Not to be confused with the modern Triple Paradiddle, the Treble Paradiddle is some kind of evolution of the Single Paradiddle.
Mentioned in a handful of American manuals, this rudiment is an interesting mystery. It may either be uniquely American or may have a particularly old history in English drumming.
The Treble Paradiddle’s exact performance is unknown, but here are a few possible interpretations:
The Treble Paradiddle in American Music:
Ashworth (1812) and Rumrille (1817) both name this extinct drum rudiment. Later, Klinehanse (1853) and Nevins (1862) also name it.
The rudiment appears in Bruce & Emmett (1862) as a “Compound Paradiddle”.
And in Hart (1862) as a “one Blow, a Five Roll and Two Half Blows” (12).
Hart seems to imply that, like the Double Paradiddle, the Treble Paradiddle is not often used. And B&E state that it is
“used in ‘fancy’ Quicksteps, and it is very necessary that the learner should practice them; as he advances, he will find them brought into use in various ‘side beat,’ in another portion of the book”
B&E (8)
While the other fancy rudiments he includes, such as the Dragadiddle No. 1, Dragadiddle No. 2, Flamadiddle-diddle, and a Ratamacue phrase, do appear later in the book, this Treble Paradiddle does not.
Without the Treble Paradiddle appearing in a period piece of music, we can’t know the actual rhythm of this rudiment.
Possible Performance of the Treble Paradiddle:
This rudiment is often interpreted as being a straight series of 16th notes, as seen in example #2 or in the standard beating for York Fusiliers.
In Ashworth, Rumrille, Klinehanse, and Nevins, the Treble Paradiddle is notated in the older style of up-down notation that contains no rhythmic information. This makes understanding their meaning quite difficult.
What I find curious about their notation is the use of the soft-hard strokes that appear to make a 5-stroke roll in the middle of the rudiment.
Hart might confirm this assumption when he refers to the rudiment as a stroke followed by a 5-stroke roll.
It’s possible that the rudiment is therefore a 5-stroke roll into a drag. Played this way, we’d get a drag-like rudiment played similar to the beginning of Three Camps. (See #3 in the example above.)
Do you have an interpretatin of the Treble Paradiddle that you’d like to share? Contact me or comment below.
The Treble Paradiddle in earlier British Music:
Based on my research into the English Foot March, I theorize that it is a roll-based rudiment as seen in example #3 and that it actually dates its history back into the 1500s.
You can read a much fuller discussion of this theory and research on the rudiments in the English Foot March.
In brief, the Douce MS (c. 1600-1650) describes a rudiment called the “Ruffe and half”. Douce defines a Half Ruffe as four strokes and a Whole Ruffe as five strokes, but then also includes the “Ruffe and half” as eight strokes. Presumably, the “Ruffe and half” is a Whole Ruffe into a Half Ruffe, such that the end of the Whole and beginning of the Half are the same, making eight strokes.
Since my research indicates that the Whole Ruffe is a 5-stroke roll and a Half Ruffe is a 4-stroke roll or a tap + drag, the “Ruffe and half” appears to be the same as Hart’s “one Blow, a Five Roll and Two Half Blows”.
While the Douce MS doesn’t provide rhythmic information, Charles I’s Warrant does. Combining the Warrant’s rhythm and Douce’s rudimental information, we can reconstruct a convincing translation of the English Foot March. This interpretation suggests that example #3 is the proper, or at least original, method of performing the Treble Paradiddle.
Also, since the Treble Paradiddle is used in the English March to create the most difficult variation on the Foot March’s core rhythm, we can see why the it is associated with advanced quicksteps and marches by the 19th century.
More Info:
If you have any additional information on the origin or development of this rudiment, please contact me and share your resources. Or, comment below!