Just read the following on an my interweb travels:
Er, since when was editing to the beat passe? Look at any music video or sports montage etc and you'll find that cuts and transitions will tend to be on the beat. Of course, you won't edit on EVERY beat, and its also good to use edit using other aspects (this can admitidly render the best results).Peter May, who just released The Essential Digital Video Handbook, has this to say about editing on the beat:
There's an almost overpowering tendency to want to edit on beats. Try to resist. Edits on the beat emphasize the beat, drawing undue attention to the rhythm track. Edits on the beat can also seem unimaginative and predictable. Try to draw out other aspects of the music. Maybe you can edit on phrases or solos. Of course, editing on the beat can be a wonderful way to surprise viewers by establishing a pattern and then breaking it.
But to tell people to avoid editing on beats - well that's a bit wierd, isn't it? I know he's suggesting you should try and edit to other aspects, but you just know that the LAMO amongst his readers will think, "oh, I don't need to worry about cutting to the music, cos Mr May said so".
PEOPLE OF THE WORLD - there are NO hard and fast rules expect what looks good and what your client (or you intended audience) wants. To say that editing to the beat is unimaginative is a bit silly - and telling the beginner to edit to other aspects is a bit ambitious. It's perhaps better to get beginners to pick out the beats first, then try and edit to rifts etc once they get this right.
I'm not saying he's wrong, just that it's badly worded! Of course you don't always edit to the beat... but that's not to say you should never edit to a beat!
Hmm, now I'm not making myself clear!!!