Single Paradiddle

When we talk about the Paradiddle, the Single Paradiddle is the classic example. It’s actually possible that the Paradiddle is a rudiment that originated with the English sometime in the 16^th or 17^th century, considering its lack of history with most other styles.

The Single Paradiddle is performed:

Single Paradiddle in British and American Music:

As discussed below, most systems of drumming lack single paradiddles, or other related paradiddle movements. This suggests that paradiddles were not an original rudiment – as in invented by the Swiss or developed early in the 16^th century – but rather was invented by the English.

A comparison of American Revolutionary War-era and 1812-era drum manuals demonstrates that the English and American use of paradiddles are nearly identical and equally complex. This suggests that the English were utilizing paradiddles by the mid-1700s at the latest, when American and English drummers were last significantly connected. Because of the complexity and number of paradiddles in this style, the English almost certainly invented or incorporated the paradiddle into their repertoire by the early 1700s, but probably much earlier. Holme (1688) might confirm this when he gives a list of rudiments employed by drummers:

The maner of which beatings is performed by single and double, quick and slow, down right and rowling blows, for which they have these terms. A Roofe. A Rowle. A right and left. A Flam. A Dragge. An Almon rowle. A Diddle, and Pou, Rou, tou, poung.

Holme (qtd. in Gauthreaux 48)

Holme here mentions the “diddle”. It’s unclear whether this implies a modern paradiddle (R-L-R-R, and reverse) or simply the double stroke (R-R or L-L). Even still, this confirms the English have a precursor to the Paradiddle in their repertoire by the 1680s.

In the British and American styles, duty calls do not utilize paradiddles until the mid-19^th century. Instead, they appear solely in marches and quicksteps. In 18^th century drum manuals and most early-19^th century drum beatings, paradiddles tend to be paired. Several of Rumrille’s beatings are the first to incorporate one single paradiddle, which probably serves as a precursor to the invention of the Flamacue.

Performing Early Paradiddles:

In the modern context, Single Paradiddles are performed with a strong accent on the first stroke only. Historically, however, paradiddles of all kinds are described as being performed with two heavy accents, with the “diddle” being soft.

Hazeltine (1810), Ashworth (1812), Potter (British; 1815), Rumrille (1817), and Robinson (1818) all make this note and it is suggested in Lovering (1819). The same accent pattern continues in Klinehanse (1853), Nevins (1861), and Howe (1862). Hart (1862) or Keach, Burditt, & Cassidy (1861) do not depict the older accenting pattern. Bruce & Emmett (1862) and Strube (1869) only accent the first note.

B&E are the first to introduce the “Flamamacue”, or Flamacue, which likely evolved from the older flamadiddle accenting.

Single Paradiddle in French Music:

Earlier French resources refer to three or four categories of strokes. Mersenne implies that the use of Single Strokes (Bâton rond or Frisé), Double Strokes (Bâton rompu), Mixed Strokes (Bâton Méle) and the flam are all that is necessary to beat the drum (556). Most likely, he means to imply that these four terms are categories of rudiments, under which the different rolls, flam movements, etc., come together to form the different beatings. Unfortunately, Mersenne doesn’t elaborate on the many ways these categories can be performed.

Bâton rond and Bâton rompu are fairly self-explanatory, but the exact meaning of Bâton Méle, in terms of French rudiments, is unclear. The vague description – mixed sticks, in which sometimes one plays singles strokes and sometimes double strokes – could imply a range of modern or extinct rudiments. There is a sort of modern rudiment that takes the name Bâton Méle, and perhaps this is what earlier resources meant by the term. It’s also possible that it refers to a wide range of Paradiddle movements.

evidence of single paradiddle in french music

The modern French style includes the Single Paradiddle, known as the Moulin, or mill. When exactly this rudiment comes into the French style is uncertain.

The first use of the term Moulin that I could find appears in Charles Gourdin’s Methode raisonnée pour l’enseignement du tambour et du clairon dans l’armée (c. 1910). In his manual, Single Paradiddles are not a major rudiment, as they are typically seen in American manuals, but rather are an optional embellishment. He explains:

“Certain drum exercises replace the Ra de 9 Détaillé by the so-called Mill Stroke [Moulin]. It is performed as follows: a stroke of the left hand, two from the right, and one from the left, one from the right, two from the left, and the last from the right.” –  “Certains tambours exercés remplacent le ra de neuf détaillé par le coup dit du moulin. Il se détaille de la manière suivante: un coup de baguette de la man gauche deux de la droite, un de la gauche, un de la droite, deux de la gauche, et le dernier de la droite.”

Gourdin, Methode raisonnée, 20

Thus we see that the French rudiment Ra de 9 Détaillé, which is the phrase “1e&a 2e&a 3” as double strokes, can be complicated with the mixture of single and double strokes that Paradiddles offer. This use does highly suggest that Paradiddles always occur as pairs and never as individual Paradiddles (R-L-R-R or L-R-L-L).

stylistic sticking differences

Also note the way the French descrie the sticking: L-R-R-L R-L-L-R.

In the American style, drummers think of rudiments beginning on the beat and lead off it. So the Americans perform Paradiddles: R-L-R-R L-R-L-L, in the rhythm 1e&a 2e&a. The next beat (‘3’) is some other rudiment or stroke.

In the French style, drummers think of rudiments leading to the beat. Thus, some rudiment ends on the beat (‘1’). The French therefore perform Paradiddles: L-R-R L-R-L-L R, in the rhythm e&a 2e&a 3. The paradiddles end on beat ‘3’, having followed some rudiment that ended on ‘1’.

Single Paradiddle in Swiss Music:

A study of Swiss ordonnances proves their military drumming lacked any paradiddles from 1728 into the 20th century.

This study included the following Swiss ordonnances: Verzeichnis derjenigen Ordonnanz-Streichen, nach welchen die Tambouren Teutsch- und Welschen Landes Bergebiets sich richten und selbigen Exercieren sollen (1728); Peter Stocker, Verzeichnis der Ordonnantz Steichen, darin die Tambouren überall solen underwiesen warden (1759); Tambour-Ordonnanz für die eidgenössischen Truppen (Zurich: 1845); Tambour-Ordonnanz für die Schweizerische Infanterie (Swiss Military, 1889); and Tambour-Ordonnanz für die Schweizerische Infanterie (Swiss Military, 1917).

Single Paradiddle in Basel Music:

According to Grieder, the Basel drummers incorporate the paradiddle from the French in the late 19th century, implying that the Swiss did not have a tradition of paradiddle rudiments (148). Unfortunately, Grieder does not offer evidence for this assumption.

The Basel style as two versions of the Single Paradiddle – the Moulin Simple 1 and the Moulin Simple 2.

Single Paradiddle in other European Music:

The Germans also do not have paradiddle rudiments in their repertoire. More research in this avenue is required.

For an overview of the German system, see: Galm, “A Study of the Rudiments Used in Foreign Military Drumming Styles,”11-12. For more details on the German system, see: Franz Kruger, Pauken und Kleine Trommel Schule (Berlin: Hinrichsen, [1951]). Additionally, for more on the earlier German / Prussian systems, see Winter, Kurze-Unweisung das Trommel-Spielen and Robert Kietzer, Trommel-Schule zum Selbstunterricht, Translated by Dr. Theod Baker (Chicago: Heinreich Zimmermann, 1891).

The Dutch also do not have paradiddle rudiments. More research in this avenue is required.

For an overview of the Dutch system, see: Galm, “A Study of the Rudiments Used in Foreign Military Drumming Styles,”12-14. For more details on the Dutch system, see: A van Veluwen, Tamboerschool (Wormerveer, Holland: Molenaar’s Muziek-centrale, n.d.) and M. Schneider and W.F. Sprink, Eenvoudige Leergang (Rotterdam: N.V. Konefa Muziekuitgaven, n.d.).

While not full, Pistofilo’s Italian and Spanish examples did not contain paradiddles (118-122), perhaps indicating that these styles also do not utilize the rudiment.

Final Notes on the Origin of Paradiddles:

My research suggests that very likely the English were the originators of the paradiddle. Today, the English, Scottish, and American styles all share a wealth of paradiddle-based rudiments, that can pretty much all trace their roots to the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

The Basel style now has some paradiddle rudiments, but as Grieder suggests these seem to be imported around the end of the 19^th century. Besides the Single Paradiddle and Double Paradiddle, most of their paradiddle movements are actually inversions or sticking that the American / British style wouldn’t consider a paradiddle. For example, the Moulin simple 2 is just an inverted paradiddle. The Moulin au Fla (Flammed Mill) is this inverted paradiddle but flammed. There is also a drag version, the Moulin au ras de 3 (Paradiddle with a drag).

The French appear to be the only other system with a firm history of paradiddles, but they also only use the Single Paradiddle and Double Paradiddle. Exactly when these rudiments come into the French style is unclear. Also unclear is the origin of their names.

Do you have any evidence or observations about when the Paradiddle enters the French style? Contact me or comment below.

---

More Info:

If you have any additional information on the origin or development of this rudiment (particularly in the French style), please contact me and share your resources. Or, comment below!