Recently came across another teacher who was saying mirror setup is a detriment to learning, but after some practice with both methods isn’t the opposite true?
With a mirrored setup you can do everything you can do with a “realistic” setup and more. The argument seemed to be that the backbeat and accents should be on separate hands, but what about mirrored layout doesn’t allow you to play like this as well?
It seems like learning mirror may be more difficult since you have to learn to use both hands to play either role, but doesn’t it ultimately allow more versatility than even traditional drums?
I started my journey into finger drumming a long time ago with Rob’s free material (which you can go quite far with I might add). I also thought the mirrored approach made more sense to me at the time (as opposed to the dominant hand approach). I signed up for “another” course (sorry Rob) that focused on “alternating hands”. I stuck with it for a while. I could get some impressive beats going but I felt something was missing. I ultimately came back to the quest for groove program. Focusing on hand independence and being able to freely place accents etc with your alternate hand gave me back what was missing from the other approach. My goal was always to be able to jam with friends and feel connected to what was being played - I never felt that with the other more “mechanical” approach. In real life, Rob’s approach is more rewarding and feels more natural and creative. It’s hard to explain - it’s like the other approach was paint by number and the QFG approach is more like really painting. So in the end to me, it’s less about a mirrored layout (I in fact use the FGDP-50 with QFG and it’s fine) and more about what your hands are doing. You need to train your brain to treat your hands independently which then can apply to any layout. The other approach locks your hands into alternating and requires a mirrored layout - yes, maybe you can get to faster tempos etc. but for me the creativity and improvisational aspects were gone. Just my experience.
Thanks, I also followed the QFG lessons and still find Robert’s teachings to be quite effective. I followed the charts and teachings, but I’m on a novation using the 6x6 layout and was questioning whether I was learning optimally. I agree that Rob’s approach is my favorite I’ve come across so far.
What I think is interesting is that @Darwould mentions he likes the “hand independence” of my approach whereas I often get compared to Dragon and it usually get’s boiled down to “Mirror Layout” (me) vs “Hand isolation” (Dragon) and which one is better.
That always frustrates me because:
QFG layout is not a fully mirrored layout
What layout you use is largely unrelated to whether you play alternating or with hand isolation.
I use both alternating and hitting at the same time (hand isolation) and apply it where it seems to work best for me.
So it’s fun to read someone who uses my method and likes the “independence” aspect of it. Because it is in there!
So basically, in my experience, you don’t have to learn how to do everything with both hands. It’s more that you need to have control over both hands and you need to make them work together very well. But this is true regardless of layout.
you don’t have to learn how to do everything with both hands. It’s more that you need to have control over both hands and you need to make them work together very well.
This is critical and sums it up well. The other program I was referring to was all about economy of finger movements and that became the main consideration for how to play something. Even a simple beat that you could easily play with one hand became a 2 handed pattern - sure you could crank the temo up to 200 and still play it but it felt way too mechanical to me. Coming back to the QFG method actually required me to unlearn some muscle memory from the other approach. To me QFG = alternate where it makes sense as part of the core rhythm then accent, fill etc. with hand independence wandering in and out of these modes where it serves the music. Much more creative IMO and a much better approach for improvising which has always been my main goal.
I agree that mirrored layout vs. hand independence is a very wrong take on how the layouts work.
In my mind, I think of it more like “vertical” vs. “horizontal” orientation of the layout. If I go with vertical, I can play all the most important parts easily with one hand and can also (!) reach it with my other hand. The horizontal layout forces you to split even the basics between two hands because they would otherwise be in each others way.
Second, it’s about a playing style where the decision is between alternating hands (based on timing) and “hand independence” (based on drum part). I think both is worth it to learn - at least for me, I get very different results and tend to play differently in each style.
The alternating hands style feels more fun and relaxed to me, but somehow it puts me also into similar patterns more. Not sure why, it’s a mental thing maybe - falling into typical patterns, because they are too comfortable?
I think we all know who you’re talking about, but kudos for not saying the name.
I’m still new to finger drumming having started back in late July. I was really happy with my first couple of months with QFG but my membership has since lapsed so I haven’t really been practicing anything specific. I do still muck around with some improvisation and from what I picked up from Rob’s lessons I’m happy with some beats I can put down.
One thing I’m not sure I’ve heard mention is the fact that regardless of how you finger drum, you need to find a way to substitute what your feet would normally do on a real drumkit. The most obvious being the role of the kick drum. I haven’t played a drumkit before, but I think my mind considers my thumbs to take the place of my feet in this instance so it’s not as important what my fingers are doing.
I recall Rob mentioning in one of the very early lessons about the relative ease of getting a very basic beat going using the one hand for either 1/4 or 1/8 beat patterns. As a example, assuming a steady 8th note high hat, the kick and snare hits are almost guaranteed to be on the same time as you’re hitting with the same hand in the same motion. I think this is what helped hook me in early.
I’ve tried using my right hand on just the hi-hat and using my left to play kick and snare and the timing is more challenging.
I know when I looked ahead in the QFG course it’s got parts around using your hand independently, so as Rob mentioned above, it’s about using the right method for what you want to play. I’d certainly like to explore that at some stage.
I guess in summary, I’ve really enjoyed using the QFG layout, it’s not a true mirror so you still have easy access to an open hi-hat, ride, 3 different toms, 3 different symbols and then just doubles on your hi-hat, snare, side-stick (or similar) and kick drum. The pads I find the least natural to play are 1, 4, 5 and 8 but I haven’t really played much that needed them. Regardless of your layout, presumably you would always want multiple snare, kick and hi-hat anyway.
Yes this is a very important point. It is one of the main things to ask when someone throws the “real drummers do this, real drummers do that” argument at you claiming it is always superior to do what real drummers do. I think that going from using 4 limbs to just two, but then being able to hit multiple pads at the same time using multiple fingers is exactly why you should not assume that everything real drummers do is automatically better for finger drumming.
I keep throwing this one around but I would think tennis vs table tennis. Lots of overlaps, but it’s just not the same thing.