# Any tips for learning Polyrhythms?



## jonespwns (Apr 7, 2013)

I am pretty new to polyrhythm type stuff. A friend of mine said I should learn some music theory before even trying it. Iv'e tried covering songs and i about have a heart attack because its too random to follow lol. Is it worth learning the theory behind it?


----------



## theo (Apr 7, 2013)

Whilst theory may help you, It's not necessarily essential. It all comes down to practice, Just loop sections you have a hard time with and jam it until it's right.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 7, 2013)

You'll need to know how meter works in the first place. Check this site out: musictheory.net

Meter consists of two pieces of information: the number of beats, and how those beats are divided up. Here are some examples of how we would represent meters:


```
1: 1
2: 1 2
3: 1 2 3
4: 1 2 3 4
5: 1 2 3 4 5
6: 1 2 3 4 5 6
7: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
```
See where I'm going with this? Where most people disconnect is in the division part of rhythm. You see, each of those beats may be cut up into smaller equal chunks. These chunks are either equal divisions of two, or equal divisions of 3. We'll start with the divisions of 2. Meters whose divisions are in twos are called "simple meters". Keep the space between the beats (represented by numerals) even, and then place another note equidistant between each beat. I will represent the half beat (where we're dividing the beat into twos) by "&":


```
1: 1 &
2: 1 & 2 &
3: 1 & 2 & 3 &
4: 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 &
5: 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 &
6: 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 &
7: 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 &
```
Next, we will divide the same meters into threes. This kind of meter is called "compound meter". Once again, keep the same distance between the beats (numerals), and we'll divide the beat evenly into threes with "& a".


```
1: 1 & a
2: 1 & a 2 & a
3: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a
4: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a
5: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a
6: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a
7: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a 7 & a
```
Following along? Good. Next, time signatures. Time signatures are kind of bullshit, because time signatures force us to think in little boxes. What a time signature is, is a visual representation of meter. The number of beats and division of the meter is communicated in a time signature, but then we have a pesky extra piece of information.

A time signature's top number is the number of beats. We've exhausted this already, but really take it to heart. The bottom number of the time signature exists solely for written music. So, if you see a time signature such as 4/4 (using colors to differentiate between the two values), 4 means that there are four beats in the measure. 4 means that the value that is given to a beat is a quarter note. We do not hear 4, it is nonexistent. We do, however, hear 4. This is technically the same meter, but a different time signature: 4/8. Remember, the blue number merely represents what is considered a beat on the paper. Now here is a different meter: 2/2. In this time signature, there are two beats, and the unit that receives a beat is the half note. Note that two half notes and four quarter notes take up the same amount of musical space, but 4/4 and 2/2 are completely different meters and time signatures: one has two beats, the other has four.

Now the confusing part: compound time signatures. Remember those compound meters? Well, because of our notation system, their time signatures are awful. In order to distinguish them from the simple time signatures, we have to multiply the number of beats by three. So, this...


```
1: 1 & a
2: 1 & a 2 & a
3: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a
4: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a
5: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a
6: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a
7: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a 7 & a
```
... becomes this:


```
3: 1 & a
6: 1 & a 2 & a
9: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a
12: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a
15: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a
18: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a
21: 1 & a 2 & a 3 & a 4 & a 5 & a 6 & a 7 & a
```
I know, the meter on the last one now reads "21" and there are only seven beats. It's a pain in the ass. And, yeah, 3 in compound time is different than 3 in simple time.

I'll get to poly everything in the next post, but I want to make sure that you're still with me before launching off into the rhythmic stratosphere. (By the way, there is a polyrhythm in my sig.)


----------



## jonespwns (Apr 7, 2013)

Wow dude that is a lot of typing! Thanks for all this. I just read it all and will probably read over it some more to fully understand all that.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Apr 7, 2013)

I think the first step is to determine the difference between a poly meter and a polyrhythm. When djent kids and learners talk about poly rhythms they almost always mean polymeters, ala Meshuggah. In fact, I haven't heard one meshuggah song with a polyrhythm, but a fuckload of poly meters, (Though I haven't heard all their stuff). Lamb of god however, are a good band for poly rhythms, due to the drummer's love for triplets and the guitarists always writing standard 4/4 riffs.


----------



## jonespwns (Apr 7, 2013)

Yeah. I sorta thought that to be the case. I know that August Burns Red plays polyrhythm type breakdowns and thats different from most djent type stuff. I'm basically wanting to learn how to play both of those.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 8, 2013)

Polymeter is easy. All you do is keep the same beat for both rhythms, then use different meters.







I don't think that polyrhythm is that bad, either. It's just opposing tuplets.






(^3 [or 6] against 2 [or 4], until the last beat, which is 5 against 4.)

And then there's rhythmic displacement, which is when you have at least two lines whose downbeats don't match up. Can be with the same meter or with different meters.


----------



## Hipster Holocaust (Apr 8, 2013)

Yo_Wattup said:


> I think the first step is to determine the difference between a poly meter and a polyrhythm. When djent kids and learners talk about poly rhythms they almost always mean polymeters, ala Meshuggah. In fact, I haven't heard one meshuggah song with a polyrhythm, but a fuckload of poly meters, (Though I haven't heard all their stuff). Lamb of god however, are a good band for poly rhythms, due to the drummer's love for triplets and the guitarists always writing standard 4/4 riffs.



Just another example, of their lack of basic composition knowledge. 

THESE are examples of guitars using polyrhythm:


----------



## Given To Fly (Apr 8, 2013)

"Polyrhythms The Musicians Guide" by Peter Magadini is a good resource to start with and includes a CD with all the examples which I think is crucially helpful for effectively learning how to play polyrhythms. 

Also, what are you learning that "sounds too random to follow?" I'm just asking because sometimes there is a way to simplify what you are hearing; sometimes there isn't.


----------



## jonespwns (Apr 8, 2013)

Given To Fly said:


> "Polyrhythms The Musicians Guide" by Peter Magadini is a good resource to start with and includes a CD with all the examples which I think is crucially helpful for effectively learning how to play polyrhythms.
> 
> Also, what are you learning that "sounds too random to follow?" I'm just asking because sometimes there is a way to simplify what you are hearing; sometimes there isn't.



Well, there was a song that I was wanting to cover called in-take by Volumes. There are some parts that are just really sporadic and random. It is a bit hard to know what is coming up. From what you guys are informing me, what they are doing might not be polyrhythm, but polymeter.


----------



## cGoEcYk (Apr 8, 2013)

It's cool that you are interested in polyrhythms. I think they are still kind of technical and forward thinking and often overlooked. When done well, it can me a little bit of a mind spin for the listener... and I love doing that (for me jaggedly executed odd time sigs and stuff like that add to the "heaviness"). 

I'd record/loop stuff to explore it. If you arent very thrown off by it at first as a beginner, you should try to make it odder. I'd use an odd time signature too, to get your instincts a little more off balance. You need to be rock solid in what you are doing and almost completely zone out everything else. 

*Years* ago (maybe 2000) my first band with a genius drummer (Giann Rubio) did some polyrhythm stuff.

The rhythm done in unison up to :20 continues to be played/repeated by the guitar after :20 but bass/drums do something poly with it. It's hard to sort out in your head but it's a legit example. This is some rough old school stuff, but shows even kids can do it. 

Cyberdyne - 2001 - Hype (live) by dr_thunda on SoundCloud - Hear the world

Another example is in Tool - Jambi a little after 5:00



Polymeter: I think any polymeter is cool, but something odd over something 4/4 is a little played out. Odd over odd would be the way to go if you are an experimenter.


----------



## yingmin (Apr 9, 2013)

Hipster Holocaust said:


> THESE are examples of guitars using polyrhythm:




I don't hear any polyrhythms in this.


----------



## Hipster Holocaust (Apr 9, 2013)

What about this one then? If you can't hear it look up the tabs.

2 guitar playing, 2 individual things, at 2 different time signatures. If those aren't polyrhythms, show me an example of what is.


----------



## coffeeflush (Apr 9, 2013)

This is my whole education on odd time signatures. 
While I am not a learned prog master it serves me enough for my little mind. Hope it helps

Adrian Belew: History & Future of Guitar Noise- Pt 2/3 - YouTube


----------



## meambobbo (Apr 9, 2013)

Hipster Holocaust said:


> 2 guitar playing, 2 individual things, at 2 different time signatures. If those aren't polyrhythms, show me an example of what is.


 
I can't listen to the link right now, but just wanted to point out that the statement isn't necessarily true. A polyrhythm could be played on 2 or more different strings of a single guitar. Same with a piano. 2 individual parts are also is irrelevant to polyrhythm - 2 parts are played all the time without polyrhythm and can be done with or without polymeter. And as SW mentioned above, two different time signatures is also irrelevant - it likely means there is polymeter used to create syncopation, but it may or may not involve polyrhythm.

When I think polyrhythm, I think two rhythmic patterns that have no common divisor. As SW said, the simplest example is opposing tuplets. So if you have a 3 8th note triplet occurring at the same time as a 4 16th notes, you have polyrhythm. The first note of every triplet and every 4 16th notes will sync up, but the others will be off-time relative to each other.


----------



## yingmin (Apr 9, 2013)

Hipster Holocaust said:


> What about this one then? If you can't hear it look up the tabs.
> 
> 2 guitar playing, 2 individual things, at 2 different time signatures. If those aren't polyrhythms, show me an example of what is.




Are you just talking about the fact that the solo is mostly triplets? Because other than that, I don't hear anything that remotely resembles a polyrhythm, nor could I see anything in tabs. That's a kind of polyrhythm, but you're incorrect about them being "2 different time signatures"; it's a difference in quantization. They're both in 4/4, but one is playing 16th notes, and one is playing 16th note triplets. The ultimate example of this is in Chopin's Fantasie Impromptu 66, where the left hand is playing 8th note triplets while the right hand plays 16th notes.


----------



## ElRay (Apr 9, 2013)

Hipster Holocaust said:


> 2 guitar playing, 2 individual things, at 2 different time signatures. If those aren't polyrhythms, show me an example of what is.



My understanding (and likely over simplification) is that in a poly-rhythm, the measures will stay in sync and you have different rhythms (maybe in different voices, maybe not) in the same time signature (e.g. triplets in the treble and 1/4 notes in the bass). 

On the other hand, a poly-meter is two or more voices each playing in their own meters at the same time (e.g. a drummer playing constant 4/4 while the guitarist is playing in 7/8). In this case, the guitarist will "fall behind" by an 1/8 note every two measures the drummer plays.

 Theory Deities, is that correct?  

Now, to throw a wrinkle at you: Rush used to do a lot of guitar & bass playing in alternating 6/8 & 7/8 while the drummer played 3x(3/4) + 1x(4/4), which technically would be poly-meter, correct? But, since they sync-up every two bars (bass & guitar) and four bars (drums), couldn't that be looked as as a giant poly-rhythm?


Ray


----------



## meambobbo (Apr 9, 2013)

^ yeah - that's how i see it


----------



## ElRay (Apr 9, 2013)

coffeeflush said:


> Adrian Belew: History & Future of Guitar Noise- Pt 2/3 - YouTube


... and that's what it was like living in the Zappa Household. 

Ray


----------



## jonajon91 (Apr 9, 2013)

Can anyone help me with this grove riff. It is not technically a polyrhythm, but it is a crazy rhythm that I need to learn.
Its in compound time and it lasts ten beats in total (in four four so playing it twice lasts five bars)
It is written so that the strong beat ban be one thirds from a beat.
0 is a note
X is a ghost note

l---------------------------------------
l---------------------------------------
l---------------------------------------
l-0-X0-X0-XX0-X0-X0-XX0-X00-X0-X--- X2

would the best way to count to go;
bom ka bom ka bom kaka
bom ka bom ka bom kaka
bom ka bobom ka bom ka
repeat?


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Apr 9, 2013)

jonajon91 said:


> Can anyone help me with this grove riff. It is not technically a polyrhythm, but it is a crazy rhythm that I need to learn.
> Its in compound time and it lasts ten beats in total (in four four so playing it twice lasts five bars)
> It is written so that the strong beat ban be one thirds from a beat.
> 0 is a note
> ...



Give us real notation, how are we supposed to know what is 16ths, 8ths etc


----------



## jonajon91 (Apr 10, 2013)

All the same note length.


----------



## bondmorkret (Apr 10, 2013)

Try playing a short 5/8 rhythm cell for 4 bars, and on the last bar ending the rhythm cell early, so that you end up back on beat 1 for bar 5. Happens a lot in fusion and jazz phrasing, and also bands like Meshuggah use it a lot for polyrhythmic riffs.

Give it a go!


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 10, 2013)

bondmorkret said:


> Try playing a short 5/8 rhythm cell for 4 bars, and on the last bar ending the rhythm cell early, so that you end up back on beat 1 for bar 5. Happens a lot in fusion and jazz phrasing, and also bands like Meshuggah use it a lot for polyrhythmic riffs.
> 
> Give it a go!



This isn't polyrhythm, you know.



jonajon91 said:


> Can anyone help me with this grove riff. It is not technically a polyrhythm, but it is a crazy rhythm that I need to learn.
> Its in compound time and it lasts ten beats (_12 beats, no? It's three measures._) in total (in four four so playing it twice lasts five bars)
> It is written so that the strong beat ban be one thirds from a beat.
> 0 is a note
> ...





jonajon91 said:


> All the same note length.



Not that crazy - it's a shuffle. Set a metronome so one click = one (triplet) eighth. Then once you have that down, set it to one click = one quarter note. I'd also suggest practicing one measure at a time, loop it, then put them all together. What's everybody else doing? Should this be written in 4/4, or is it really 12/8? Either notation could be correct, I'm just wondering.


----------



## jonajon91 (Apr 11, 2013)

^ 
not 3 bars, 1/2 bars, it does last ten beats.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 11, 2013)

Ah, I see, just the highlighted area.


----------



## meambobbo (Apr 12, 2013)

i think it's easiest to think of it as two bars of 4/4 and one bar of 2/4 and count it as triplets. If you count each note of the triplet, that'd be what? 12/12 for the first two then 6/12. So you could get 3 bars of equal length in 10/12, but I don't like counting so high if I don't have to.


----------



## Tyler (Apr 13, 2013)

The more you listen to them, the easier they eventually become. Once you get the basics of some then they get a lot easier to understand pattern wise or at least to my experience.


----------



## farren (Apr 13, 2013)

Rather than starting a new thread, it's probably better to ask here:

What are the chances of anyone who didn't become ambidextrous very young (usually a lefty who is encouraged to turn righty very early), mastering, or nearly so, something like Imogen's Puzzle Pt. 2?

I realize few people are born ambidextrous and most must learn, but few ever seem to approach the potential of someone who is actually cross-dominant.

If you're not wired that way, would it even be possible to commit one hand to muscle memory and eventually do the same with the other, ultimately bringing the two parts together?

No, I'm not going to actually attempt to learn it. I know it would be an exercise in futility, but am curious all the same.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 13, 2013)

^ Of course. I don't know the piece, but how many pianists do you think are ambidextrous? You weren't born with two hands just so you can use one of them.


----------



## farren (Apr 14, 2013)

I realize that and have heard the pianist motivator (I play a bit) many times directed at people struggling to become ambidextrous. This is a bit different IMO. Rather than building strength and agility and a decent amount of independence in both hands so that you can play typical left-hand bass/right-hand treble music, the extent to which a pianist typically becomes ambidextrous, the mental aspect of playing polyrhythms on either instrument presents a problem beyond strength and speed. The more difficult polyrhythmic music I've heard, like the following, seems beyond the concentration threshold for most guitarists (or pianists):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3Q3LDXV9WQ

Such that it must be entirely, or nearly entirely, committed to muscle memory. Executing each hand simultaneously from muscle memory when there are no helpful links between the left hand and right hand to "sync" one's train of thought seems to me to require certain wiring that is beyond the abilities of someone who can't, say, write perfectly with both hands, or write their signature left to right with one hand while simultaneously writing it backwards with the other. I'd love for someone to tell me that isn't the case, that someone who has built up their ambidexterity strictly from playing polyrhythmic guitar music or playing the drums can pull it off, but I'm not sure if anyone meeting that description who can play something on the level of Imogen's Puzzle Pt. 2 exists.


----------



## tedtan (Apr 14, 2013)

You're overthinking this, farren. Learning to play the two parts and learning to write with both hands simultaneously are completely unrelated, but they work pretty much the same way. You first learn each part separately, then you learn to combine them. Its not something that is natural for anyone. Like everything else, playing unrelated parts simultaneously takes time and requires working on the parts in multiple steps to get to the end goal.


----------



## farren (Apr 14, 2013)

Thanks, I'll take that. I knew someone who supposedly never had to learn the signature trick, one of the better cases of someone "born" ambidextrous (controversial idea) or, more likely, someone who developed it very, very early (like my example of a lefty forced to write righty by teachers). But just now I read Mike Mangini, the drummer, trained as an adult (or teen) and was not before that the least bit ambidextrous. That's quite promising for anyone, I think.


----------



## tedtan (Apr 14, 2013)

If you think about it, none of this stuff is natural, whether playing an instrument or using little squiggles on paper to represent phonetic elements of speech. We're not born knowing any of these things. Some of them just take a little more work to learn than others. Someone who is ambidextrous may have a little easier time of it, but they'll still have to put in the work learning and perfecting it like the rest of us.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Apr 15, 2013)

Seconded. Ambidexterity, or the lack thereof, should be the least of your concerns. I listened to the song. It's pretty straightforward, technique-wise. Just go slow and be very deliberate about fingering. You probably aren't accustomed to dividing up your limbs, so you shouldn't assume that people that play the guitar that way just woke up one morning and started double-handed tapping. If you practice tunes with that sort of technique, you'll find that you can not only play that tune, but other ones like it will come easier. On the other hand, if you have it in your mind that you have an inborn disability (non-ambidexterity? monodexterity?), you're only going to inhibit yourself. Don't worry about it, have fun and make music.


----------



## ajrdileva (Feb 6, 2016)

Use the LCM of the two subdivisions of the meter you want to play and practice the compound rhythm first, then split it

Here's a youtube video with a cool way of creating your own practice for polyrhythms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaZ8_fH9cGA


----------

