I will listen to any reasonable explanation but for the life of me in the U.S. what advantage is there to count BPM as beats per minute and not Bars of Music per Minute. I would find it easier to count 28 bars per minute than 112 beats. Not that i would count 28 bars . Instead i would count bars for 15 seconds and times it by four. I would expect the music to be played at the tempo of seven bars in 15 seconds by counting 123 223 323 and so on for the 15 seconds. Foxtrot or Quickstep would be 1234. 2234. 3234 and so on. Maybe somebody can explain.

I'll be happy to explain.

Actually, I'll do you one better. I'll start with a question: Which do you think is faster: a Foxtrot at 30 bars per minute, or a Waltz at 40 bars per minute?

If you said "Waltz", you'd be wrong. They're exactly the same speed.

The above example is a perfect illustration of the problems that arise when we use bars instead of beats to measure tempo. For a more detailed explanation, see the following topic:

https://www.ballroomdancers.com/Message_Board/view_messages.asp?Topic=20515

Regards,
Jonathan Atkinson
www.ballroomdancers.com

Fine I will have a look at that. But how come the rest of the world it would appear including those who produce discs count in bars. I will copy Japanese Orchestra Best Selection Ballroom Dancing Hiao Sudou. Sherazade 30 BPM. German Disk called Ballroom Fantasy. Is it You
( Theme from Shrek ) 29 BPM. I dont want to appear argumentative but I would rather count 64 bars of music if I had to than a 192 or anywhere in between which I very much doubt anybody would do anyway. To some it must be confusing. Maybe I am old fashioned but I would still rather count a V Waltz 123 223 323 for eight bars and start again. Which has little to do with the timing but everything to do with phrasing which brings up another angle. My typist is getting impatient, have to go.

Here i am again. I read the article. But i must be odd. I've counted two Waltz' s and two Foxtrots and got exactly the same number that is on the disk each time. I also tried dancing a Foxtrot to a Waltz to the theme from Pearl Harbour with the music counting in threes. I found it necessary to drive that first step otherwise the steps fit into the count of three perfectly .Six steps in a Reverse Turn Or twelve in a Feather Three Step and Natural Turn which all fit into the steps with beats. This wasn' t wholly my idea. I remember being told that a guy who is still one of the leading teachers in the world today, had this pupil doing a Foxtrot to a Waltz. Intersting. Everything was called in threes.

Hi Anna
I'm in Europe and so always measure tempo as Bars-per-minute. Jonathan's point is very valid, so it's all down to convention. I believe that in the US they still measure in feet and inches!!
As for dancing fox-trot to waltz music - you just have to dance the slows a little quicker (as, for example in a feather step). Dancing waltz to fox-trot music is equally simple - in fact i often do this at social dances where ther's not enough space for a real fox-trot. Instead i practice slow waltz natural and reverse turns with the normal '1' occupying two beats of the foxtrot music. I'm sure you're aware of all this.
On a good night i just do the 3 steps to the 4 beats.

Phil. What needs to be pointed out is that a thorough understanding of the steps plus listening to the beat. Those who believe they can dance without being aware of the beats should try this as part of there training.