Anonymous. Maybe on paper it could be argued where a step starts or finishes. But when we are dancing that's a different story. Take the Foxtrot. I was always told don't bother about the Slows but get those quicks dead on the beat. If you are being judged the judge will be able to see clean timing an readable choreography. Any stepping inbetween beats will look and is muddy. Once again we are governed by the music not the steps.

I'm with those who believe that music is the ruler.If there is evidence that says the step begins and ends half way. My way of thinking woudn't it be better to move the step either forward or back onto the beat then maybe theses rocket scienists might become happy. We can't move the music backward or forward can we. The music is set. We have it on a disk. The argument it infantile and fruitless. Would anyone like to try a Quickstep starting on a step halfway into a beat. It sound as stupid as it is. Who agrees..

"I'm with those who believe that music is the ruler.If there is evidence that says the step begins and ends half way. My way of thinking woudn't it be better to move the step either forward or back onto the beat then maybe theses rocket scienists might become happy."

It's simply a matter of the definitions used to formally document dancing. Someone decided that, FOR PURPOSES OF DESCRIPTION, steps start and end when the feet pass.

If you want to re-write the defintions, then you have to adjust the step descriptions in the books to match your new idea of where steps start and end...

The steps start with the music and end when the music stops playing. If you dance without music there is no way to tell if the dance is in time or out.

"The steps start with the music and end when the music stops playing. If you dance without music there is no way to tell if the dance is in time or out."

Try watching video of dancers of various levels without the sound, and then come back and tell us if you still believe there is no way to tell.

Anonymous. You just do not seem to be able to grasp things sometimes. Without a ruler of any kind is it poosible to measure. And don't say paces because paces become the ruler.

"Anonymous. You just do not seem to be able to grasp things sometimes. Without a ruler of any kind is it poosible to measure."

If you had much experience watching dancing, you would already know that music is not required to dance musically. A skilled dancer can create an impression of musicality even when dancing in silence. They do this by sequencing their actions correctly, and artistically too - and as a result they are far more musical (even with no soundtrack) than a beginner slavishly hitting downbeats but without any of the interving lyraclity.

Anonymous. But without music how can you tell if the Reverse Turn is given the right amount of time. It doesn't matter how good the dancers are untill the music is played it cannot be gaged. I can see that you don't think the music is important. The most important.

"Anonymous. But without music how can you tell if the Reverse Turn is given the right amount of time."

The same way that a musician performing solo without a metronome would know if he was giving that part of the music the right amount of time: by using his or her internal sense of musicality.

Learn to be a musician while you dance - create your own music. If there is an orchestra on the speakers, you will become a member of it with your body as your instrument. If there is no orchestra, you will have to be a soloist.

Maybe you would understand better if I said that dancing without music is musical if you could watch the dancing and sing along to it.

Without music there is no way that a person or persons would know if you have taken too long on any step . It even gets better performing a group.