Expertise-Related Differences in Cyclic Motion Patterns in Drummers: A Kinematic Analysis

Abstract

Background: At present only little information is available concerning the acquisition of skilled movements in musicians. Although optimally a longitudinal study of changing movement patterns during the process of increasing expertise is required, long-term follow up over several years is difficult to manage. Therefore, in the present cross-sectional study a comparative kinematic analysis of skilled movements in drummers with different levels of expertise was carried out.

Aims: The aim of the investigation was (1) to analyze the kinematic differences between beginners, students and expert drummers, and (2) to deduce from the results general rules related to the acquisition of drumming expertise and (3) to discuss the implications for drum teaching.

Method: Two highly skilled experts, eight professional drumming students and five beginners participated in the experiment. Fast repetitive drumming movements were assessed using an active infrared measurement setup (SELSPOT-System). Recording was obtained from LEDs positioned over the shoulder-, elbow-, wrist- and MCP-joints and close to the tip of the stick at a sampling rate of 300 Hz. Kinematic analysis included calculation of angles, velocities and accelerations and assessment of the relation between velocity and acceleration as phase diagrams.

Results: Temporal accuracy of the drumming movements was related to expertise. In contrast to beginners, experts and students revealed a high degree of self-similarity of movements and a predominant use of low-mass distal joints, resulting in a whiplash-like movement when hitting the pad.

Conclusion: Intense training in students and experts results in economic utilization of forces. Percussion teachers can take advantage of the kinematic analysis and improve their instructions according to the student's observed motor pattern.

Keywords: cyclic motor patterns; drumming movements; motion capture; motor learning; musical expertise.

FIGURE 1

Experimental setup. Expert DS01 with LEDs attached to the stick and to lateral bony parts of right arm joints: (i) stick, LED is attached 3 cm below the tip of the stick, (ii) metacarpophalangeal joint (MCP) of the index finger, (iii) ulnar tuberositas of the wrist, (iv) epicondylus lateralis humeri of the elbow, and (v) tuberculum majus of the shoulder.

FIGURE 2

Motion trajectories of LEDs seen from the same perspective as in Figure 1 in the same skilled expert during playing quarters at 76 bpm in forte. Around 25 beats are accumulated over time. Labels of LEDs are analog to those in Figure 1. For details see text.

FIGURE 3

Diagram of mean temporal deviation σ[s] in time intervals between succeeding strokes while playing at a fast speed (16th notes at 76 bpm, forte). Temporal accuracy is highest in the two expert performers, less in the students, and markedly reduced in the five non-drummers.

FIGURE 4

Figures on the left side show the movements of the LED positions i–v along the (vertical) z-axis over time during exercise b of (A) an expert percussionist, (C) a student, (E) a non-percussionist. Figures on the right side (B,D,F) are displaying the respective calculated angles ω₁ between the stick and the hand at the MCP joint of the index finger, ω₂ at the wrist and ω₃ at the elbow (same order top – down as trajectories).

FIGURE 5

Phase plot of kinematic data of the LED attached to the stick in expert DS01 during 25 cycles of exercise b. Plotted are acceleration (y-axis, mm/s²) versus velocity (x-axis, mm/s) of LED movements along the (vertical) z-axis. The orientation of the motion is shown with the arrow (clockwise). In quadrant I the upward motion after the impact is shown. The (positive) velocity of the stick decreases until the upper reversal of the movement at velocity “0” occurs. Quadrant II shows the phase of acceleration toward the drum pad, when the subject applies movement energy to the stick for the generation of the sound on the drum. In the gray area (quadrants III and IV), the velocity changes from negative to positive values in the moment of the impact. This is an extremely short period with strong “negative” deceleration (note the different scales on the y-axis).

FIGURE 6

Phase plot for the student UK. Same conventions as in Figure 5. Compared to the expert, the phase-plot diagram is very similar, although minor deviations can be observed in the quadrant 1, probably due to individual biomechanical properties.

FIGURE 7

Phase plot for the non-drummer DP. Clear differences emerge compared to the traces in Figures 5, 4. The “artifacts” in quadrant I are due to a lack of co-ordination of the impact. Furthermore, the increasing slope already during the raising of the stick demonstrates an uneconomical use of force.