I'd expect a contra dance tempo in the 80s to feel not merely slow, but excruciatingly slow, especially if in the low 80s. To get an idea, try playing one of the Youtube videos in the slower half of the list I posted on Wednesday afternoon, and then use YouTube's "Settings" control (click on the gear-shaped icon in the strip at the bottom of the YouTube viewing window) to set the playback speed to 0.75.
I don't know whether anyone has done careful systematic testing of liveBPM's accuracy on a varied range of contra dance music. If anyone does, I'd be interested in knowing the result. I have, however, seen liveBPM be seriously confused (if you'll pardon the anthropomorphism) about the tempos of waltzes, where the beats come in multiples of three. I wouldn't be surprised if it could were sometimes similarly inaccurate about jigs, in which the beats subdivide in thirds. For example, perhaps it would sometimes report a tempo of, say, 84 BPM for a jig whose real tempo is 84 * 4/3 = 112 BPM. --Jim On Sep 22, 2019, at 7:26 PM, Richard Hart via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Sometime over past year someone use liveBPM at the Nelson Monday night dances > a few times. It was interesting to see that the beat per minute varied quite > a bit depending on musicians, dancers, the caller, and particular dance. They > varied from a low in the 80’s up to about 125. > > And, yes, the music seemed slow with bpm in the 80’s, but it worked well > given the dancers on the floor. > > Rich. <snip> _______________________________________________ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
