers can have a different opinion, and the footwork can possibly look rhythmically disorganized for the reasons outlined in this video. I personally love dancing "On2". I only discovered these rhythmical issues when watching various videos of NY2 dancers social dancing. While reading the comments on those video clips, I noticed some commenting that "NY2" dancers weren't in sync with the rhythm of the music. Obviously, I don't agree with that, but I wondered why they would say that. Were they just hating on the style, or was there possibly a real rhythmic discrepancy that they were noticing? This led me to discover these rhythmic deviations of the NY2 pattern. Again, I'm not criticizing the NY2 timing at all. Rather, this video is about understanding why "others" might criticize the timing (or even have problems learning it) so that we can better address those criticisms or help them learn it more easily.
The only con here is a misleading title, as none of the cons here is realy a con. It's just a partial insight into a multidialectic nature of salsa, which is based on a multidialectic nature of african rhythms (both double and triple at the same time), clave mainly, but not only. There's not just one salsa music, it's a whole spectrum where rhytmical layers may vary - some may fade away and some can get emphasized and it's not only about on1 or on2 but also - or maybe first of all - if it's on4 (son cubano), as the actual maintream crossbody genre is more of a modern son cubano (strong bass accent on 4 and 8) than modern mambo - it has the son cubano layer emphasized again (after 80 years) and mambo layer (upbeat - like in mambo no. 5) faded and tuned down. Anyway salsa has downbeat and upbeat layers simultaneously allmost all the time, as it's based on clave, which is downbeat and upbeat ar the same time even if there's no clave actualy being played. Clave still is the key and all the salsa is so heavily clave-influenced that it's stił clave based even if there's no clave. And on the other side and totally apart from that there's also rubato, which is not an option, but a must sometimes (safety feature saving follower from injury in complicated figures), so any rhytmical pattern can be syncopated anytime. And apart from that there are also different parts in salsa music (even bachata breaks), so you can change timing many times in one song. Salsa is more rich and complex than just an "on 2 or on1" disxussion and dichotomy (false by the way). It is also mix of things noone ever would expect and knows and talks about (like ancient greek tragedy for example). EDIT: it's all about the characteristic bounce the music leads into when musicians switch from downbeat accent (on1) to upbeat accent (on2) like in russian, greek or jewish music. That's exactly what mambo did in 1940ies. On2 fits this new upbeat pattern as the rock step lifts you up on the upbeat (2, 6) and so you bounce up and down. If the music changed and you haven't changed steps to adjust, then you are the one who is off beat and rhythm. On2 is tiempo, not contratiempo as the mambo music is upbeat-accented (syncopated).
Thank you for the comment, and you've made some excellent points! These rhythmic discrepancies are not necessarily cons for everyone. Many feel that the advantages of the "New York 2" far outweigh any perceived discrepancies. In fact, the video before this one discussed some of those advantages. ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.htmlsi=Plvm2-MFEJaHle7L However, some who are more used to other styles of "Salsa" dancing may see these discrepancies as cons. That's why the thumbnail title says "On2 Cons?". That title really is not misleading because it is a question, not a statement. The question is: are there "cons" to the "NY2" pattern? That's exactly the question that the video examines. There is absolutely nothing misleading about the thumbnail title whatsoever. It's a matter of perspective. What many of us recognize as positive others might view as a negative depending on their priorities in the dance. Some focus on maintaining a consistent rhythm with the feet rather than the timing of turn patterns (and what the dancers are doing above the waist). While those of us who love "On2" (like myself) may understand the logic behind the timing, others may criticize it because they are used to footwork that is more rhythmically consistent. Also, there are those who like and want to learn the "New York 2" , but are confused by it, possibly because of the rhythmic discrepancies I mentioned. (Some of the other comments on this very video show that I'm not making this up.) The point is to understand what others may be noticing as "cons" and possible reasons for that. Not everyone is on the same page in terms of rhythmic preferences, and there are both pros and cons to virtually every style. It's not even about the timings of "On1" or "On2". "Salsa" music is polyrhythmic, so one can choose a timing. However, it's about being rhythmically consistent with whatever timing is chosen. And you bring up a good point about "rubato". But, as I understand, "rubato" is a "deviation" from the standard tempo according to the artist's discretion. It appears to be an exception, not the rule. However, with the "New York 2" stepping pattern, that "deviation" of playing with the tempo is the "rule" which becomes the standard rhythm being used rather than being just an occasional exception. It is not an exception because the rhythmic discrepancies mentioned in this video occur on every single bar of music , not just periodically or occasionally. So, while it can be great and creative to "play with the rhythm" as an embellishment to the standard stepping pattern, doing so constantly might be confusing to those trying to figure out the rhythm of our steps, especially when the rhythm of the music is so consistent by comparison.
You didn;t explaing why you decided to call steps 1 & 5 as dominants steps in New York on2 Style (you could have also select times 3 & 7, as dominant steps, as well). However, assuming you dance New York on2 style having 2 & 6 and 1 & 5 , as dominant steps. You made a mistake grouping "2 with 5" and "6 with 1" , if you INSTEAD group the dominant steps as "`1 with 2" and "5 with 6", you will have correlated dominant steps in each of the two compasses.
Thanks for the comment, & I apologize for the confusion. This video is actually related to other "timing-based" videos on this channel, and I've explained the concept of the "dominant steps" in many of those other videos. But this concept can be confusing, especially if you don't understand what I mean. However, it's very important to understand what I'm about to explain to comprehend where I'm coming from. This is not a "technical" explanation of how to execute the basic "Salsa" stepping pattern. Otherwise, those steps on 3 and 7 would be included. However, I am not giving a "technical" explanation of the pattern. Instead, I'm giving a "musical" explanation to show how the steps match up with the rhythm of the music that we are dancing to. That's why those steps on 3 and 7 are not included. In fact, here is an entire video which explains the concept more clearly: ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.htmlsi=J2ruFeJfpKTa3D7c By "dominant steps", I'm referring to 4 out of the 6 steps in the pattern, specifically the "break step" as well as the step where you take that same foot and bring it back to the center. For the "New York 2," (123-567), I am not including the steps on beats 3 and 7 as "dominant steps". Although those steps are important, they don't necessarily factor into the steps which I call the "dominant steps", and the video that I shared with you just now explains why. Also, I group the "break step" on beat 2 with the "middle step" on beat 5 (and the step on beat 6 with the step on beat 1) because they are each the "dominant step" for that same leg The steps on beats 2 and 5 are taken with the same leg. (The same goes for the steps on beats 6 and 1). Each set of dominant steps refers to steps that are taken with the same leg, not with opposite legs. The "break" step is always the first and most important "dominant step". The "middle step" is the second "dominant step" that simply continues the rhythmic sequence that the "break step" started. In addition, I didn't just randomly decide to make up this concept of the "dominant steps" because I felt like it. There is a reason why I utilize this concept, and it has to do with the origin of the stepping pattern. So, please be on the lookout for my next video (coming soon!) because it's really going to go into a lot more detail and explain this concept more fully so that you understand exactly why I call those steps the "dominant steps".
@@salsagoalsI must thank you for your interesting videos analizing salsa dancing. I understand now why you choose 1 & 5 as (secondary) dominant steps to 2 & 6, in the New York on2 style. I agree with.you that the dancing pattern in this style is different to the on2 mambo, and the on1 style. I think that the difference lies in where that pause is. By pause I mean the time where there is not stepping. In on2 mambo, son, and on1 dancing the pause occurs before the break step, on the contrary, in New York on2 style the pause comes between middle steps. I have asked my self that if this situation is somehow awkward for a fluid dancing. But, I think is very interesting if it can be performed accurately. Finally, regarding the way you select the dominant steps to me is not totally useful because it can not be applied to all possible dancing patters. That is why you are finding things wrong with New York on2 pattern. In this style, if you center on the steps when you depart from the middle before the break steps and come back to the same step, you have perfect alignment. Those steps are 1 & 3 and 5 & 7. There are other possible dancing patterns which are different to the styles mentioned above. For example, stepping 8-1-2 and 4-5-6 with breaks on times 2 and 6, and the other indicated times occur as middle steps. Also, if you alternatively DEFINE the dominant steps as the times where the dancer put more emphasis, in New York style case, you would naturally select "1 & 2" and "5 & 6" as dominant steps. Of course, they ocurre with different legs. But still you will see that they are well posed in the two compasses of the music Thanks for addressing my question.
Thanks for the comment and I'm glad the concept makes a little more sense now. Also, I didn't just decide for myself which steps are the "dominant steps" based on my own preference. Rather, it's based on the way that the timing was originally defined in the dance of the "Cuban Son" (which is where the "Salsa" basic stepping pattern that we use today originally came from). I'm not just making all this up for fun. There's a reason why I call them the "dominant steps". These "dominant steps" are determined by how they match the rhythm that is being highlighted in the music (either "a tiempo" or "contratiempo"), not which steps the dancer is trying to emphasize. I'm giving a "musical" explanation of the step, not a "technical" one (where you indicate which counts to step on and which foot to use). I'm not trying to explain "what" count we step on, but rather "why" and "how" that count matches some aspect of the rhythm (because it's all about connection with the music when we dance). Sure, it may seem like we can rearrange the "dominant steps" to make them both fit into the same measure of music. However, the rhythm of the music determines which steps are the "dominant" ones, which is why the "break" step is being counted before the "middle" step (not other way around unless you're dancing "On3" maybe). The "dominant steps" are defined by the rhythm of the music. Since the rhythm in each bar of music always starts on beat 1, the first "dominant step" is that first "break step" that takes place in the bar. The "middle step" doesn't happen at the beginning of the measure (or "compas"), it happens either in the middle of it (for On1) or at the end (for traditional "On2" such as "Power 2"). Also, remember that the Eddie Torres "New York 2" timing is not the original, traditional way of dancing "On2". It's a great timing, but the "NY 2" is still a slightly modified version of the "Contratiempo" timing (234-678) also known as "Power 2". This was the On2 timing that was sometimes used at places like New York's "Palladium Ballroom" (and before that, in Cuba with the dance of the Cuban "Son"). Therefore, the definition of those "dominant steps" doesn't come from the "NY 2" step. It comes from the original Cuban "A Tiempo" or "Contratiempo" patterns which are still used today. Actually, these "dominant steps" are the same in practically all the "Salsa" basic step patterns that are used today (On1, Power 2, etc.) and they follow the same rhythmic rules (either all "A Tiempo" or all "Contratiempo" ). However, the ”NY 2" is the exception, because it differs from these other traditional timings (for the reasons shown in the video). That doesn't mean it's wrong, just that it might be different from what some expect because it changes the rhythmic dynamic that the other steps follow. And this could be why some have criticized the timing for being "out of sync" with the music. (It also could be why some have trouble learning the "NY 2" because it feels awkward.) I'm not finding things wrong with the "NY 2" myself. Personally, I think it's fine because I understand the advantages that the rhythmic unevenness gives it over other steps. However, some who dance other Latin American styles may criticize the timing of the footwork, possibly due to that same rhythmic unevenness. So all I'm doing is attempting to explain a possible reason why they might do that so that we can understand where they are coming from and address the issue. More videos on this subject are coming soon!
@@salsagoals Thanks for answering. I have a doubt, you say that the dominant steps are chosen just by musicality, in such case, you will be implying that in salsa the dominant musical times are "2, 5, 6 and 1" and I dont think that is so. Salsa is a mixture of different instruments and they are accentuating different times which gives flavor. I think the dancer can choose what steps to select as dominant. He can even select to step between times as for example when dancing with the clave.
@@alejandrolimache9518Great point! However, the rhythmic timing of the music is defined by the music, not by the dancer. Regardless of what the dancer does, the music itself has a specific timing that each instrument emphasizes. Although these dominant steps are on 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1) in the NY2 step, that's not where the "dominant beats" of the timing are in the music. In the music, the "dominant" "contratiempo" beats are on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8). For example, instruments like the campana emphasize the "A Tiempo" beats (or the "strong" beats of the rhythm). The conga tumbao pattern emphasizes the "Contratiempo" beats (or the "weak" beats of the rhythm). The "dominant steps" of almost every traditional "Salsa" basic pattern emphasize one of those timings, but not both simultaneously. The Eddie Torres "NY2" pattern is the exception because it mixes both timings. (i.e. the "break step" is on a "contratiempo" beat, but then the "middle step" is on a strong "a tiempo" beat). The "dominant steps" aren't on the same rhythmic page as they are in other traditional timings, and this could possibly make the step look a little "out of sync" rhythmically to some (particularly some who dance other non-linear styles of "Salsa"). This issue is not about which beat the dancer tries to emphasize. Since "Salsa" has many different instrumental patterns going on, the dancer can choose the timing they want. In fact, they can emphasize whatever beats they want. But, being in sync with the timing of the music is another issue. If we want to be in sync with the music in a way that others will be able to recognize, then it's important to dance with the same consistent timing as the music. Your comments seem to focus on the steps the "dancer" chooses to highlight, but I'm focusing on the rhythm that the "music" is highlighting. I agree with your comments, but I'm talking about something different. I'm not talking about the intention of the dancer, I'm talking about the timing of the music (whether you choose to use "a tiempo" or "contratiempo" timing, the point is to be consistent with that timing). Yes, the dominant steps of the "NY 2" are on either 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1). But that's just where they happen to land for the "NY 2". In traditional "Contratiempo" they land on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8) which is the way this timing was originally (both in the music and the dance). Therefore , the timing of the "dominant steps" in the NY2 is a deviation from the way the timing was originally supposed to be. This is what might cause the rhythm of the "NY2" basic stepping pattern to seem "off" for some.
How can you have this conversation without mentioning the Congas and the Tumbao rhythm? The strong accent of the beat are on 2 and 6. A lot of it is also about weight transference and changing direction to forward and backward. The 4and plus 8and are too fast to step and so there is a pause. If you slow it down you have a chacha and can step it out.
Thanks for your comment. The conga tumbao is extremely important and I've spoken about it in many videos including this one here: ua-cam.com/video/kqfhidzEIDk/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared But this video isn't giving a technical description of why we break on 2, but rather the rhythmic inconsistencies that some might notice. The prominent beats of the conga tumbao are the slap on beats 2 and the double high tones that start on beat 4. Beats 2,4,6, and 8 are known as the "off" beats of the rhythm. The dominant steps of many ways of dancing on 2 such as the original contratiempo 'Son" timing and "Power 2" are more in sync with the highlighted beats of the conga tumbao (2,4,6,8), but not the Eddie Torres "On2". That is what this video is talking about. And to understand what I mean by "Dominant Steps", check out this video here: ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
@@salsagoals Firstly I'm not a musician. So some of the technical musical language goes past me. But your video seems to be directed at dancers and not musicians. And that's why I asked? How can you have a discussion about what seems off without mentioning the percussion instruments. Which have accents that are harder or softer. And without mentioning the practicalities of weight transference for dancers etc
@@Sean1homeles Very good observation. Actually, the video is aimed at both. The thing is, these rhythmic discrepancies might be noticeable to those watching the dancers. Often, others have commented that something looks "off" about the rhythm of the "New York 2" step, particularly those trying to learn the step or those who dance other styles. Weight transfer is important for dancers, but people can really notice when the foot hits the ground initially regardless of weight transfer. If that initial step isn't in sync with the rhythm, they can notice. This video explains a possible musical reason for that rhythmic discrepancy with the dancer's steps. The various percussion instruments in "Salsa" are highlighting specific beats in the music based on which of those beats are the strong beats (1,3) or which are the weak beats (2,4). The strong beats are also called the "pulse" of the rhythm. For a "Salsa" dancer, that "pulse" hits beats 1,3,5,7. Regardless of which percussion instrument is being used, the highlighted beats of the pattern typically accent that pulse (such as with the cowbell or the güiro) or the beats that contrast with the "pulse" (2,4,6,8 as with the "conga tumbao"). So the percussion patterns are connected to that "pulse" in some way. There is no need for me to mention a specific percussion pattern because I'm referring to the rhythmic foundation that those patterns are based on, the "pulse". And that "contratiempo" pattern of the "conga tumbao" (2,4,6,8 which are the beats that contrast with the "pulse") are precisely what the "New York 2" is slightly out of sync with which is possibly what causes that rhythmic discrepancy that some might notice.
Studying under Eddie Torres “clears” discrepancies. Bye pointing out a so called discrepancy instead of studying with the King, is like trying to look for a light switch in the dark when all lights are controlled by Bluetooth. Get connected thru usb-c study with Eddie. Watching videos putting on is AR for some martial arts lessons when one can actually avoid mishap or observations.
This is all very true, but remember that not everyone has the privilege of studying "On2" under Eddie Torres, let alone studying "On2" in general. Many are also fans of different "Salsa" dancing styles. The "so-called" rhythmic discrepancies are not really "so-called". They exist and may explain the disconnect that some see when watching the feet of "New York 2" dancers. Those rhythmic discrepancies were explained very clearly in the video. However, these "discrepancies" have both advantages and disadvantages. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is in the eye of the beholder. Studying under Eddie Torres and understanding the logic behind your dancing is one thing. But the impression that others might get from watching and trying to figure out the rhythm of your feet is another. Beginning learners and dancers of other styles may notice these rhythmic inconsistencies, but these things might not matter at all to others like yourself. There's nothing wrong with that. This channel is all about defending linear styles like "On2" and helping others to understand them better if possible. This channel is not about criticizing any style of "Salsa" dancing. But, if someone criticizes the rhythm of an "On2" dancer because they don't understand what's going on, it helps to understand where they might be coming from, especially if you want to educate them so that they can learn the "New York 2" timing.
Mambo D is not 234 678. If that is the case the Frankie Martinez Style should be like Mambo D Style. Studing a video is not studing under the teachings of the Instructor.
You lost your mind! On 2 dancers follow the clave and can play with all the beats. If you're dancing, you don't have to make your breaks dominant. It's like you're explaining from the perception of an On1 dancer
Thanks for your comment! Actually, I'm not explaining from the perception of an On1 dancer. I prefer On2 myself. I'm explaining some of the rhythmic inconsistencies that some people may notice which causes them to think that the Eddie Torres style of On2 (or the NY2) is somehow off. Remember, not everyone dances On2. Regardless of what timing they use, onlookers can look at dancers and tell if they are following a consistent rhythm or not. I have seen many comments from many dancers of other styles who notice something off about the rhythm of the footwork for the basic NY2 step (particularly dancers from other countries in Latin America). Remember, it doesn't matter if On2 dancers can play with all the beats of the song, I'm referring to the rhythmic sequence of the basic step itself (123-567). It's not just about "playing with all beats of the song". It's about maintaining a consistent, coherent rhythm that makes sense to those watching. Breaking on 2 and 6 is great, but if you return that same "break" foot back to the center on beats 5 or 1, then that might not appear consistent to some for the reasons I outlined in the video. I'm not saying that the NY2 stepping pattern is bad or wrong, just that dancers of other styles might notice rhythmic discrepancies. The purpose of this video is to explain in musical terms just what those discrepancies might be. There are pros and cons to everything, and the NY2 is no different. It definitely has its advantages, and for many of us, these advantages far outweigh any discrepancies. However, others who dance different styles of Salsa might notice something rhythmically off with the NY2 timing. Remember that the NY2 is not the only way of dancing On2. In fact, it is just slightly different from the original "contratiempo" way of dancing On2 (234-678) that was used in the dance of the Cuban "Son" (as well as the Palladium-era "Power 2" style). The cons I mention in the video only apply to the NY2 specifically. Remember, it doesn't matter if "you" intend to make specific steps dominant or not, it's about the rhythmic consistency of the steps that onlookers may notice the most. And those break steps (as well as the step where you return that "break step" to the center) can be very noticeable when it comes to the rhythm being used. Remember that when trying to determine if a dancer is "on beat", often onlookers may expect to see that dancer emphasize a steady consistent rhythm from the "breaking foot" (i.e. 1,3,5,7 or 2,4,6,8). I refer to these steps as the "dominant steps" of the basic sequence, because they are the steps where the body moves most noticeably (either forwards or backward) and they outline the rhythmic timing being used (again, either beats 1,3,5,7 or beats 2,4,6,8). However, the rhythmic sequence of the "dominant steps" in the NY2 isn't necessarily steady or consistent (i.e. 2, 5, 6, 1). And if you decide to make any random step "dominant", well, that is very creative, but it might look rhythmically confusing for the observer. From my perspective, regardless of what steps the dancer is trying to emphasize in his or her mind, the basic stepping pattern itself has "dominant steps" that can stand out more noticeably to those watching because these steps outline the rhythmic timing of the pattern being used. I explain more about what I mean by "dominant steps" in the following video: ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.html This is not a criticism of the NY2 timing. Again, I prefer to "break" on 2 myself. Rather, this is just an attempt to explain what other people might be noticing when they criticize the NY2 timing. When people notice something odd about the NY2 timing, they aren't necessarily making things up. I'm showing that there could possibly be a rhythmic inconsistency that they are noticing.
I'm not sure that I understand your comment. The clave -- be it 3:2 or 2:3 -- only uses five beats whereas salsa dancers need at least six to complete a basic. When dancing NY On2 (123-567) the dancers are really only in synch with the clave on 1,6 and 7 or 5, 2 and 3. When dancing on "syncopated" On2, the situation is similar. They step with the 3:2 clave on beats 4, 6 and 7 or with the 2:3 clave on 8, 2 and 3. Sorry 4& and 8& with the full weight transfer more likely closer to 1 and 5 nevertheless. Who really knows? In any case, in either variation, the dancers are only dancing to the clave (in my view) part of the time. What did I miss?
@@rianmonnahan Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure if you're referring specifically to the reply I gave to @mm.f262 regarding the rhythmic discrepancy. However, if you are, I'm not referring to synchronization with the clave rhythm. I do understand your comment about that, but I'm referring to something else. What I'm referring to is synchronization with or against the steady "pulse" of the music (1,3,5,7). 1,3,5 and 7 are the "core" or strong beats of the rhythm whereas 2,4,6 & 8 are the "off" or weak beats of the rhythm. Regardless of the clave rhythm direction being used, that "pulse" is what defines the structure of the rhythm, even for songs that don't use a clave pattern (i.e. Jazz, Rock, R&B, etc.) Even though we dancers count all 8 beats of the song, the rhythmic pattern being used can emphasize either those odd-numbered "strong" beats (i.e. the campana or güiro rhythm) or the even-numbered "weak" beats (i.e. the conga tumbao rhythm). The clave is super important for the flavor of the rhythm and instrumental parts of a Salsa song. However, the "clave" depends on the pulse for stability. (Otherwise, how would the musicians know what tempo the clave should be in, or even where beat #1 is?) Sometimes when a band is about to play a song, one of the musicians will establish the "pulse" by calling out (1, 2, 1,2,3,4...) I believe that this is called the "count off" which sets the tempo and timing of the song. This allows all the musicians to be rhythmically aligned and on the same page. We talk about the "clave" a lot, and rightfully so. But it's important not to forget about the "pulse" because it is super important too. Traditionally, the dancer's dominant foot (or the foot that takes the "break" step) of the dancer alternately either steps on the beats of the pulse (1,3,5,7 in "On1" or "a tiempo" timing) or it steps on the beats that are opposite the pulse (2,4,6,8 as in "Power 2" or "contratiempo" timing. ) This establishes a steady, consistent rhythm were the breaking foot is stepping for every other beat. Some who observe people dancing can notice if a steady, consistent rhythm is being followed regardless of whether or not the dancer is hitting 3 out of 5 beats of the clave pattern. And keep in mind the people observing you dance may not know anything about the "clave", but they may still be able to tell if you are keeping a consistent, logical rhythm with your feet. Perhaps if the dancer steps to all 5 beats of the clave rhythm exactly, then being in harmony with the clave would make visible sense to everyone. But that's not usually the case. Our basic stepping pattern is more aligned to the "pulse" of the song than to the "clave". The dominant foot either synchronizes with the "pulse" (as in "On1") or it goes against it (as in "Power 2" or Contratiempo). The Eddie Torres 2 (or "NY2" is the exception because it does a little of both. Again, some who dance other styles of "Salsa" might notice the discrepancies that I mentioned. These things may not be a problem for those of us who love "On2'. But, others have commented that there is something that seems "off" to them about the "NY2", and I am only attempting to explain what they "might" be noticing. Of course, they could be referring to something else, but the video is just showing a musical reason for any possible rhythmic discrepancies.
@@salsagoals Yes, I was responding to the comment made by @mm.f262. I usually dance On2 - either NY/Eddie Torres or "syncopated." I can still dance On1, if I concentrate. Muscle memory now tends to drag me back into On2 although, like many dancers, I started dancing On1. I agree that the clave is important to the music. No argument there. And I suppose that I use part of it when I dance. However, I am usually more focused on the "tu-tu ... slap" of the conga... at least when dancing On2. When dancing On1 I listen more to something that keeps me in sync with the chord beats - 1 3 5 7. Anyway... my issue was more with @mm.f262. I found your video interesting... hardly the work of someone who has lost his mind. ; Cheers.
@@rianmonnahan dude no! Dancing and stepping to the beat are two seperate things. On2 dancers are aware of where they are in the entirety of the song. The Clave is just one input that tells us where we are. There are other instruments we play off of and help us keep beat
I'm sorry. You're right that Salsa dancing should be a fun and easy experience for beginning Salsa dancers, but the timing and technical details of certain styles can sometimes cause confusion. Also, some dancers of other styles criticize the New York "On2" style because they don't understand the timing of the footwork and notice that something seems "off". This unique timing can also make "On2" a little awkward to learn for beginners. This video is designed to try and explain why that is in musical terms so it hopefully makes more sense. I know it's technical, but the subject is kind of technical.
@@salsagoals ok thanks. So long story short, which one should I invest my time on. My intention is to be able to dance with anyone in social dancing or a salsa night.
@@farshadsh3454 Depending on your area, "On1" might be a good place to start. If your goal is to be able to dance with as many people as possible, the solution is to learn as many different styles as you can. In fact, I made a few videos on that subject a while back: ua-cam.com/play/PLqy7lF-9J-W-ZTLivcLZvhQmvhozybS5K.html
You know, its like a book. You don't have to read it if you don't want to. 😂 Its not any UA-camrs fault. Its complicated because there exists so many flavors of dance out there. How should you as a dancer be able to understand the real world if you don't have the theory behind it? Its like musik: you can sit with your guitar and play basic cowboy 4 chords songs for the rest of your life and be fine with that. But there exists other people who like to have more music theory behind what they do to evolve as musicians. Just like dancers.
First have you studied with Eddie Torres? 1. It is not Salsa it is dancing Mambo. 2. You for get their are 8 beats 4 & 8. 3. You forget weight transfers which are counted in the timing.
*Hi* and thank you for your comment. No, I have not personally studied with Eddie Torres. Actually, most of the top Salsa "On2" instructors come from the school of Eddie Torres. In fact, I first became a huge fan of "On2" after getting the "Eddie Torres Teaches Salsa Nightclub Style" videos back in the late '90s, and I've been a huge fan ever since. So, I do understand some of the advantages of the "Eddie Torres" step as discussed in the video prior to this one on "On2 Pros". Please check that out when you get a chance in order to get the full picture. That video is here: ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.html Therefore, the video that you are commenting on is not a criticism of the "Eddie Torres" step, it's an observation. It is just an attempt to explain a discrepancy that others may notice when watching the step. Although I like "On2", remember that not everyone is an "Eddie Torres On2" (or "New York 2") dancer. Fans of other "Salsa" dancing styles (and even newcomers to the "New York 2"), can notice these rhythmic discrepancies. The reason I discovered these discrepancies is because, within the past 5 years, I read many comments from dancers of other styles who claimed that "New York 2" dancers were off-beat and not following the rhythm of the song. Keep in mind that I had already been a fan of "On2" for many years, so this was new to me and I asked myself if they were just hating on the style or if they were possibly noticing something real. What I learned is what is expressed in this video. Remember, regardless of what beats the dancer intends to accent, what observers may notice is when the foot actually touches the ground (not necessarily the weight changes). The rhythm in music is consistent, but to onlookers, the rhythm of the feet in the "New York 2" may not look consistent (like in other styles of the basic "Salsa" step). Also, this is referred to as "Modern Mambo". It is important to understand that the Eddie Torres style step is not quite the same as the "Classic Mambo" which was danced in the Palladium ballroom (among other places). Although the break steps are still beats 2 and 6, the step counts for classic "Mambo" are 234-678, not 123-567 as used in the Eddie Torres system. The Eddie Torres system is a slight modification of the original Palladium-era "Mambo" basic step (also known as "Power 2"), The Eddie Torres method is an updated version of "Classic Mambo", but again, it is not the original way of dancing to "Mambo" that was used in the Palladium. It is important to understand the history of this step. It did not start with "Eddie Torres", he just popularized and updated it. Regardless, that is not the issue that this video is addressing. Yes, there are 8 beats in the count, but that is also not the issue. "New York 2" dancers aren't stepping on beats 4 or 8. Weight transfers are important, but they aren't the issue either. Those transfers are counted in the timing for the dancer but are not necessarily counted by those who are watching the dancers. The moment that the foot hits the ground may be more noticeable to onlookers than the weight transfer. Again, you have to remember that not everyone is an "On2" dancer. Therefore, as an "On2" dancer (no matter what level), it might be a good idea to understand what others might be noticing when they watch you dance. That way, it's possible to address (or at least understand) the issue (even if you don't agree with what they are saying.) Again, these rhythmic discrepancies are not my criticisms of the "New York 2". Rather, they are an attempt to explain the disconnect that others may notice with the step. For many of us, these things don't matter and we can still understand the logic behind the stepping count. But for others, these things may be noticeable and this video is an attempt to explain why (from a musical perspective).
These videos are so informative. As a new salsa dancer it’s helping me a lot. I’ve been wondering why ‘NY on 2’ has been driving me crazy after beginning my journey On 1. Having never danced before, and without any dance vocabulary or musicality in my background, On 1 and Son feels so much more intuitive/natural, at least to me. Thanks for all the uploads!
Thank you so much! I'm glad you find the information helpful!
Wow! I really love the investment you did in explaining in this video! 😍 Thanks for the explaination.
Thanks for your comment! I'm glad the information made sense to you!
Talking about all of these in abstract is interesting, but without video showing how the different steps interact with the music, it's tough to see what point you are trying to make. My personal tactic is to be sure to hit the 2 and the 6, and the other four steps are fuzzier.
Thanks for your comment! You are correct, and I wish I were able to use video examples instead of just illustrations. But the principles are pretty clearly explained from a musical and rhythmic standpoint. Hopefully, though, I can use more video examples in the future. You make a great point.
Very nice vid. And like the previous comment I too started On 1 but later switched to On 2. I prefer it and find more enjoyment when I dance that way. And even though when I play music at my place and dance by myself with the On 2 rhythm in my head whenever I dance socially I often have to switch to On 1 due to the general preference of most dancers I run into. Although I've been told as a man if I'm a solid lead I should be able to convert a dancer (and I have done this before) it is often not so easy. But whenever I find a fellow On 2 dancer I feel like we connect better on the floor.
Thanks for the vid 👍
No problem! I'm glad you liked the information, and thank you for the great comment!
@@salsagoals My pleasure.
I watch band players. They tap on 1 and break on 2. For a dancer that would translate into , tapping on1&5 and breaking on 2 & 6 You would still be dancing on 1 because the 1 is being marked, but on 2 because the break happens on the 2. Watch live bands and the musicians when they keep on beat by tapping their feet.
I agree with you. It is still on1 but with different foot 👣
I'm a musician since young age and started dancing as a hobby very recently. Finally someone has put on a video something I was watching every time Facebook recommended me videos of a couple dancing 'on2' (concept that was foreign to me before started dancing). I can see that everything falls more or less into tempo (they dance faster or slower depending on the song) but the feet did not match the song's beats at all in majority of cases to the point sometimes I wondered if there was any point on having music in the background? Like I could play any song, any style and they'd still be dancing the same (faster or slower depending on the tempo). I see it as something more danced with the arms instead of the feet (hence so many spins and combos). It achieves a certain look as if the couple is floating but there's something missing for me :S ..... Saying that, I've seen videos of Eddie Torres and Eddie Torres Jr. and they are absolute beasts on the dancefloor. But I think one thing is what they taught/teach and another what people do on the dancefloor. My favourite style is Salsa Caleña but it lends itself very well to be danced to pachangas, sadly nobody in Cardiff, UK dances that style and very rarely they play a song with that type of percussion in it. So I'll keep dreaming someone teaches me how to dance like that :(
Thank you very much for your insightful comment! You make some excellent points and thank you for watching!
As a musician, I understand why the on2 NY style is confusing me. Musicians are consistent in rhythm with no change
Exactly!
I know people who dance on 17
No, there isn't a 17 beat
But they are not aware of that 🤣😂🤣
Wow! love the video. I was inspired to learn salsa from the movie Salsa with Roby Rosa the evil salsa lady i found an instructional video with her in it dancing with a guy with a ponytail and suit on it was a smooth dance im not sure of this womans name or what style it was but they appeared to be floating if i had my guess it was probably Puerto Rican style kinda like with a kick feel then step since movie was about Puerto Rico. My 1st wife was Puerto Rican from NYC and so i imagine i picked up on some NYC On2 but that seemed to have a kick then step also i call that the PR step and we were always told that we were out there floating. So now im confused don't know if im On1 NYC On2 PR Isla Cubano or On3 if there's such a thing. I like Old School salsa so ballet in my salsa i dont like I'd do hip hop salsa b4 id do ballet salsa ( New Contemporary Salsa) give me feed back if you can brother👍🏿
Interesting! Thanks for your comment and I'm lad you enjoyed the video. I haven't seen the instructional video that you mentioned. Is there any kind of link to it? I would definitely like to see it.
I don't see a link but the dance choreographers are Miranda Garrison and Kenny Ortega which now I believe are LA On1 dancers and the 1st time I seen any kind of salsa dancing back in the 80's. I grew up watching I Love Lucy hearing and watching Desi Arnaz when I was 12 I got my 1st Tito Puente album by the time I was 16 I saw LA Salsa but new I was getting a NYC feel from Titos mambo
Very informative but very very hard to watch this style of draw as you go video.
bailar es bailar. encuentro bailar en uno mas comodo. pero cha cha en dos me encanta . quien diria ??????????
I respectfully disagree with the point of the video. I dance both On1 and On2 contratiempo. There are no inconsistenices. Both have different nuances that are logical and beautiful.
Thank you for your comment! However, the point of the video is not to criticize the NY2, but to point out discrepancies that some can view as inconsistencies, especially if they are used to other more rhythmically consistent stepping patterns like On1 and Contratiempo timing. This doesn't mean that the NY2 timing is wrong, just that it can be confusing to some who don't understand the logic behind it and the advantages it has (particularly when it comes to the timing of turn patterns).
The rhythmic timing of the "dominant steps" (or the step that you take your break step with and then return to the center) deviates from the consistency of timings like On1 or "Power 2" for the reasons clearly outlined in the video. This gives it a different look and feel from the other timings. Many of us don't mind (or even notice this), but others might. It's a matter of personal preference. But the explanation given on how the NY2 deviates from the rhythmic consistency of other timings is a fact, not an opinion. (How the "dominant steps" line up with {or deviate from} either the "strong" or "core" beats of the music {1,3,5,7} or the "weak", "contratiempo" beats {2,4,6,8} is a musical definition, not my personal opinion. Now, if someone views that as a good (or a bad) thing, that is where personal opinion comes in. Before posting this video, I posted a video about "On2 Pros?" which explained some of the advantages of these NY2 rhythmic deviations. That video is here:
ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.html
However, some still haven't seen that video. Instead, they focus on this one, and they seem to have missed the point of this video altogether. But that's why it's important to watch the entire video and get the whole story. I agree with you that these different timings have nuances that are logical and beautiful. In fact, if you saw the video until the end, that's kind of the video's ultimate message. You might want to go back and watch the video again, specifically from 7:25 onward.
However, remember that while those nuances can be a "pro" for those of us who love On2, they can be a "con" for others who don't dance On2. Some dance other styles from Latin America like Salsa Caleña, Casino, etc. Also, some beginners want to learn the NY2, but they have trouble figuring out the timing of the basic stepping pattern. Look at some of the other comments on this video and you'll see that I'm not making this up. For example, check out the comments by @island-lava and @jmruizgil.
Therefore, it's important to understand what inconsistencies "others" might be seeing so that you can explain how the timing works and possibly help them understand it better. While the NY2 turn patterns may be great and well-coordinated, some pay more attention to the rhythm of the footwork. Even though you dance On1 and On2 Contratiempo, and regardless of how much you appreciate those timings, others who are watching the footwork of NY2 dancers can have a different opinion, and the footwork can possibly look rhythmically disorganized for the reasons outlined in this video.
I personally love dancing "On2". I only discovered these rhythmical issues when watching various videos of NY2 dancers social dancing. While reading the comments on those video clips, I noticed some commenting that "NY2" dancers weren't in sync with the rhythm of the music. Obviously, I don't agree with that, but I wondered why they would say that. Were they just hating on the style, or was there possibly a real rhythmic discrepancy that they were noticing? This led me to discover these rhythmic deviations of the NY2 pattern.
Again, I'm not criticizing the NY2 timing at all. Rather, this video is about understanding why "others" might criticize the timing (or even have problems learning it) so that we can better address those criticisms or help them learn it more easily.
The video indeed mentioned that On1 and On2 contratiempo are consistent, while On2 NY is less consistent
On2 is really a bastard of the on1. If you step on1 you are dancing on1
100%
Tito Puente is the reason why it’s called “On2”.
Thanks for the comment!
I didn't understand con number 3.
After speaking with you earlier, I'm glad you understand it now, Cathy!
The only con here is a misleading title, as none of the cons here is realy a con. It's just a partial insight into a multidialectic nature of salsa, which is based on a multidialectic nature of african rhythms (both double and triple at the same time), clave mainly, but not only. There's not just one salsa music, it's a whole spectrum where rhytmical layers may vary - some may fade away and some can get emphasized and it's not only about on1 or on2 but also - or maybe first of all - if it's on4 (son cubano), as the actual maintream crossbody genre is more of a modern son cubano (strong bass accent on 4 and 8) than modern mambo - it has the son cubano layer emphasized again (after 80 years) and mambo layer (upbeat - like in mambo no. 5) faded and tuned down. Anyway salsa has downbeat and upbeat layers simultaneously allmost all the time, as it's based on clave, which is downbeat and upbeat ar the same time even if there's no clave actualy being played. Clave still is the key and all the salsa is so heavily clave-influenced that it's stił clave based even if there's no clave.
And on the other side and totally apart from that there's also rubato, which is not an option, but a must sometimes (safety feature saving follower from injury in complicated figures), so any rhytmical pattern can be syncopated anytime.
And apart from that there are also different parts in salsa music (even bachata breaks), so you can change timing many times in one song.
Salsa is more rich and complex than just an "on 2 or on1" disxussion and dichotomy (false by the way). It is also mix of things noone ever would expect and knows and talks about (like ancient greek tragedy for example).
EDIT: it's all about the characteristic bounce the music leads into when musicians switch from downbeat accent (on1) to upbeat accent (on2) like in russian, greek or jewish music. That's exactly what mambo did in 1940ies. On2 fits this new upbeat pattern as the rock step lifts you up on the upbeat (2, 6) and so you bounce up and down. If the music changed and you haven't changed steps to adjust, then you are the one who is off beat and rhythm. On2 is tiempo, not contratiempo as the mambo music is upbeat-accented (syncopated).
Thank you for the comment, and you've made some excellent points! These rhythmic discrepancies are not necessarily cons for everyone. Many feel that the advantages of the "New York 2" far outweigh any perceived discrepancies. In fact, the video before
this one discussed some of those advantages.
ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.htmlsi=Plvm2-MFEJaHle7L
However, some who are more used to other styles of "Salsa" dancing may see these discrepancies as cons. That's why the thumbnail title says "On2 Cons?". That title really is not misleading because it is a question, not a statement. The question is: are there "cons" to the "NY2" pattern? That's exactly the question that the video examines. There is absolutely nothing misleading about the thumbnail title whatsoever.
It's a matter of perspective. What many of us recognize as positive others might view as a negative depending on their priorities in the dance. Some focus on maintaining a consistent rhythm with the feet rather than the timing of turn patterns (and what the dancers are doing above the waist). While those of us who love "On2" (like myself) may understand the logic behind the timing, others may criticize it because they are used to footwork that is more rhythmically consistent. Also, there are those who like and want to learn the "New York 2" , but are confused by it, possibly because of the rhythmic discrepancies I mentioned. (Some of the other comments on this very video show that I'm not making this up.)
The point is to understand what others may be noticing as "cons" and possible reasons for that. Not everyone is on the same page in terms of rhythmic preferences, and there are both pros and cons to virtually every style. It's not even about the timings of "On1" or "On2". "Salsa" music is polyrhythmic, so one can choose a timing. However, it's about being rhythmically consistent with whatever timing is chosen.
And you bring up a good point about "rubato". But, as I understand, "rubato" is a "deviation" from the standard tempo according to the artist's discretion. It appears to be an exception, not the rule. However, with the "New York 2" stepping pattern, that "deviation" of playing with the tempo is the "rule" which becomes the standard rhythm being used rather than being just an occasional exception. It is not an exception because the rhythmic discrepancies mentioned in this video occur on every single bar of music , not just periodically or occasionally. So, while it can be great and creative to "play with the rhythm" as an embellishment to the standard stepping pattern, doing so constantly might be confusing to those trying to figure out the rhythm of our steps, especially when the rhythm of the music is so consistent by comparison.
on1 is far more useful. it can be switched to bachata steps, also casino rueda is only dance globally on1
Great point!
But you can switch from on2 NY to power on2 in the same song much easier.
You didn;t explaing why you decided to call steps 1 & 5 as dominants steps in New York on2 Style (you could have also select times 3 & 7, as dominant steps, as well). However, assuming you dance New York on2 style having 2 & 6 and 1 & 5 , as dominant steps. You made a mistake grouping "2 with 5" and "6 with 1" , if you INSTEAD group the dominant steps as "`1 with 2" and "5 with 6", you will have correlated dominant steps in each of the two compasses.
Thanks for the comment, & I apologize for the confusion. This video is actually related to other "timing-based" videos on this channel, and I've explained the concept of the "dominant steps" in many of those other videos. But this concept can be confusing, especially if you don't understand what I mean.
However, it's very important to understand what I'm about to explain to comprehend where I'm coming from. This is not a "technical" explanation of how to execute the basic "Salsa" stepping pattern. Otherwise, those steps on 3 and 7 would be included.
However, I am not giving a "technical" explanation of the pattern. Instead, I'm giving a "musical" explanation to show how the steps match up with the rhythm of the music that we are dancing to. That's why those steps on 3 and 7 are not included.
In fact, here is an entire video which explains the concept more clearly:
ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.htmlsi=J2ruFeJfpKTa3D7c
By "dominant steps", I'm referring to 4 out of the 6 steps in the pattern, specifically the "break step" as well as the step where you take that same foot and bring it back to the center. For the "New York 2," (123-567), I am not including the steps on beats 3 and 7 as "dominant steps". Although those steps are important, they don't necessarily factor into the steps which I call the "dominant steps", and the video that I shared with you just now explains why.
Also, I group the "break step" on beat 2 with the "middle step" on beat 5 (and the step on beat 6 with the step on beat 1) because they are each the "dominant step" for that same leg The steps on beats 2 and 5 are taken with the same leg. (The same goes for the steps on beats 6 and 1). Each set of dominant steps refers to steps that are taken with the same leg, not with opposite legs. The "break" step is always the first and most important "dominant step". The "middle step" is the second "dominant step" that simply continues the rhythmic sequence that the "break step" started.
In addition, I didn't just randomly decide to make up this concept of the "dominant steps" because I felt like it. There is a reason why I utilize this concept, and it has to do with the origin of the stepping pattern.
So, please be on the lookout for my next video (coming soon!) because it's really going to go into a lot more detail and explain this concept more fully so that you understand exactly why I call those steps the "dominant steps".
@@salsagoalsI must thank you for your interesting videos analizing salsa dancing. I understand now why you choose 1 & 5 as (secondary) dominant steps to 2 & 6, in the New York on2 style. I agree with.you that the dancing pattern in this style is different to the on2 mambo, and the on1 style. I think that the difference lies in where that pause is. By pause I mean the time where there is not stepping. In on2 mambo, son, and on1 dancing the pause occurs before the break step, on the contrary, in New York on2 style the pause comes between middle steps. I have asked my self that if this situation is somehow awkward for a fluid dancing. But, I think is very interesting if it can be performed accurately.
Finally, regarding the way you select the dominant steps to me is not totally useful because it can not be applied to all possible dancing patters. That is why you are finding things wrong with New York on2 pattern. In this style, if you center on the steps when you depart from the middle before the break steps and come back to the same step, you have perfect alignment. Those steps are 1 & 3 and 5 & 7. There are other possible dancing patterns which are different to the styles mentioned above. For example, stepping 8-1-2 and 4-5-6 with breaks on times 2 and 6, and the other indicated times occur as middle steps. Also, if you alternatively DEFINE the dominant steps as the times where the dancer put more emphasis, in New York style case, you would naturally select "1 & 2" and "5 & 6" as dominant steps. Of course, they ocurre with different legs. But still you will see that they are well posed in the two compasses of the music Thanks for addressing my question.
Thanks for the comment and I'm glad the concept makes a little more sense now. Also, I didn't just decide for myself which steps are the "dominant steps" based on my own preference. Rather, it's based on the way that the timing was originally defined in the dance of the "Cuban Son" (which is where the "Salsa" basic stepping pattern that we use today originally came from). I'm not just making all this up for fun. There's a reason why I call them the "dominant steps".
These "dominant steps" are determined by how they match the rhythm that is being highlighted in the music (either "a tiempo" or "contratiempo"), not which steps the dancer is trying to emphasize. I'm giving a "musical" explanation of the step, not a "technical" one (where you indicate which counts to step on and which foot to use). I'm not trying to explain "what" count we step on, but rather "why" and "how" that count matches some aspect of the rhythm (because it's all about connection with the music when we dance).
Sure, it may seem like we can rearrange the "dominant steps" to make them both fit into the same measure of music. However, the rhythm of the music determines which steps are the "dominant" ones, which is why the "break" step is being counted before the "middle" step (not other way around unless you're dancing "On3" maybe). The "dominant steps" are defined by the rhythm of the music. Since the rhythm in each bar of music always starts on beat 1, the first "dominant step" is that first "break step" that takes place in the bar. The "middle step" doesn't happen at the beginning of the measure (or "compas"), it happens either in the middle of it (for On1) or at the end (for traditional "On2" such as "Power 2").
Also, remember that the Eddie Torres "New York 2" timing is not the original, traditional way of dancing "On2". It's a great timing, but the "NY 2" is still a slightly modified version of the "Contratiempo" timing (234-678) also known as "Power 2". This was the On2 timing that was sometimes used at places like New York's "Palladium Ballroom" (and before that, in Cuba with the dance of the Cuban "Son").
Therefore, the definition of those "dominant steps" doesn't come from the "NY 2" step. It comes from the original Cuban "A Tiempo" or "Contratiempo" patterns which are still used today.
Actually, these "dominant steps" are the same in practically all the "Salsa" basic step patterns that are used today (On1, Power 2, etc.) and they follow the same rhythmic rules (either all "A Tiempo" or all "Contratiempo" ). However, the ”NY 2" is the exception, because it differs from these other traditional timings (for the reasons shown in the video).
That doesn't mean it's wrong, just that it might be different from what some expect because it changes the rhythmic dynamic that the other steps follow. And this could be why some have criticized the timing for being "out of sync" with the music. (It also could be why some have trouble learning the "NY 2" because it feels awkward.)
I'm not finding things wrong with the "NY 2" myself. Personally, I think it's fine because I understand the advantages that the rhythmic unevenness gives it over other steps. However, some who dance other Latin American styles may criticize the timing of the footwork, possibly due to that same rhythmic unevenness. So all I'm doing is attempting to explain a possible reason why they might do that so that we can understand where they are coming from and address the issue. More videos on this subject are coming soon!
@@salsagoals Thanks for answering. I have a doubt, you say that the dominant steps are chosen just by musicality, in such case, you will be implying that in salsa the dominant musical times are "2, 5, 6 and 1" and I dont think that is so. Salsa is a mixture of different instruments and they are accentuating different times which gives flavor. I think the dancer can choose what steps to select as dominant. He can even select to step between times as for example when dancing with the clave.
@@alejandrolimache9518Great point! However, the rhythmic timing of the music is defined by the music, not by the dancer. Regardless of what the dancer does, the music itself has a specific timing that each instrument emphasizes. Although these dominant steps are on 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1) in the NY2 step, that's not where the "dominant beats" of the timing are in the music. In the music, the "dominant" "contratiempo" beats are on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8).
For example, instruments like the campana emphasize the "A Tiempo" beats (or the "strong" beats of the rhythm). The conga tumbao pattern emphasizes the "Contratiempo" beats (or the "weak" beats of the rhythm). The "dominant steps" of almost every traditional "Salsa" basic pattern emphasize one of those timings, but not both simultaneously. The Eddie Torres "NY2" pattern is the exception because it mixes both timings. (i.e. the "break step" is on a "contratiempo" beat, but then the "middle step" is on a strong "a tiempo" beat). The "dominant steps" aren't on the same rhythmic page as they are in other traditional timings, and this could possibly make the step look a little "out of sync" rhythmically to some (particularly some who dance other non-linear styles of "Salsa").
This issue is not about which beat the dancer tries to emphasize. Since "Salsa" has many different instrumental patterns going on, the dancer can choose the timing they want. In fact, they can emphasize whatever beats they want. But, being in sync with the timing of the music is another issue. If we want to be in sync with the music in a way that others will be able to recognize, then it's important to dance with the same consistent timing as the music.
Your comments seem to focus on the steps the "dancer" chooses to highlight, but I'm focusing on the rhythm that the "music" is highlighting. I agree with your comments, but I'm talking about something different. I'm not talking about the intention of the dancer, I'm talking about the timing of the music (whether you choose to use "a tiempo" or "contratiempo" timing, the point is to be consistent with that timing).
Yes, the dominant steps of the "NY 2" are on either 2 and 5 (or 6 and 1). But that's just where they happen to land for the "NY 2". In traditional "Contratiempo" they land on 2 and 4 (or 6 and 8) which is the way this timing was originally (both in the music and the dance). Therefore , the timing of the "dominant steps" in the NY2 is a deviation from the way the timing was originally supposed to be. This is what might cause the rhythm of the "NY2" basic stepping pattern to seem "off" for some.
An argument to make... If you dance on 1 ior ny 2 in the spot, its the exact same step.
Great point! For the "Eddie Torres 2" basic, the foot positions are different, but the sequence of steps is essentially the same with the same timing.
How can you have this conversation without mentioning the Congas and the Tumbao rhythm?
The strong accent of the beat are on 2 and 6. A lot of it is also about weight transference and changing direction to forward and backward.
The 4and plus 8and are too fast to step and so there is a pause.
If you slow it down you have a chacha and can step it out.
Thanks for your comment. The conga tumbao is extremely important and I've spoken about it in many videos including this one here:
ua-cam.com/video/kqfhidzEIDk/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
But this video isn't giving a technical description of why we break on 2, but rather the rhythmic inconsistencies that some might notice.
The prominent beats of the conga tumbao are the slap on beats 2 and the double high tones that start on beat 4. Beats 2,4,6, and 8 are known as the "off" beats of the rhythm. The dominant steps of many ways of dancing on 2 such as the original contratiempo 'Son" timing and "Power 2" are more in sync with the highlighted beats of the conga tumbao (2,4,6,8), but not the Eddie Torres "On2". That is what this video is talking about. And to understand what I mean by "Dominant Steps", check out this video here:
ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
@@salsagoals
Firstly I'm not a musician. So some of the technical musical language goes past me.
But your video seems to be directed at dancers and not musicians.
And that's why I asked?
How can you have a discussion about what seems off without mentioning the percussion instruments. Which have accents that are harder or softer.
And without mentioning the practicalities of weight transference for dancers etc
Yes this last video does explain. But then arent you saying two different things?
@@Sean1homeles Very good observation. Actually, the video is aimed at both. The thing is, these rhythmic discrepancies might be noticeable to those watching the dancers. Often, others have commented that something looks "off" about the rhythm of the "New York 2" step, particularly those trying to learn the step or those who dance other styles. Weight transfer is important for dancers, but people can really notice when the foot hits the ground initially regardless of weight transfer. If that initial step isn't in sync with the rhythm, they can notice.
This video explains a possible musical reason for that rhythmic discrepancy with the dancer's steps.
The various percussion instruments in "Salsa" are highlighting specific beats in the music based on which of those beats are the strong beats (1,3) or which are the weak beats (2,4). The strong beats are also called the "pulse" of the rhythm. For a "Salsa" dancer, that "pulse" hits beats 1,3,5,7.
Regardless of which percussion instrument is being used, the highlighted beats of the pattern typically accent that pulse (such as with the cowbell or the güiro) or the beats that contrast with the "pulse" (2,4,6,8 as with the "conga tumbao"). So the percussion patterns are connected to that "pulse" in some way.
There is no need for me to mention a specific percussion pattern because I'm referring to the rhythmic foundation that those patterns are based on, the "pulse".
And that "contratiempo" pattern of the "conga tumbao" (2,4,6,8 which are the beats that contrast with the "pulse") are precisely what the "New York 2" is slightly out of sync with which is possibly what causes that rhythmic discrepancy that some might notice.
@@Sean1homelesTwo different things? What do you mean? Please let me know and I will try to clarify.
Studying under Eddie Torres “clears” discrepancies. Bye pointing out a so called discrepancy instead of studying with the King, is like trying to look for a light switch in the dark when all lights are controlled by Bluetooth. Get connected thru usb-c study with Eddie. Watching videos putting on is AR for some martial arts lessons when one can actually avoid mishap or observations.
This is all very true, but remember that not everyone has the privilege of studying "On2" under Eddie Torres, let alone studying "On2" in general. Many are also fans of different "Salsa" dancing styles. The "so-called" rhythmic discrepancies are not really "so-called". They exist and may explain the disconnect that some see when watching the feet of "New York 2" dancers. Those rhythmic discrepancies were explained very clearly in the video.
However, these "discrepancies" have both advantages and disadvantages. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is in the eye of the beholder. Studying under Eddie Torres and understanding the logic behind your dancing is one thing. But the impression that others might get from watching and trying to figure out the rhythm of your feet is another. Beginning learners and dancers of other styles may notice these rhythmic inconsistencies, but these things might not matter at all to others like yourself. There's nothing wrong with that. This channel is all about defending linear styles like "On2" and helping others to understand them better if possible. This channel is not about criticizing any style of "Salsa" dancing.
But, if someone criticizes the rhythm of an "On2" dancer because they don't understand what's going on, it helps to understand where they might be coming from, especially if you want to educate them so that they can learn the "New York 2" timing.
Some of his videos he dances the p 2 timing. In his instructional video, mambo D is dancing 234 678. And that is his own video lol.
Mambo D is not 234 678. If that is the case the Frankie Martinez Style should be like Mambo D Style. Studing a video is not studing under the teachings of the Instructor.
I do prefer Co tra Tiempo to ny2
You lost your mind! On 2 dancers follow the clave and can play with all the beats. If you're dancing, you don't have to make your breaks dominant. It's like you're explaining from the perception of an On1 dancer
Thanks for your comment! Actually, I'm not explaining from the perception of an On1 dancer. I prefer On2 myself. I'm explaining some of the rhythmic inconsistencies that some people may notice which causes them to think that the Eddie Torres style of On2 (or the NY2) is somehow off. Remember, not everyone dances On2. Regardless of what timing they use, onlookers can look at dancers and tell if they are following a consistent rhythm or not.
I have seen many comments from many dancers of other styles who notice something off about the rhythm of the footwork for the basic NY2 step (particularly dancers from other countries in Latin America). Remember, it doesn't matter if On2 dancers can play with all the beats of the song, I'm referring to the rhythmic sequence of the basic step itself (123-567). It's not just about "playing with all beats of the song". It's about maintaining a consistent, coherent rhythm that makes sense to those watching. Breaking on 2 and 6 is great, but if you return that same "break" foot back to the center on beats 5 or 1, then that might not appear consistent to some for the reasons I outlined in the video.
I'm not saying that the NY2 stepping pattern is bad or wrong, just that dancers of other styles might notice rhythmic discrepancies. The purpose of this video is to explain in musical terms just what those discrepancies might be. There are pros and cons to everything, and the NY2 is no different. It definitely has its advantages, and for many of us, these advantages far outweigh any discrepancies. However, others who dance different styles of Salsa might notice something rhythmically off with the NY2 timing.
Remember that the NY2 is not the only way of dancing On2. In fact, it is just slightly different from the original "contratiempo" way of dancing On2 (234-678) that was used in the dance of the Cuban "Son" (as well as the Palladium-era "Power 2" style). The cons I mention in the video only apply to the NY2 specifically.
Remember, it doesn't matter if "you" intend to make specific steps dominant or not, it's about the rhythmic consistency of the steps that onlookers may notice the most. And those break steps (as well as the step where you return that "break step" to the center) can be very noticeable when it comes to the rhythm being used. Remember that when trying to determine if a dancer is "on beat", often onlookers may expect to see that dancer emphasize a steady consistent rhythm from the "breaking foot" (i.e. 1,3,5,7 or 2,4,6,8). I refer to these steps as the "dominant steps" of the basic sequence, because they are the steps where the body moves most noticeably (either forwards or backward) and they outline the rhythmic timing being used (again, either beats 1,3,5,7 or beats 2,4,6,8). However, the rhythmic sequence of the "dominant steps" in the NY2 isn't necessarily steady or consistent (i.e. 2, 5, 6, 1). And if you decide to make any random step "dominant", well, that is very creative, but it might look rhythmically confusing for the observer. From my perspective, regardless of what steps the dancer is trying to emphasize in his or her mind, the basic stepping pattern itself has "dominant steps" that can stand out more noticeably to those watching because these steps outline the rhythmic timing of the pattern being used. I explain more about what I mean by "dominant steps" in the following video:
ua-cam.com/video/50P7bqfQjg8/v-deo.html
This is not a criticism of the NY2 timing. Again, I prefer to "break" on 2 myself. Rather, this is just an attempt to explain what other people might be noticing when they criticize the NY2 timing. When people notice something odd about the NY2 timing, they aren't necessarily making things up. I'm showing that there could possibly be a rhythmic inconsistency that they are noticing.
I'm not sure that I understand your comment. The clave -- be it 3:2 or 2:3 -- only uses five beats whereas salsa dancers need at least six to complete a basic. When dancing NY On2 (123-567) the dancers are really only in synch with the clave on 1,6 and 7 or 5, 2 and 3. When dancing on "syncopated" On2, the situation is similar. They step with the 3:2 clave on beats 4, 6 and 7 or with the 2:3 clave on 8, 2 and 3. Sorry 4& and 8& with the full weight transfer more likely closer to 1 and 5 nevertheless. Who really knows? In any case, in either variation, the dancers are only dancing to the clave (in my view) part of the time. What did I miss?
@@rianmonnahan Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure if you're referring specifically to the reply I gave to @mm.f262 regarding the rhythmic discrepancy. However, if you are, I'm not referring to synchronization with the clave rhythm. I do understand your comment about that, but I'm referring to something else.
What I'm referring to is synchronization with or against the steady "pulse" of the music (1,3,5,7). 1,3,5 and 7 are the "core" or strong beats of the rhythm whereas 2,4,6 & 8 are the "off" or weak beats of the rhythm. Regardless of the clave rhythm direction being used, that "pulse" is what defines the structure of the rhythm, even for songs that don't use a clave pattern (i.e. Jazz, Rock, R&B, etc.) Even though we dancers count all 8 beats of the song, the rhythmic pattern being used can emphasize either those odd-numbered "strong" beats (i.e. the campana or güiro rhythm) or the even-numbered "weak" beats (i.e. the conga tumbao rhythm).
The clave is super important for the flavor of the rhythm and instrumental parts of a Salsa song. However, the "clave" depends on the pulse for stability. (Otherwise, how would the musicians know what tempo the clave should be in, or even where beat #1 is?) Sometimes when a band is about to play a song, one of the musicians will establish the "pulse" by calling out (1, 2, 1,2,3,4...) I believe that this is called the "count off" which sets the tempo and timing of the song. This allows all the musicians to be rhythmically aligned and on the same page. We talk about the "clave" a lot, and rightfully so. But it's important not to forget about the "pulse" because it is super important too.
Traditionally, the dancer's dominant foot (or the foot that takes the "break" step) of the dancer alternately either steps on the beats of the pulse (1,3,5,7 in "On1" or "a tiempo" timing) or it steps on the beats that are opposite the pulse (2,4,6,8 as in "Power 2" or "contratiempo" timing. ) This establishes a steady, consistent rhythm were the breaking foot is stepping for every other beat.
Some who observe people dancing can notice if a steady, consistent rhythm is being followed regardless of whether or not the dancer is hitting 3 out of 5 beats of the clave pattern. And keep in mind the people observing you dance may not know anything about the "clave", but they may still be able to tell if you are keeping a consistent, logical rhythm with your feet. Perhaps if the dancer steps to all 5 beats of the clave rhythm exactly, then being in harmony with the clave would make visible sense to everyone. But that's not usually the case. Our basic stepping pattern is more aligned to the "pulse" of the song than to the "clave". The dominant foot either synchronizes with the "pulse" (as in "On1") or it goes against it (as in "Power 2" or Contratiempo). The Eddie Torres 2 (or "NY2" is the exception because it does a little of both.
Again, some who dance other styles of "Salsa" might notice the discrepancies that I mentioned. These things may not be a problem for those of us who love "On2'. But, others have commented that there is something that seems "off" to them about the "NY2", and I am only attempting to explain what they "might" be noticing. Of course, they could be referring to something else, but the video is just showing a musical reason for any possible rhythmic discrepancies.
@@salsagoals Yes, I was responding to the comment made by @mm.f262. I usually dance On2 - either NY/Eddie Torres or "syncopated." I can still dance On1, if I concentrate. Muscle memory now tends to drag me back into On2 although, like many dancers, I started dancing On1. I agree that the clave is important to the music. No argument there. And I suppose that I use part of it when I dance. However, I am usually more focused on the "tu-tu ... slap" of the conga... at least when dancing On2. When dancing On1 I listen more to something that keeps me in sync with the chord beats - 1 3 5 7. Anyway... my issue was more with @mm.f262. I found your video interesting... hardly the work of someone who has lost his mind. ; Cheers.
@@rianmonnahan dude no! Dancing and stepping to the beat are two seperate things. On2 dancers are aware of where they are in the entirety of the song. The Clave is just one input that tells us where we are. There are other instruments we play off of and help us keep beat
You salsa UA-camrs have turned salsa into such an unpleasant experience for a beginner. Dance should be fun but over time people made it complicated
I'm sorry. You're right that Salsa dancing should be a fun and easy experience for beginning Salsa dancers, but the timing and technical details of certain styles can sometimes cause confusion.
Also, some dancers of other styles criticize the New York "On2" style because they don't understand the timing of the footwork and notice that something seems "off". This unique timing can also make "On2" a little awkward to learn for beginners. This video is designed to try and explain why that is in musical terms so it hopefully makes more sense. I know it's technical, but the subject is kind of technical.
@@salsagoals ok thanks. So long story short, which one should I invest my time on. My intention is to be able to dance with anyone in social dancing or a salsa night.
@@farshadsh3454 Depending on your area, "On1" might be a good place to start. If your goal is to be able to dance with as many people as possible, the solution is to learn as many different styles as you can. In fact, I made a few videos on that subject a while back:
ua-cam.com/play/PLqy7lF-9J-W-ZTLivcLZvhQmvhozybS5K.html
This isn't a beginner video.
You know, its like a book. You don't have to read it if you don't want to. 😂
Its not any UA-camrs fault. Its complicated because there exists so many flavors of dance out there. How should you as a dancer be able to understand the real world if you don't have the theory behind it?
Its like musik: you can sit with your guitar and play basic cowboy 4 chords songs for the rest of your life and be fine with that. But there exists other people who like to have more music theory behind what they do to evolve as musicians. Just like dancers.
First have you studied with Eddie Torres?
1. It is not Salsa it is dancing Mambo.
2. You for get their are 8 beats 4 & 8.
3. You forget weight transfers which are counted in the timing.
*Hi* and thank you for your comment. No, I have not personally studied with Eddie Torres. Actually, most of the top Salsa "On2" instructors come from the school of Eddie Torres. In fact, I first became a huge fan of "On2" after getting the "Eddie Torres Teaches Salsa Nightclub Style" videos back in the late '90s, and I've been a huge fan ever since. So, I do understand some of the advantages of the "Eddie Torres" step as discussed in the video prior to this one on "On2 Pros". Please check that out when you get a chance in order to get the full picture. That video is here:
ua-cam.com/video/fYIKmJflyGU/v-deo.html
Therefore, the video that you are commenting on is not a criticism of the "Eddie Torres" step, it's an observation. It is just an attempt to explain a discrepancy that others may notice when watching the step. Although I like "On2", remember that not everyone is an "Eddie Torres On2" (or "New York 2") dancer. Fans of other "Salsa" dancing styles (and even newcomers to the "New York 2"), can notice these rhythmic discrepancies. The reason I discovered these discrepancies is because, within the past 5 years, I read many comments from dancers of other styles who claimed that "New York 2" dancers were off-beat and not following the rhythm of the song. Keep in mind that I had already been a fan of "On2" for many years, so this was new to me and I asked myself if they were just hating on the style or if they were possibly noticing something real. What I learned is what is expressed in this video. Remember, regardless of what beats the dancer intends to accent, what observers may notice is when the foot actually touches the ground (not necessarily the weight changes). The rhythm in music is consistent, but to onlookers, the rhythm of the feet in the "New York 2" may not look consistent (like in other styles of the basic "Salsa" step).
Also, this is referred to as "Modern Mambo". It is important to understand that the Eddie Torres style step is not quite the same as the "Classic Mambo" which was danced in the Palladium ballroom (among other places). Although the break steps are still beats 2 and 6, the step counts for classic "Mambo" are 234-678, not 123-567 as used in the Eddie Torres system. The Eddie Torres system is a slight modification of the original Palladium-era "Mambo" basic step (also known as "Power 2"), The Eddie Torres method is an updated version of "Classic Mambo", but again, it is not the original way of dancing to "Mambo" that was used in the Palladium. It is important to understand the history of this step. It did not start with "Eddie Torres", he just popularized and updated it.
Regardless, that is not the issue that this video is addressing. Yes, there are 8 beats in the count, but that is also not the issue. "New York 2" dancers aren't stepping on beats 4 or 8. Weight transfers are important, but they aren't the issue either. Those transfers are counted in the timing for the dancer but are not necessarily counted by those who are watching the dancers. The moment that the foot hits the ground may be more noticeable to onlookers than the weight transfer.
Again, you have to remember that not everyone is an "On2" dancer. Therefore, as an "On2" dancer (no matter what level), it might be a good idea to understand what others might be noticing when they watch you dance. That way, it's possible to address (or at least understand) the issue (even if you don't agree with what they are saying.)
Again, these rhythmic discrepancies are not my criticisms of the "New York 2". Rather, they are an attempt to explain the disconnect that others may notice with the step. For many of us, these things don't matter and we can still understand the logic behind the stepping count. But for others, these things may be noticeable and this video is an attempt to explain why (from a musical perspective).