Thursday, September 16, 2004

Question of the Week

Last week, there was quite a lively discussion on the comments to Halfling's blog, regarding the use of solfege vs. numbers in aural skills classes. I thought it would be a good idea to have some sort of discussion question every week, so here goes one:

Does any musician who reads this blog prefer the Eastman counting system (one-te, two-te) over traditional counting (one-and, two-and)? If so, why? If you prefer traditional (as I do), please tell me why as well. Ready, set, go...


Matt said...

I prefer the traditional counting system, yet that does work too well in John Murphy's class cause he perfers the Eastman system. Oh well, what ya gonna do?

Steven said...


Easier to count faster rhythms.

Eastman sounds makes one sound like they have a speech impediment.

G. Travis said...

What Dingus said.
My band directors in school used the Eastman system, and raked me over the coals for using traditional. I seriously did get a horrible verbal butt kicking in front of the whole ensemble for using traditional. @_@

Kev said...

Holy crap, Murphy uses Eastman? He didn't do that when he was my lab band director. It just sounds so wrong with jazz rhythms.

The three reasons I like traditional:

1) Works better faster, as Dingus said.

2) The whole "te" thing just sounds ridiculous.

3) DWF uses Eastman...enough said.

James said...

I prefer the traditional method, for no other reason than it's the only one I know and have used :)

I spose I've never played in a big band thing, aside from just the church band with a couple of guitars and drums... so I haven't even had a real use for the counting system since I stopped the piano exams bak in 1998.