Actually.. 3 of my smooth classes in social style e.g. F/trot, are taught essentially as American style ( even in silver level ) this apparently has become quite common ,after I gave a lecture at a congress 2yrs ago.

Todays clientele are much older than than those of the past , generally 40s and up. They , by and large, are not interested in medal test work ( do have to stay with a "book" format for q/s.
and some waltz ) also, R and R is very popular .

Polished seems to be a bit confused about the function of the term "BPM" (or at least so it would seem from the statement above), which is not a method of counting but a means of describing tempo.

I think perhaps what he meant to say is If a person is to become a skilled dancer, he must be able to count bars (i.e. measures) in addition to beats. There are many methods for counting, but those that include the counting of measures as well as beats are typically preferable because they provide the counter with an awareness of phrasing. I don't think anybody would dispute this (although there might be situations where it's unnecessarily cumbersome, but that's a discussion for a different day).

But that's all beside the point. Back to the topic of "BPM", again it's not a method of counting, so of course topics like measures and phrasing have absolutely nothing to do with it. Put very simply:

TEMPO IS A MEASURE OF SPEED. NOTHING MORE.

When you see a tempo indication, be it on a sheet of written music or the back of a dance CD, it's not telling you how to count, or how many measures are in each phrase. It's simply giving you a concrete and factual representation of the speed of the music as a number. When you look at this number, it's supposed to make you say, "That's fast!", "That's slow", "That's sort of medium", or possibly "This one is slightly faster than that one", etc.

In some sheet music, tempo is described using words such as "vivace", "andante", "lento", etc. This works well enough, but has the disadvantage of being relatively inaccurate. For example, "moderato" might fall anywhere between 110 and 120 bpm. (This, of course, could be an advantage if your aim is flexibility, but that's not relevant to our discussion).

Using a numerical indication of tempo, therefore, is advantageous because it's far more precise than using subjective language. By the same token, Beats per minute is advantageous over Bars/Measures because it's more accurate... actually, 3 to 6 times as accurate, to be specific. So if you're going to choose numerical indications over subjective terms for the sake of accuracy, why would you choose a *less* accurate number?

As well as being inaccurate, Measures/Bars is also on occasion totally misleading, particularly when comparing songs of a different time signature. To see a Tango at 30 MPM followed by a Tango at 60 MPM, the average dancer might assume that one was twice as fast as the other, without realizing that because one is in 4/4 and the other in 2/4, they are in fact the same exact speed. And if tempo is supposed to be a clear and accurate measure of speed, then the practice of representing the same speed with two very different numbers is remarkably flawed.

However, having said all that, I do realize that for better or worse, ballroom dancers have always used measures to describe tempo. It's ingrained in their very being, and no words of wisdom from any musician will ever sway an entire culture of tradition. So I simply explain the theory as best I can, and then let it go. Fred, take note. :)

Regards,
Jonathan Atkinson
www.ballroomdancers.com

Again, Jonathan and Terence, many thanks for your time and thorough explanations! I think I already have a much better understanding of the specific requirements, and will be able to make more consious decisions. I will keep a copy of this discussion for future reference. As you suggest, I'll consult with a local expert too, and I'll make sure we monitor more systematically what's going on on the dance floor -- not only what songs that fill the floor, but also the dances preferred by the crowd at a particular tempo. I feel this is the start of an interesting journey. In a couple of months I can then report back how it turned out in practice. (Perhaps I'll even take that beginner's foxtrot class that has been on my to do-list for the last 15 years or so... :) )

This site is a terrific resource -- by far the most comprehensive I've seen when cruising for information. Perhaps a future revision could state the tempo in the Tech Spec sections given both in beats per minute and measures per minute (the MPM designation is a good idea!). This would help users becoming familiar with both methods. (The subject might even deserve an entry in the Lerning Center. Your elaboration above is certainly FAQ material.)

Finally, I'm impressed by the audio clip -- excellent writing as well as playing (you could publish and sell that arrangement)! I do hope you find some time to play these days, too.

Bye for now, and take care,
Fred