more old time fiddle questions
Chris Haigh
Thanks everyone for the great response to my questions. Anyone got answers
to any of these?
- Do any of the tunings have special names? (I seem to remember someone
talking about a Å‚sawmill tuningË›. Someone else came up with Å‚Dead ManÄ…s
tuning!Ë› where does this amazing name come from and which tuning does it
refer to?
-What is meant by Å‚beating the stringsË› Is it where someone hammers on the
fiddle strings with little sticks while someone else is playing? Is it
mainly something for children or does it have a serious part in the
tradition?
-Who wrote Wednesday Night waltz and Midnight on the Water?
-Is it common for OT fiddlers these days to play with the fiddle down on the
chest?
-Would I be right in thinking that John Hartford is the top professional
old-time fiddler today-or is there anyone else youÄ…d put before him?
-Who wrote Midnight on the Water? was it Benny ThomassonÄ…s brother?
-Would I be right in thinking that, as with Irish tunes, there are countless
different versions of every named tune, and just as many names for any one
tune?
-I believe there used to be a tradition of fiddlers backing political
campaigns- playing at rallies and so on- are there any examples of this
happening these days?
-what are the top old time festivals?
Many thanks,
Chris Haigh
tony goldenberg
to some festivals this summer.....
If my arms were longer i would play low on my chest. Its bad technic if you
want to play in higher positions but easier on the neck.I would think it
would be easier to sing and play with the fiddle low.
Emil Faug
questions, without which you'd get right to what you want to know a bit
quicker. And that is the understandable but mistaken idea that there exists
in the USA a unified monolithic old time music culture with standard
terminology and maybe some uniform doctrine. But there ain't no such thing.
In fact if the opportunity presented itself I doubt many would want to
agree. The chaos is prized. There's unity there anyway.
Tuning names are generally derived from the name of a tune that is played in
that tuning. "sawmill and deadman's" are in my perhaps limited experience
names of banjo tunings. "Sawmill " seems to be used for practically any
(banjo) tuning. By different people. More prized chaos.
beatingrhythm on fiddle strings with sticks or straws, knitting needles etc.
is venerable, good music, not childish
midnight on the water was composed by Benny Thomassen's father. It may
contain phrases from older tunes.
Some play with the fiddle lowered, but not many and not too low. Not like
in hillbilly and western movies. It'd be hard on the right shoulder to play
a dance like that.
There are as many good versions of a given tune as there are good fiddlers.
Not nearly so many names though
Presidential pre-candidate Al Gore's father was a fiddler. "Fiddling Al
Gore". From Tennesseee. Young Al's not exploiting that fact however, the
idiot! IT just might cost him the nomination.
"top" in what sense? Most Highly attended? best local music? most rained
upon?
Kerry Blech
Chris Haigh wrote:
>
> -What is meant by Å‚beating the stringsË› Is it where someone hammers on the
> fiddle strings with little sticks while someone else is playing? Is it
> mainly something for children or does it have a serious part in the
> tradition?
Sometimes called "beating the straws," it was used to provide rhythmic
accompaniment
to the fiddle. Volume One of the Rounder Kentucky Old-Time fiddle
anthology
has a photo of Alva Greene fiddling with his neighbor (Francis Gillum?)
beating
straws, though when they recorded that practice, Francis beat the straws
on
a second fiddle, tuned like Alva's. I've mostly seen adults doing the
beating.
This owuld include Mike Seeger beating the strings while Dewey Balfa
fiddled
"Devil on a Stump/Stomp" at the National Folk Festival.
> -Who wrote Wednesday Night waltz and Midnight on the Water?
I have never seen a composer credit for WNW, other than Don Messer's
claim
(as he seemed to do with every tune he learned from elsewhere. Midnight
On the
Water is attributed to Luke Thomasson, Benny's Dad. One line of lore has
it that he reworked "Old Paint" to create MOTW.
>
> -Is it common for OT fiddlers these days to play with the fiddle down on the
> chest?
I know a lot who do, but "common" is a pretty relative term.
>
> -Would I be right in thinking that John Hartford is the top professional
> old-time fiddler today-or is there anyone else youÄ…d put before him?
There are so many different styles and approaches to old-time fiddling
that I'd be hesitant to rank them. Apples, oranges, starfruit,
rutabagas...
And personally I do not think of John Harford as an old-time fiddler. I
think of him as a bluegrass fiddler, banjoist, and professional
entertainer who
happens to play some old-time tunes (not necessarily in an old-time
style,
though he sometimes does so). Just my two cents' worth.
> -Would I be right in thinking that, as with Irish tunes, there are countless
> different versions of every named tune, and just as many names for any one
> tune?
That is a pretty absolute statement. I think some named Irish tunes
(sorry
for going off-topic here, as this is an old-time newsgroup) have one
version
and some tunes have only one name. Such as those composed by Ed Reavy.
Quite
a lot of Reavy's compositions are now being distributed in ABC format
on the Fiddle-L listerv, by the way.
> -I believe there used to be a tradition of fiddlers backing political
> campaigns- playing at rallies and so on- are there any examples of this
> happening these days?
Other than Senator Robert Byrd, thankfully not, as far as I know.
Possibly the
most fascinating example of this were the Taylor brothers of Tennessee
who
both fiddled and both ran goober-natorial campaigns featuring and
flaunting
their rival politics and fiddling. I seem to recall an entire book
dedicated to them, but can't recall its title. Fiddlin' Wolf ran for
governor of Alaska about 15 years ago (I still have my t-shirt). I
pondered
moving there so I could vote early and often for him. We did share
a few anchovie pizzas with him over the years, though.
> -what are the top old time festivals?
White Top, Cliff Top, umm, can't think of any more with "top" in
their names.
That's all I have (a sigh of relief hits cyberspace....)
Kerry
--
Blec...@WolfeNet.com
"When you get above the clouds, you can do just as you choose."
- The Rector Trio, Asheville, NC 1930
GARELICK
featured the Light Crust Doughboys from Ft. Worth, Texas, whose leader, W. Lee
O'Daniels, later became Governor of Texas. Governor Jimmy Davis of Louisiana
used a lot of musicians in his campaigns, including pianist Moon Mullican.
Davis was famous for the song "You are my Sunshine." Aside from those
examples, I can't think of any current politicians using fiddlers or any other
musicians in their campaigns. And personally, I don't know any fiddlers who
would work for either George W. Bush or Al Gore. Of course, I wonder how much
they pay :)
GUS GARELICK
Library Guy
to anything in particular that has been said.
But, I'd like to recommend a quirky but interesting book I found in a
used book store:
Fiddle and Bow, by Robert Taylor, Jr., is a 'historical' novel about
the careers of Fiddlin' Alf Taylor, one-time governor of Tennessee,
and his brother, "Our Bob" Taylor, who was three-times governor.
=============================
Frank Dalton, Library Guy
=============================
Mike Schway
gare...@aol.com (GARELICK) wrote:
I've seen video bites of Sen Robert Byrd playing fiddle during a
campaign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Schway | [Picture your favorite quote here]
msc...@nas.com |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
GNelson700
>campaign.
My brother has a copy of Sen. Byrd's (vinyl) LP. If I remember it wasn't half
bad. I wonder if it's still available (Elderly..Countysales)?
nelson
Joel Shimberg
>In re fiddlers and political campaings: the beginnings of Western Swing
>featured the Light Crust Doughboys from Ft. Worth, Texas, whose leader, W. Lee
>O'Daniels, later became Governor of Texas. Governor Jimmy Davis of Louisiana
>used a lot of musicians in his campaigns, including pianist Moon Mullican.
>Davis was famous for the song "You are my Sunshine." Aside from those
>examples, I can't think of any current politicians using fiddlers or any other
>musicians in their campaigns. And personally, I don't know any fiddlers who
>would work for either George W. Bush or Al Gore. Of course, I wonder how much
>they pay :)
>
>GUS GARELICK
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the political ambitions, some
years ago, of Roy Acuff, who started his professional life as a fiddler.
Joel Shimberg
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Mike Schway
gnels...@aol.com (GNelson700) wrote:
Being a Democrat from WVA, I wonder if he played "Redbird". <ducking and
covering>
(Before you send out the flamethrowers, I may be right occasionally, but
never ON the right)
Steve Goldfield
Library Guy <dal...@vet.upenn.edu> wrote:
#>I haven't been following this thread, so I don't know if this applies
#>to anything in particular that has been said.
#>
#>But, I'd like to recommend a quirky but interesting book I found in a
#>used book store:
#>
#>Fiddle and Bow, by Robert Taylor, Jr., is a 'historical' novel about
#>the careers of Fiddlin' Alf Taylor, one-time governor of Tennessee,
#>and his brother, "Our Bob" Taylor, who was three-times governor.
#>=============================
#> Frank Dalton, Library Guy
#>=============================
I haven't read the book, but one interesting thing about these
fellows is that Bob (I thought he was called "Streaking Bob"
after a tune he played which was renamed "Bob Taylor's March")
was a Democrat and Alf a Republican. They ran against each
other, were living in the same house, and Bob won. Charlie
Acuff tells that story.
Steve
(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>
-------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Goldfield <stev...@best.com> * Oakland, California
* Home Page--<http://www.best.com/~stevesag/stevesag.html> *
Peter S. Shenkin
GARELICK <gare...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000224131559...@ng-fo1.aol.com...
> ...And personally, I don't know any fiddlers who
> would work for either George W. Bush or Al Gore...
What about Al Gore, Sr.? (Well, I guess you don't
know him, and he's dead, anyway. :-) )
-P.
Mike Murray
"Kerry Blech" <Blec...@Wolfenet.com> wrote in message
news:38B3F509...@Wolfenet.com...
>
> And personally I do not think of John Harford as an old-time fiddler. I
> think of him as a bluegrass fiddler, banjoist, and professional
> entertainer who
> happens to play some old-time tunes (not necessarily in an old-time
> style,
> though he sometimes does so). Just my two cents' worth.
Kerry, IMHO, Hartford's last few albums ("The Fun of Open Discussion", "Wild
Hog in the Red Brush", the Ed Haley album, the recent "Good Old Boys" album,
etc.), don't come close to bluegrass. It seems to me that, in the last few
years anyway, Hartford's been deliberately placing himself in the old time
genre, rather than bluegrass or country. He may sometimes stretch the
envelope a bit, but if you don't call this stuff "old time", what would you
call it?
Jon Pankake
Mike Murray wrote:
> It seems to me that, in the last few
> years anyway, Hartford's been deliberately placing himself in the old time
> genre, rather than bluegrass or country. He may sometimes stretch the
> envelope a bit, but if you don't call this stuff "old time", what would you
> call it?
Retrograss?
Kerry Blech
Mike Murray wrote:
> Kerry, IMHO, Hartford's last few albums ("The Fun of Open Discussion", "Wild
> Hog in the Red Brush", the Ed Haley album, the recent "Good Old Boys" album,
> etc.), don't come close to bluegrass. It seems to me that, in the last few
I'd agree that much of his recent recorded work is not bluegrass, but
it most of it is not "old-time" either, by my interpretation. Like
most of what he's played through his career, it simply is John's
personal music, influenced by whatever has interested him at that
time -- lately, that has been Ed Haley (see current issue of
Smithsonian Magazine for instance, about John's hiring of the
pathologist from the Smithsonian to exhume Milt Haley's body
[Ed's Dad] at Hart's Creek). John is pretty unique, and often
tickles my interest, but especially my funny bone, as he is
immensely funny. His concert in Seattle last July was heavily-laden
with bluegrass, nicely done, also lots of original stuff, and
a few pieces leaning towards old-time music -- and he brought Lee
Stripling up on stage from the audience to play a couple numbers,
nice touch.
Later
kerry
David Lynch
<mmur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> Kerry, IMHO, Hartford's last few albums ("The Fun of Open Discussion", "Wild
> Hog in the Red Brush", the Ed Haley album, the recent "Good Old Boys" album,
> etc.), don't come close to bluegrass. It seems to me that, in the last few
> years anyway, Hartford's been deliberately placing himself in the old time
> genre, rather than bluegrass or country. He may sometimes stretch the
> envelope a bit, but if you don't call this stuff "old time", what would you
> call it?
I'm going to butt in here, as Kerry and I are of a like mind regarding
John Hartford. I want to add that I consider Hartford to be a Nashville
Performer above all. Mind you, he excels at what he does - and I freely
admit that Hartford is ten times the musician I am, but to me his music
quite a departure from traditional old-time music.
I think the operative word here is "performer". Performers have honed
quite a bit of stage craft. John has his own way of crafting a tune to
"sell" certain notes and phrases in a tune, and enhances the sell with
his body posture. He employs lots of musical "hooks" and arrangements
to liven up a tune and make it more entertaining, much to the delight
of his audiences
To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
music is restraint. Old-Time music is very simple, and when it's
"fancied up", I think it loses it's authentic sound.
Changing the tunes is a double edged sword: Hartford's interpretations
of old-time probably makes them more palatable and enjoyable to a
modern audience, but these rearrangements transform the music into
something quite different than it would have sounded when played in its
heyday.
I personally prefer old-time musicians who strive for the more
authentic sound. I freely admit that my fiddling is subject to many
influences which are a product of living in this modern environment - I
realize that my fiddling will never sound purely as if it were played
100 years ago, but I listen to early recordings almost exclusively, and
try and keep their old sound in my ears so that any variations as a
result of my personal interpretations are steered closer to that
80-years-ago sound.
Hartford deliberately recrafts the tunes for his performing of them.
I'm fine with that, as long as what he does is represented as such, and
not as the authentic sound of yesteryear.
There's a place for both styles. I think modern audiences might respond
more favorably to Hartford's music than to mine, since it's tailored
toward the more familiar performer-spectator arena. Hartford might
kindle some interest for folks who have never heard the old tunes which
they might otherwise miss if they heard my simpler, more purist
representation of the music.
Bill Richardson
Why doesn't he shuffle any, I asked. His reply was that he plays the tunes as he
hears them. When you think about it, that is exactly the way any other fiddler
plays his tunes.
I've been listening to Wild Hog in the Red Brush and I definitely think it is
old-time. Very smooth and polished also, but still old-time.
Perhaps you would not call Ed Haley old-time either, since he has such a
non-standard backup? But he was playing it as he heard it and his wife was
playing the mandolin the way he wanted to hear it
Bill Richardson
Blacksburg, Va
Steve Goldfield
David Lynch <dly...@mindspring.com> wrote:
#>In article <ZXwv4.46$d33....@news.uswest.net>, Mike Murray
#><mmur...@uswest.net> wrote:
#>
#>> Kerry, IMHO, Hartford's last few albums ("The Fun of Open Discussion", "Wild
#>> Hog in the Red Brush", the Ed Haley album, the recent "Good Old Boys" album,
#>> etc.), don't come close to bluegrass. It seems to me that, in the last few
#>> years anyway, Hartford's been deliberately placing himself in the old time
#>> genre, rather than bluegrass or country. He may sometimes stretch the
#>> envelope a bit, but if you don't call this stuff "old time", what would you
#>> call it?
#>
#>I'm going to butt in here, as Kerry and I are of a like mind regarding
#>John Hartford. I want to add that I consider Hartford to be a Nashville
#>Performer above all. Mind you, he excels at what he does - and I freely
#>admit that Hartford is ten times the musician I am, but to me his music
#>quite a departure from traditional old-time music.
#>
#>I think the operative word here is "performer". Performers have honed
#>quite a bit of stage craft. John has his own way of crafting a tune to
#>"sell" certain notes and phrases in a tune, and enhances the sell with
#>his body posture. He employs lots of musical "hooks" and arrangements
#>to liven up a tune and make it more entertaining, much to the delight
#>of his audiences
#>
#>To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
#>music is restraint. Old-Time music is very simple, and when it's
#>"fancied up", I think it loses it's authentic sound.
#>
#>Changing the tunes is a double edged sword: Hartford's interpretations
#>of old-time probably makes them more palatable and enjoyable to a
#>modern audience, but these rearrangements transform the music into
#>something quite different than it would have sounded when played in its
#>heyday.
#>
#>I personally prefer old-time musicians who strive for the more
#>authentic sound. I freely admit that my fiddling is subject to many
#>influences which are a product of living in this modern environment - I
#>realize that my fiddling will never sound purely as if it were played
#>100 years ago, but I listen to early recordings almost exclusively, and
#>try and keep their old sound in my ears so that any variations as a
#>result of my personal interpretations are steered closer to that
#>80-years-ago sound.
#>
#>Hartford deliberately recrafts the tunes for his performing of them.
#>I'm fine with that, as long as what he does is represented as such, and
#>not as the authentic sound of yesteryear.
#>
#>There's a place for both styles. I think modern audiences might respond
#>more favorably to Hartford's music than to mine, since it's tailored
#>toward the more familiar performer-spectator arena. Hartford might
#>kindle some interest for folks who have never heard the old tunes which
#>they might otherwise miss if they heard my simpler, more purist
#>representation of the music.
I agree with much of what Kerry and David have said; however,
I thought that Hartford's fiddling on Retrograss (maybe
because of Mike Seeger's influence ?) was closer to old-time
than anything else I've heard him do. Perhaps in the context
of weaving music with two other equally prominent performers,
Hartford did a better job of achieving the restraint that
David advocates.
That said, I have reviewed a number of Hartford's projects
and usually recommend them for Hartford fans more than for
people who want more or less unvarnished old-time music.
Hartford's recording of Ed Haley tunes, for example, is
99% Hartford and at most 1% Haley. If I evaluate it as
an attempt to play the Haley tunes, I have to rate it
as a failure. But if I evaluate it as Hartford playing
his own material inspired by Haley, then it is more
successful. Since the latter is what he was apparently
trying to do, I evaluate it that way.
Charley Pennell
fiddle music, entertainers in one form or the other? Certainly many of
them now considered beacons of our genre were involved with contest
fiddling and commercial recording, traded tunes and styles with their
contemporaries and looked for that unique style, repertoire, and
personality that would get them hired, recorded and admired. I doubt
that Hartford is any more idiosyncratic for his day than Doc Roberts,
Eck Robertson, the Striplings, Ed Haley, Clayton McMichen, or even John
Salyer were in theirs. Or more recent folks like Franklin George, Ralph
Blizard, or J.P. Fraley for that matter. Even fiddlers like Snake
Chapman and Benton Flippen have used bluegrass backup from time to time,
while discussions here have admitted to the broad knowledge OT fiddlers
have of the repertoires of commercial greats like Tommy Jackson and
Arthur Smith. In other words, there is no purity within this genre
anymore than there is in blues, jazz, bluegrass, or even hip-hop. Just
like Hartford, we all play what appeals to our hearts and comes out our
fingers, even if we don't make up nonsense rhymes to go along with it!
_______________________________________________________________________
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Charley Pennell mailto:cpen...@unity.ncsu.edu
Head, Cataloging Department voice: (919)515-2743
NCSU Libraries, Box 7111 fax: (919)515-7292
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-7111
Adjunct Librarian, Memorial University of Newfoundland
World Wide Web: http://sicbuddy.library.mun.ca/~charl8P9/chuckhome.html
Cataloguer's Toolbox: http://www.mun.ca/library/cat/
_______________________________________________________________________
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
kel...@usit.net
Bob Carlin knee to knee at a midnight jam session at Merlefest. They
played for several hours and if they werent playing old time music
they certainly fooled me. I grew up around fiddlers such as Ralph
Blizzard, Guy Jeffers... so I had heard a few oldtime tunes prior to
their jam. :))
Tom
Robert Palasek
>
> Mike Murray wrote:
>
> > It seems to me that, in the last few
>
> Retrograss?
Retrograss.
On a lark, I chose that one as a premium for a pledge drive. Grisman,
Hartford, and Mike Seeger. Interesting, but I haven't found myself
going back to it for a third listen.
He did a tune there under the pretext: "Just suppose we are playing
music in a pre-bluegrass style, how then would Monroe's
Jerusalem Ridge come out? Well, the A minor would be an
A major, and it would sound like this." And then he plays his
concoction. And it sounds a lot like Hartford's version of
GrandMammy Look at Uncle Sam. Leading this listener to wonder
if Grandmammy Look at Uncle Sam was a conscious or unconscious
influence in Monroe's writing Jerusalem Ridge.
I do not take issue with anything Kerry Blech or David Lynch wrote
about Hartford's not being old time in the same vein that they
understand and love old time.
But as I listen to Dave Macon on Spud Mountain or Appalachian OT
Throwdown, I cannot see how Hartford is any less old time than
the Dixie Dewdrop. Maybe folks that know Macon's material better
could point out differences.
It has been my guess (and this is just speculation on my part) that
Hartford's recent (in his lifetime) pursuit of the music of eastern
Kentucky revealed Monroe's bluegrass precedents. I recently described
Monroe's "Uncle Pen" album, one of my favorites from the '70s where
the cuts were all fiddle tunes that Bill had learned from his uncle
Pen and that he had Kenny Baker play, I said that "that album presaged
the great Ed Haley albums of the mid 90's" <g>. Good melodies. Fine
rhythm but not strongly bluesy. It is conceivable to me that
Monroe could have heard Haley and have been influenced by him.
In the same vein, one wonders whether the Shepherd brothers
were a source of inspiration for Monroe.
Bob
= == === ===== ======== ============= =====================
The Martins
fiddler Charlie Acuff. Hartford's banjo accompaniment was anything but
restrained. I liken it to the court jester leaping and bounding about the
room while the king ignores him and plays the fiddle. On second and third
listening I grew to like a lot of what Hartford was doing, but I had to
mental tune out the fiddling because the two musical happenings had so
little in common. I like Hartford's banjo playing but I just can't figure
out why he was doing what he was doing to Charlie's great oldtime tunes.
Bill Martin
GNelson700
>if Grandmammy Look at Uncle Sam was a conscious or unconscious
>influence in Monroe's writing Jerusalem Ridge.
Bill may have recieved authorship for publishing and royalty purposes, but I
had always heard that Jerusalem Ridge was written by Kenny Baker. Does anyone
know for sure??
Duc de Savoie
thousands of people, self included, to an appreciation of folk music in its
more traditional setting. For those who preferred to stick with that
popular-consumption packaging I have respect. But when I really got into the
music in its traditional, authentic setting, I found I didn't like the KT so
much any more. I have been with the old-timey music since 1961, so I'm pretty
much committed to it for life. John Hartford is a wonderful musician and can
play authentic old-timey when he feels like it, which isn't most of the time.
But if he leads other people to the headier brew, great. If there are those
who prefer theirs mixed with water, that's fine too. Music is nothing if not
an individual preference, and as the Romans said, de gustibus non est
disputandum.
Mike Murray
>
> I think the operative word here is "performer". Performers have honed
>
> To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
>
So where would this leave Uncle Dave, or the Skillet Lickers ?
David Lynch
<bill...@vt.edu> wrote:
> Perhaps you would not call Ed Haley old-time either, since he has such a
> non-standard backup? But he was playing it as he heard it and his wife was
> playing the mandolin the way he wanted to hear it
Bill, I'd call Ed Haley an old-time fiddler. But you have to admit,
Haley changed the tunes to make it difficult if not impossible for
other fiddlers to match him.
I figured I'd be opening a can of worms here. Please keep in mind that
everything I'm saying is merely my opinion and perspective, no more, no
less.
I'm not saying there's isn't room for individuality in old-time music.
In fact, we wouldn't have old-time music if individuals hadn't
reinterpreted the music of Scotland/Ireland and flavored it with
African influences.
However, some peoples' interpretations depart more drastically from
previous sources than others. You can listen to an old 78 of William
Harris and then listen to Led Zeppelin and find the similarites, but I
wouldn't call what Led Zeppelin plays the Delta Blues.
When Kerry Blech or Pat Conte play a tune they've learned from an old
78, they probably aren't duplicating the original note for note (though
I'll bet they can). They're intentionally not straying very far - and
more importantly, any deviations from the original adhere more closely
in phrasing, texture, etc. to what would have been played 150 years
ago. That's how they choose to play.
I think it's more than that Hartford hears things differently - it
sounds to me like Hartford is intentionally strays from the original
recoridngs and rearranging tunes to make them his own. I liken that to
David Grisman's crafting of a traditional tune, and in my opinion, it
should be recategorized as something other than authentic old-time
music. It's not bad, just different.
I guess it's all a question of degrees - how much deviation should be
considered before a new genre is created? 40%? 60%? That's always going
to be a matter of opinion.
And true, Uncle Dave and The Skillet Lickers played a different
sub-style of old-time than did Eddon Hammons or Emmett Lundy. I think
these sub-styles diverged less from each other 70 years ago because of
their era. The modern era provides us with more diversity of influences
and therefore the ability to depart even further from the way music was
played 100 years ago.
kel...@usit.net
In answer to my own post...I should point out that I am not nor have I
ever been a strict tradionalist so I may see and hear things a tad
differently.
>
>Tom
>
Jack Fontanella
<mmur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> "David Lynch" wrote
> >
> > ...John has his own way of crafting a tune to "sell" certain notes and phrases in a tune, and enhances the sell with
> > his body posture. He employs lots of musical "hooks" and arrangements
> > to liven up a tune and make it more entertaining, much to the delight
> > of his audiences
> >
> > To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
> > music is restraint. Old-Time music is very simple, and when it's
> > "fancied up", I think it loses it's authentic sound.
> >
>
> So where would this leave Uncle Dave, or the Skillet Lickers ?
My thoughts exactly Mike.
Joe Cline
>Bill may have recieved authorship for publishing and royalty purposes, but I
>had always heard that Jerusalem Ridge was written by Kenny Baker. Does anyone
>know for sure??
This is discussed from time to time over on Bgrass-L.
Kenny was part of an oral history session a few years back at IBMA,
and told it thus: The BGBoys were in Ashland, Ky. back in the
mid-seventies, and Bill called Kenny to his hotel room to bounce some
ideas back and forth. Kenny very definitely had an influence on the
tune as and editor of sorts, but he says that the musical ideas were
all Bill's.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe Cline ( Mand...@hotmail.com )
Charlotte
Practice safe eating -- always use a condiment
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe Cline
wrote:
>I recently described
>Monroe's "Uncle Pen" album, one of my favorites from the '70s where
>the cuts were all fiddle tunes that Bill had learned from his uncle
>Pen and that he had Kenny Baker play, I said that "that album presaged
>the great Ed Haley albums of the mid 90's" <g>. Good melodies. Fine
>rhythm but not strongly bluesy. It is conceivable to me that
>Monroe could have heard Haley and have been influenced by him.
Would this be possible? Ed Haley was a product of extreme eastern Ky,
and Monroe was raised in equally extreme western Ky.
Steve Goldfield
widely, and Haley lived into the fifties. So it
is possible that they met. But it probably would
have been after his style was formed.
Steve
In article <iim2csclokfmsmt78...@4ax.com>, Joe Cline
<Mand...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
#On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 05:05:58 GMT, Robert Palasek <bobpa...@home.com>
#wrote:
#
#>I recently described
#>Monroe's "Uncle Pen" album, one of my favorites from the '70s where
#>the cuts were all fiddle tunes that Bill had learned from his uncle
#>Pen and that he had Kenny Baker play, I said that "that album presaged
#>the great Ed Haley albums of the mid 90's" <g>. Good melodies. Fine
#>rhythm but not strongly bluesy. It is conceivable to me that
#>Monroe could have heard Haley and have been influenced by him.
#
#Would this be possible? Ed Haley was a product of extreme eastern Ky,
#and Monroe was raised in equally extreme western Ky.
#
#~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#Joe Cline ( Mand...@hotmail.com )
#Charlotte
#
#Practice safe eating -- always use a condiment
#~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8
Steve Goldfield Oakland, CA stev...@best.com
http://www.best.com/~stevesag/otfaq.html
Lyle Lofgren
wrote:
>"David Lynch" wrote
>>
>> I think the operative word here is "performer". Performers have honed
>> quite a bit of stage craft. John has his own way of crafting a tune to
>> "sell" certain notes and phrases in a tune, and enhances the sell with
>> his body posture. He employs lots of musical "hooks" and arrangements
>> to liven up a tune and make it more entertaining, much to the delight
>> of his audiences
>>
>> To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
>> music is restraint. Old-Time music is very simple, and when it's
>> "fancied up", I think it loses it's authentic sound.
>>
>
>So where would this leave Uncle Dave, or the Skillet Lickers ?
The same place they always were, part of a pantheon of entertainers
who were also innovators within the tradition (and any tradition
involves restraints -- that's essential to what makes up a
tradition). I believe if all that had ever been recorded of old-time
music were pieces by those introverted musicians who played or sang
without actively "selling" the music (say B.F. Shelton or Uncle Jimmy
Thompson, although many of the great musicians recorded for the
Library Of Congress could also be mentioned), the music would have
died out, because the 1920's boom in recordings of old-time music
wouldn't have happened for lack of record buyers, and most of us
would have never heard the old stuff. Even with the existence of the
Folkways Anthology and other re-releases, I would never have
discovered the music if I hadn't attended (more or less at random) a
Pete Seeger concert in 1957. Seeger and Hartford both "sell" the
audience during their performances, although not for pecuniary gain.
They were / are gateway performers (the equivalent of Gateway Drugs)
which are accessible enough to get your attention, and can lead you to
the real thing, if you only follow your ears. The Limelighters or the
Kingston Trio could have done the same thing, but, to go back to the
Gateway Drug analogy, they were more like the wild hemp that still
grows in the Minnesota River Valley nearby, left over from rope
farming earlier in the century: capable of producing a headache, but
not a thrill.
James Whitesell
made me wonder where their music came from. They were indeed a personal
gateway into Old Time music. And I'm also wondering how performing can be
divorced from Old Time music. Isn't that a large part--entertaining-- of
what it was/is about?
Robert Palasek
>
> Robert Palasek wrote:
>
> > It is conceivable to me that
>
>
after his parents died when he was 10. So the influences of uncle
Pen and Arnold Schultz were probably complete by then.
And Hartford wrote that Haley
did not apparently travel very far west in Kentucky. At least,
Hartford wrote, no one from Winchester remembered him. Winchester is
near Lexington, still 140 miles east of Rosine, Monroe's birthplace.
So how would this be possible? Monroe spent at least half his
professional life on the road. And there were a good 25 years from
the time Monroe left Rosine until the time Haley quit playing. Monroe
was a working musician for probably 15 of those years. Good
musicians tend to not just wait for folk process osmosis, but
seek and find good musicians to understand and to share.
So to use a tested Minnesota rhetorical paradigm: If Monroe
traveled, it's likely that he traveled to eastern Kentucky.
And if he traveled to eastern Kentucky, and he
sought to find out about good musicians, then he likely heard
of Ed Haley. And if Haley had renown, Monroe would have
been interested in hearing him. And if Haley was really good,
Monroe would have been affected.
Was Charles Wolfe working on a biography of Monroe? Did it
come out?
Bob
= == === ===== ======== ============= =====================
Some of you may know this other poem from Space Child's Mother
Goose that goes:
This is the theory that Jack built . . . .
Lyle Lofgren
As far as the musicians who made recordings, or at least more than one
recording, that's true. But some of the roots of the music, at least
from a romanticist's viewpoint, involves a back-porch musician with
no-one to entertain except maybe the neighbors across the holler who
can hear him on still nights. As to the relationship of the romantic
view to reality, of course, that's why society supports colleges who
support PhD candidates who write theses.
Jim Nelson
> ... So how would this be possible? Monroe spent at least half his
> professional life on the road. And there were a good 25 years from
> the time Monroe left Rosine until the time Haley quit playing. Monroe
> was a working musician for probably 15 of those years. Good
> musicians tend to not just wait for folk process osmosis, but
> seek and find good musicians to understand and to share.
>
> So to use a tested Minnesota rhetorical paradigm: If Monroe
> traveled, it's likely that he traveled to eastern Kentucky...
Monroe went north to Indiana when he about 16 or 17, and stayed there for
several years. His first professional touring work was as an exhibition
square dancer on the WLS Barn Dance road show. These shows travelled
through IL, IN, parts of Wisconsin, and perhaps Iowa. From Hammond
Indiana, Bill and Charlie went to Shenandoah, Iowa to play as a duet. From
there, I believe they went to Charlotte, NC, where they played on the radio
and locally. I don't know for sure, but I doubt if they spent much time in
eastern KY. After the brothers split, Bill went to Arkansas, and then to
Atlanta, GA. From there he went to Nashville, where he lived for the
remainder of his life. He did travel constantly, but there's absolutely no
evidence I know of that he met or hung out with Haley, despite what we
might want to believe. I think his primary musical influences came from
within his own family, the great guitarist/fiddler Arnold Schulz, 78
records, and musicians he worked with at WLS.
Jim Nelson
Jim Nelson
> I'm going to butt in here, as Kerry and I are of a like mind regarding
> John Hartford. I want to add that I consider Hartford to be a Nashville
> Performer above all.
Please explain yourself further. Uncle Dave Macon was a Nashville performer above
all else. So was Humphery Bate, Sam and Kirk McGee, the Binkley Brothers, the
Fruit Jar Drinkers, etc.
> I think the operative word here is "performer". Performers have honed
> quite a bit of stage craft. John has his own way of crafting a tune to
> "sell" certain notes and phrases in a tune, and enhances the sell with
> his body posture. He employs lots of musical "hooks" and arrangements
> to liven up a tune and make it more entertaining, much to the delight
> of his audiences
>
> To me, one of the most challenging aspects of traditional old-time
> music is restraint. Old-Time music is very simple, and when it's
> "fancied up", I think it loses it's authentic sound.
Your opinion, David, but not necessarily the facts. I think some folks have this
romantic notion that old-time music was conjured up by a bunch of old guys who sat
out on the back (or front) porch playing Anglo/Irish/Scots fiddle tunes for
themselves, but never in public, when they weren't out behind their mules or out
making moonshine. These guys never would have anything to do with making any kind
of money from their music, because this music was pure and unsullied by any kind
of commercial endeavor, and that to do so would violate some sacred trust and thus
sacrifice its integrity.
Well it's ok to entertain romantic notions about the music we love, but we ought
to acknowledge the reality that the old-time music we love is part of a living
tradition that has always interacted and borrowed from various types of popular
music. It remains vibrant, for the most part, because several of its best
practitioners and their promoters in the 1920s and 30s saw it as a possible way to
make a livlihood. Even if they weren't successful, many of them left behind a
wonderful legacy via commercial recordings (emphasis on "commercial"), radio sound
checks and songbooks, all elements of mass communications and popular culture. I
also think this music existed and continues to so outside of the commercial arena,
but these two aspects of old-time music are not mutually exclusive. In fact,
they're probably interdependent.
> Changing the tunes is a double edged sword:
Changing the tunes is an inherent part of any musical tradition. Period.
> Hartford's interpretations of old-time probably makes them more palatable and
> enjoyable to a modern audience, but these rearrangements transform the music
> into something quite different than it would have sounded when played in its
> heyday.
True. And he'd probably be the first to acknowledge that. I also think he could
give a rat's behind whether or not some of us think his music is old-time,
authentic, etc. I do know that he has been hanging out and playing with old-time
fiddlers for over forty years. I had an opportunity to chat with him at length
about this and a bunch of other stuff just a couple weeks ago, and my admiration
for him has only increased. I don't always agree with his ideas about music, but
he is an artist, with his own particular vision. And in that way, he's not much
different than a lot of the "authentic" "old-time" folks that get raved about in
this forum. By the way, I've heard Hartford play note for note versions of tunes
he learned from Gene Goforth one minute and stuff that sounds like Benny Martin
the next. It all works for me.
You've used the word "authentic" to describe and differentiate the music you play
and hold dear from fiddle music as interpreted by Hartford. Though I think I know
what you're talking about, I'd like to hear exactly what you mean by "authentic."
I think this is a term that's getting thrown around so much that it may not have
much real meaning anymore, especially when used by folks trying to replicate
sounds on recordings by musicians whom they've never met, and who are now dead.
> There's a place for both styles. I think modern audiences might respond
> more favorably to Hartford's music than to mine, since it's tailored
> toward the more familiar performer-spectator arena. Hartford might
> kindle some interest for folks who have never heard the old tunes which
> they might otherwise miss if they heard my simpler, more purist
> representation of the music.
Truer words haves never been spoken. I wonder why we have to continue to
consciously see the two as being that different. What does it really accomplish?
Perhaps it's more a matter of taste and interests, than a matter of authenticity.
Jim Nelson
David Lynch
<nels...@law.wustl.edu> wrote:
Ah, Jim, I was wondering what took you so long to attack my opinion -
yet again. I can understand it in this forum, but you've even gone so
far as to criticize my opinion as posted in FIDDLE-L. Why are you, a
guitar player who flits between old-time, bluegrass and classic
country, taking the time to harangue me in a fiddle discussion group?
What's up with you?
> David Lynch wrote:
>
> > I'm going to butt in here, as Kerry and I are of a like mind regarding
> > John Hartford. I want to add that I consider Hartford to be a Nashville
> > Performer above all.
>
> Please explain yourself further.
I believe I already have. See my subsequent post in this thread.
I will repeat, however that I think the performers of the 20s and 30s
may have put their own "spin" on traditional music, but given the era,
that spin did not diverge dramatically from the main body of old-time.
In present day, we are bombarded by influences far removed from the
old-time music of 70-80 years ago, which gives us the potential to
distort the music to the point where it ceases to be of the same genre.
I have no illusions about some pure, romantic ideal with respect to
Old-Time Music. America is and was a melting pot. Nobody, not even the
most remote mountain musician, played in a complete vacuum without at
the very least encountering travelers who brought with them outside
influence. However, I question how much influence can be applied before
a style is distorted to the point where it ceases to be that style.
> Your opinion, David, but not necessarily the facts.
In all my posts, I have taken pains to clearly represent my posts as
being my opinion and nothing more. My sentences are peppered with
clauses like "it seems to me" and "I think". How did you miss that?
>I don't always agree with his [Hartford's] ideas about music,
> but he is an artist, with his own particular vision.
At no point have I questioned or criticized Hartford's musical genius.
But as you say, "his own particular vision" is so strong that *in my
opinion*, his music diverges dramatically from what *I consider* to be
old-time music. (Do the asterisks help, Jim?)
>I'd like to hear exactly what you mean by
> "authentic."
Spend some time listening to Pat Conte.
> Perhaps it's more a matter of taste and interests
No kidding. But Jim, why does my personal taste rile you so? You
protest as if I were representing my statements as being widely
accepted facts - once again, all I'm doing is voicing my opinion.
I like old-time music that more closely adheres to the sounds prevalent
in early-recorded music. You like Rhys Jones. We're just different,
Jim. Get over it.
Ericplatt
<>Why are you, a
>guitar player who flits between old-time, bluegrass and classic
>country, taking the time to harangue me in a fiddle discussion group?
>What's up with you?
Whoa now. Just a second here. I'm going to speak out of line. I'm going to
try not to flame Mr. Lynch, but at the same time, I feel that he has no right,
no matter what his standing in any sort of music community to act like his own
vision of music is more correct than someone else's because of the instrument
one chooses to play.
I play guitar. Mostly old time, although I have also been known to flirt with
bluegrass and old(er) country material. Earlier I did play other instruments
professionally, although not the guitar.
If you feel that a guitar player has no role in old time music, just say so. I
can then write you off as a crackpot.
It is statements such as this that make me have such a love/hate relationship
with old-time music. While I play a form of it in jam sessions weekly (and
yes, I understand that what is played in a typical jam session in the latter
part of the 20th century has no real bearing on old time music from the end of
the 19th century) I am still considered an outsider by most and only barely
tolerated because I have not been doing this "since before you were born, son."
Really, this music will eventually die out. All musics do. The question is
how much quicker does one want to hasten the process?
Until then, I will continue to play guitar, have it tuned to 440=A, and enjoy
myself as much as possible in my little musical world.
Eric Platt
St. Paul, Minnesota
Mike Murray
>
> At no point have I questioned or criticized Hartford's musical genius.
> But as you say, "his own particular vision" is so strong that *in my
> opinion*, his music diverges dramatically from what *I consider* to be
> old-time music.
>
Not so much in response to David's last post, but this whole thread has set
some of my strings to buzzing ...
A reader of this thread might infer Hartford to be a well-meaning but
self-absorbed, talented dabbler in old-time music, with his real roots as a
commercial "entertainer" in other areas. I keep thinking of Wayne Newton
in a bowler hat :-)
Yet here is a guy with at least four or five relatively recent projects
where the instrumentation fits what everybody in this forum would call
old-time, with many traditional tunes played at something other than
breakneck speed, few flashy solo breaks, and no cookie-cutter vocal
harmonies. Two or three of these projects were primarily fiddle-banjo duets
with the banjo played clawhammer. He regularly attends festivals oriented
toward traditional or old-time music. He both performs and jams at these
festivals. He's devoted much time and resource to preserving and playing
the music of old-time fiddlers. ( I'm not arguing whether he's done this
successfully.). And yet people are saying he's not really old-time, but at
best a gateway through which the novice can approach the authentic good
stuff.
To call it a gateway, IMHO trivializes his music which is not homogenized
and bland, but quirky and weird (again IMHO).
Yes, his style and phrasing are idiosyncratic, but so what? So were Riley
Puckett's bass runs. Whether Hartford successfully conveyed the music of Ed
Haley, or whether Hartford's own style totally obscured Haley's tunes speaks
to the scholarly value of that particular project, but doesn't touch on
whether the music fits in the old-time tradition or somewhere else. It's
not like he added drums and electric guitar. He's obviously not a
folklorist, carefully *reproducing* the tradition, but he sure looks to me
like he's spent time *trying to perform within* the tradition.
To say that his style is so individualistic that it can't be categorized
just ducks the question. Come on. When you listen to "The Fun of Open
Discussion" or "Wild Hog ...", do you think "Bluegrass"? Do you think
"Country and Western"? Rock? Pop? Jazz (hmmm, well, actually this seems
closer than the others)? Of all the major classifications with which I'm
familiar, "old-time" seems the best fit.
So he changes his performance style and repertoire to fit what he perceives
the audience wants. So he's only old-time some of the time. So was Clayton
McMichen. So he's made a lot of bucks in the bluegrass and the country-music
fields. So he's a performer, not an ethnomusicologist. Let me ask an
impertinent question: Would there be such a tendency to "include him out"
if "Gentle on my Mind" and the Glenn Campbell Show had never happened? Or
would more people be saying, "man, you ought to hear this geezer who dances
around while he fiddles -- he's got a really unique slant on some old-time
tunes"?
Charley Pennell
that's why he didn't even place at Clifftop even after he played such a
beautiful reading of Rye Straw. Personally I had his set above Molsky's
(the winner), which just goes to show you that all of God's creatures
don't hear alike! Rhys follows Doc Roberts to the note on the many
tunes they play in common (which is many from the Vigortone CD), and if
Doc isn't vintage commercial-era OT then I'm not sure who is. Perhaps
playing for square dances has redirected Rhys' rhythm and tone away from
that of the early commercial fiddlers (except for maybe Roberts and Eck
Robertson)? I, for one, really admire the tone Rhys gets out of his
fiddle and his impeccable timing, not to mention his choice of
repertoire. Playing for square dances is as traditional an activity as
one can participate in these days, so this can't be an issue of
within/without tradition.
Maybe the distinction here is rather between those who play within the
regional styles of their surroundings (Round Peak, West Virginia,
Whitetop Mountain, Ohio Valley, etc.) and those who play what they like
from wherever? We all play what we like (well, at least when we play
alone; not quite as often when playing with larger gatherings), its just
that some of us like the Round Peak, Texas longbow, or Kentucky fiddle
styles, while others like Joseph Allard, Scott Skinner, or Arthur
Smith. Even those of us who are trying to preserve whatever tradition
we care about in particular are altering that tradition by selecting out
the parts of it we are especially tuned into--which tunes, which notes,
what rhythm, what bowing style. Even though Pat Conte or the New Lost
City Ramblers played "faithful" renditions of period pieces, their
renditions still sound more like Conte and Cohen than they do their
sources. Similarly, the sources themselves were not ripped from Adam
even if their recordings were. They too were only conduits for what
came before them.
So, enough taking things personally, as was noted "We're just
different". You like Salyer, I like Salyer. Jim likes Jones, I like
Jones. You don't like Jones. Life goes on.
eaba...@yaawih.ten
"Mike Murray" <mmur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
> A reader of this thread might infer Hartford to be a well-meaning but
> self-absorbed, talented dabbler in old-time music, with his real roots as a
> commercial "entertainer" in other areas. I keep thinking of Wayne Newton
> in a bowler hat :-)
Dude, Wayne Newton is an *awesome* musician. I'm serious.
:)
Yrs,
Ed
Robert Palasek
> . . . Chicago . . . Iowa . . . From
> there, I believe they went to Charlotte, NC, where they played on the radio
> and locally. I don't know for sure, but I doubt if they spent much time in
> eastern KY. After the brothers split, Bill went to Arkansas, and then to
> Atlanta, GA. From there he went to Nashville, where he lived for the
> remainder of his life. He did travel constantly,
What year at Charlotte? From there on I have been assuming he was on
the road and within driving distance of West Virginia and Kentucky.
Hence my proposition.
When I was in high school my favorite radio station in Cincinnati,
which was neither the most powerful, nor on a clear channel,
mentioned receiving a card from Mt. Airy, NC. I'm sure Monroe's
touring was done within earshot of the his "home" radio station, so
I have no problem suggesting Monroes had radio audience in
eastern Kentucky or West Virginia.
And certainly when Monroe was at the Opry, he was heard widely.
> but there's absolutely no
> evidence I know of that he met or hung out with Haley, despite what we
> might want to believe.
Granted.
A dozen good local working musicians out here in California have
mentioned stories of after hours sessions with Monroe when he was
done with his concerts. He certainly met some of the better
musicians in this region.
"Hung out," may imply more than even I would admit, it depends on
how the term is being used.
Also, with a wide variety of side men, Monroe would be introduced
to the better musicians of their areas. I do not know if any
of his side men were from Haley's region or not.
I would guess that you are aware of many of the fiddlers and
bluegrassers within 200 miles of St. Louis. You probably have
a sense of who the better ones are. There may be some among them
who are recognized as the best. If there are any that are truly
outstanding, would you not / have you not be affected by them?
All this, and music may not even be your first job, and you may
not be traveling where you would have the opportunity to cross
paths with those musicians more often.
>I think his primary musical influences came from
> within his own family, the great guitarist/fiddler Arnold Schulz, 78
> records, and musicians he worked with at WLS.
I recall Monroe mentioning Schultz and mentioning his own family.
I will look for references to the WLS musicians.
Bob
= == === ===== ======== ============= =====================
Well the man on the stand he wants my vote
He's runnin for office on the ballot note
He's out there standin in front of the steeple
Tellin me he loves all kinds of people
He's eatin chitlins
He's eatin bagels
Robert Palasek
> You've used the word "authentic" to describe and differentiate the music you play
> and hold dear from fiddle music as interpreted by Hartford. Though I think I know
> what you're talking about, I'd like to hear exactly what you mean by "authentic."
> I think this is a term that's getting thrown around so much that it may not have
> much real meaning anymore, especially when used by folks trying to replicate
> sounds on recordings by musicians whom they've never met, and who are now dead.
Words. Words. Words.
Let us neither confuse words with the reality they allude to, nor make
them mean more than they mean.
And besides, exactly what I mean will change from usage to usage.
Robert Palasek
> Yes, his style and phrasing are idiosyncratic,
I always thought he took something and made it main stream,
straightening crooked tunes and smoothing edges and such.
And as far as Wayne Newton, I fall in with Joe Bob Briggs
on that one.
Donka Shane
Bob
David Lynch
<eric...@aol.com> wrote:
> Whoa now. Just a second here. I'm going to speak out of line. I'm going to
> try not to flame Mr. Lynch, but at the same time, I feel that he has no right,
> no matter what his standing in any sort of music community to act like his own
> vision of music is more correct than someone else's because of the instrument
> one chooses to play.
Calm down, bud. I have nothing against guitar players, nor do I look
down on them. My point was that Jim Nelson, a guitar player, had gone
to a fiddle discussion group and challenged my opinions there - that's
all.
David Lynch
<dly...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Calm down, bud. I have nothing against guitar players, nor do I look
> down on them. My point was that Jim Nelson, a guitar player, had gone
> to a fiddle discussion group and challenged my opinions there - that's
> all.
I should also mention that Jim N. and I have emailed privately and have
brought things back to what is now a respectful discussion.
Ericplatt
<>Calm down, bud. I have nothing against guitar players, nor do I look
>down on them. My point was that Jim Nelson, a guitar player, had gone
>to a fiddle discussion group and challenged my opinions there - that's
>all.
Okay. Fine with me.
It does make me wonder, though, since I have considered joining fiddle-l. Not
because I play fiddle presently (my wife does) but because I care deeply about
old time music discussions. I don't think I'll bother, though.
Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN
Brian P.D. Smyth
"Jim Nelson" <nels...@law.wustl.edu> wrote in message
news:38C43E0F...@law.wustl.edu...
(snip)
> You've used the word "authentic" to describe and differentiate the music
you play
> and hold dear from fiddle music as interpreted by Hartford. Though I
think I know
> what you're talking about, I'd like to hear exactly what you mean by
"authentic."
> I think this is a term that's getting thrown around so much that it may
not have
> much real meaning anymore, especially when used by folks trying to
replicate
> sounds on recordings by musicians whom they've never met, and who are now
dead.
Jim,
I want to jump in your defense on this point...if being an "authentic
player" means one has to have spent time with the old masters then I am
doomed.
As you know, I have never met any of the older players and never been to a
festival...but I have met you, Geoff Seitz, Dave Landreth, Jeff Miller,
Lindell Blackford, Rich Hibbs, Steve Mote, Reed Martin et al...people I
consider to be some of this generation's best players. I have found each
and every one of you to be open and supportive of my efforts to learn the
music and very willing to take the time to show me how "you" play the old
tunes. For me you guys are "The Masters."
This spirit of inclusion is what has inspired me to pursue this music whole
heartedly. I hate to see or hear of people who have an exclusionary
attitude (intentional or not) just because someone has not spent time with
the "old masters" or because someone does not play a tune note for note from
the playing of someone else.
At some point today's players will have to assume the mantle from the
previous generation or the music will trully suffer. I can listen to the old
masters through recordings and try to be authentic but I can hang out with
guys like you and learn more perhaps than by trying to be "authentic."
Keep on playing and voicing your opinion. I always have an ear for what you
have to say (play).
Regards,
Brian
Nancy Mamlin
David Lynch <dly...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:080320000832002056%dly...@mindspring.com...
> In article <20000307184157...@ng-cc1.aol.com>, Ericplatt
> <eric...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Whoa now. Just a second here. I'm going to speak out of line. I'm
going to
> > try not to flame Mr. Lynch, but at the same time, I feel that he has no
right,
> > no matter what his standing in any sort of music community to act like
his own
> > vision of music is more correct than someone else's because of the
instrument
> > one chooses to play.
>
> down on them. My point was that Jim Nelson, a guitar player, had gone
> to a fiddle discussion group and challenged my opinions there - that's
> all.
What does that have to do with this newsgroup?
(I could add that as a rhythm section, playing for many many different
fiddlers over the years, you're likely to form an opinion or two, one that I
might take pretty seriously. But I won't.)
Nancy
Paul Tyler
> It does make me wonder, though, since I have considered joining fiddle-l. Not
> because I play fiddle presently (my wife does) but because I care deeply about
> old time music discussions. I don't think I'll bother, though.
Don't be scared off from fiddle-l from the rumor of discord (I missed it
when I blinked). It's one of the best things on the net. Many
intelligent and passionate contributors. Feathers sometimes get ruffled
for a few moments, but seldom with serious consequences.
Paul Tyler
David Lynch
<bsm...@lida.net> wrote:
Being inclusive is all well and good, but at a certain point, enough
foreign inclusions will be added until old-time music is so
homogenized, it won't even faintly resemble what it once was.
> At some point today's players will have to assume the mantle from the
> previous generation or the music will truly suffer.
And if they don't heed the musical information provided by the previous
generations, the music will suffer even further.
After a couple generations of ignoring the music as played in the 20s
and 30s, old-time musicians of the future would insist the "festival"
version (or whatever current deviation) of Sandy Boys is the true
version and the Edn Hammons version will be lost. Might as well include
the Circle Jerks in the old-time genre at that point. (BTW, I have
nothing against the Circle Jerks or Punk Rock, just using the example
for contrast.)
Charley Pennell
transmission of the music of their predecessors, at least beyond say one
or two generations, we now have recorded documentation of the Edden
Hammons, Uncle Bunt Stephens, Ed Haleys, and Roscoe Holcombs of the
world. We now have a choice between receiving the tunes of Ben Jarrell
either through the filter of Tommy or directly through Ben's own
recordings.
I would argue that music will ALWAYS suffer (or improve, in many cases)
in transmission. Even father-to-son (daughter) transmission only
carries just so much of the original feel of the music of earlier
generations because the offspring's environment is by necessity
different from that of the parent. The child will be attuned to
different things in the music they are presented with as they will
likely hear and play along with other musicians as well. Look at Edden
and Burl, Doc and Merle, Ralph and Ralph III, your own children even!
Even direct followers of a given tradition will have their own unique
limitations or talents, and hence will carry on their cultural mandate
to keep traditions alive. If you listen much to really tight musical
circles such as those of Snake Chapman and Paul Smith or any of the
incarnations of the Camp Creek, Smokey Valley, or Pine Ridge Boys, you
can still hear the differences in style when banjo players, fiddlers, or
even bass or guitar players change. Dry copying of an earlier
musician's style and repertoire does not keep a tradition alive, and
even revivalist singers like the NLCR or Major Contay & the Canebrake
Rattlers would have to admit that their renditions of 20's and 30's
tunes are different from the originals (and part of an entirely
different tradition than the one they are copying).
There are lots of versions of fiddle tunes being lost every day because
they were never recorded or were transmitted aurally to someone who
received them quite differently then they were sent. Edden Hammons
version of Sandy Boys is not in the same danger yet.
Brian P.D. Smyth
David,
Your point is well made. When I used the term "inclusion" I meant it in the
sense of welcoming newcomers rather than homogenizing. The other point I
was trying to make is that for me to learn this music "first hand" means I
must learn it from others who have learned from the previous generation.
The opportunity for me to meet the old masters is past except through their
recordings.
I visited with Dave Landreth a couple of months ago and we were listening to
a recording my fiddle teacher gave me of an after concert jam with the
Highwoods Stringband from 1978. After listening to a couple of tunes Dave
said; "you know this music could have been played yesterday or 50 years ago.
That's why I love it."
I hope to make it to Clifftop this year. Maybe I'll get a chance to meet
you then. Looking forward to it.
Brian Smyth
St. Charles, MO
David Lynch
<cpen...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> I would argue that music will ALWAYS suffer (or improve, in many cases)
> in transmission.
I agree. But I'm a proponent of taking pains minimizing the stylistic
changes in order to maximize the inclusion of the original feel of the
music. This does not mean dry copying. There are a library of phrases
and accents inherent in old-time music in general.
I fully admit that I can't nor do I wish to replicate a tune exactly
the way, say Edn Hammons played it. However, I have listened to and
dissected his source recording and choose to use this version as a
foundation upon which my personal "human filter" adds the inevitable
deviations. If instead, I chose to pattern my playing on the more
commonly played "festival" version, the end result would, in my
opinion, not contain, as much of the feel of the original.
>Edden Hammons
> version of Sandy Boys is not in the same danger yet.
I disagree - I think this tune in particular has already been
unavoidably altered. I'm fairly certain that the "festival" version I
mention was created by Bob Herring, who had heard someone play the tune
on banjo as his only reference. Nothing against Bob - he recreated the
fiddle tune as best he could based on the banjo version he had heard.
However, his version has since been so widely accepted that when you
hear a contemporary fiddler playing Sandy Boys, chances are about 90%
that they're playing the "festival" or Herring version.
True, we have documentation of Edn playing the tune in the 1940s, but
early recordings are only valuable when people pay heed to them. In
this case, a majority of revivalist fiddlers seem either unaware of
Edn's recording, or would rather play the "festival" version. Another
generation or two down the road, most of the scant thousand or so Edn
Hammons CDs that have been recently released will probably be lost, and
the Sandy Boys people will then be playing will probably bear faint, if
any resemblance to what Hammons played.
Change and variation are inevitable, true, but I think it's worth while
to minimize the changes we inflict on these old tunes.
David Lynch
<bsm...@lida.net> wrote:
The other point I
> was trying to make is that for me to learn this music "first hand" means I
> must learn it from others who have learned from the previous generation.
I agree - it's difficult if not impossible to replicate bowing
patterns, etc. by merely listening to the recordings. My mentors have
been invaluable in teaching me bowing, phrasing, etc. that were eluding
me as I listened to recordings. Once I learned more of the technique of
old-time fiddling first hand, I was able to pick out more and more
similarities in the recordings and better match what I was hearing.
Charley Pennell
I suspect that there will continue to be folks who track down rare
"source" recordings (and these are only the most recent source remember,
since the real source is lost to us through time) like you and me and
many others on this list, and there will be those who receive their muse
through the festival circuit, local jams of similar-cultured urban
musicians, and recordings of the Highwoods, Freighthoppers, or
Improbabillies. I'm not too worried that the latter may actually
outnumber the former and hence change the popular image of old-time
music, since this has always been so. More accessible music has always
attracted a greater following than more authentic stuff, even in a very
limited niche market like our own. Musical genres have more schisms
than the Christian church! There will likely continue to be masters of
our genre who will want to get beyond the popular stuff and mine the
motherlode, either for personal or professional reasons. They will
discover and reintroduce the Hammons CD in much the same way as we have
discovered it along with recordings by the Striplings, Salyer, Haley and
Uncle Wade Ward. As an example, listen to the Sandy Boys on the Brad
Leftwich and Dan Gellert tape "Moment in time". Sound familiar?
Charley
David Lynch wrote:
I fully admit that I can't nor do I wish to replicate a tune exactly
the way, say Edn Hammons played it. However, I have listened to and
dissected his source recording and choose to use this version as a
foundation upon which my personal "human filter" adds the inevitable
deviations. If instead, I chose to pattern my playing on the more
commonly played "festival" version, the end result would, in my
opinion, not contain, as much of the feel of the original.
Emil Faug
Sandy Boys in the Winter1999/2000 issue of Fiddler Magazine that supports
some of the views that have been expressed in this thread.
> From: stev...@best.com (Steve Goldfield)
> Organization: a user of Best Internet Communications, Inc. www.best.com
> Newsgroups: rec.music.country.old-time
> Date: 18 Mar 2000 06:06:48 GMT
> Subject: Re: more old time fiddle questions
>
> In article <170320000853050573%dly...@mindspring.com>,
> David Lynch <dly...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> #>In article <38D01710...@unity.ncsu.edu>, Charley Pennell
> #><cpen...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> #>>Edden Hammons
> #>> version of Sandy Boys is not in the same danger yet.
> #>
> #>I disagree - I think this tune in particular has already been
> #>unavoidably altered. I'm fairly certain that the "festival" version I
> #>mention was created by Bob Herring, who had heard someone play the tune
> #>on banjo as his only reference. Nothing against Bob - he recreated the
> #>fiddle tune as best he could based on the banjo version he had heard.
> #>However, his version has since been so widely accepted that when you
> #>hear a contemporary fiddler playing Sandy Boys, chances are about 90%
> #>that they're playing the "festival" or Herring version.
>
> In this case, I agree with David that I much prefer Edn's
> version, but I agree with Charley that Edn's version won't
> disappear that soon. That's because there are people in
> West Virginia who still sing verses to Sandy Boys, and
> you can't sing to the B part of the festival version
> because it doesn't fit the words.
>
> After listening a lot to Edn's version and trying to
> learn it on the fiddle, I've come to think of these as
> two different tunes because they are so far apart.
>
> I'd really be interested in hearing somebody play what
> was on the 19th century sheet music to see how it started
> out.
>
> Steve
> (8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>(8<})>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Steve Goldfield <stev...@best.com> * Oakland, California
> * Home Page--<http://www.best.com/~stevesag/stevesag.html> *
Steve Goldfield
David Lynch
<cpen...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> I suspect that there will continue to be folks who track down rare
> "source" recordings (and these are only the most recent source remember,
> since the real source is lost to us through time)... and there will be those who receive their muse
> through the festival circuit...I'm not too worried that the latter may actually
> outnumber the former and hence change the popular image of old-time
> music, since this has always been so.
That's probably the case. I would guess I'm part of a minority in an
already obscure genre of music, and I'm OK with that. I play the way I
play because I respond to it - because it sound soulful to me - I'd be
pretty frustrated if I expected to win a popularity contest with my
style of fiddling!
>There will likely continue to be masters of
> our genre who will want to get beyond the popular stuff and mine the
> motherlode
I hope so. Brad and Dan are definitely playing Edn's version on their
"A Moment In Time" cassette.
However, there are other popular performing old-time musicians, David
Bass for example, who were weaned on the "festival sound" and continue
to play their own interpretation of that sound, which to my ear carries
considerably less resemblance to early recorded fiddling. A musician
who chooses Bass' fiddling as inspiration will most probably end up two
steps away from the old-time music of the 1920s. All I'm saying is that
I personally prefer not to drift more than 1 step away from the
documented music of 80 years ago if I can help it. With the bombardment
of so many modern influences, I think it's a mighty challenge to remain
1 step away even when immersing myself exclusively in the old
recordings.
I'm not saying everyone should do as I do - only that in my perception,
the more contemporary old-time players drift from these source
recordings, the less it seems like old-time music to me. I'm also not
saying that David Bass' fiddling, the revivalist evolution of old-time
music, etc. are bad things - and I agree that such evolution is
inevitable. I'm saying that I personally respond more favorably to
old-time music with less of those evolutionary changes.
tony goldenberg
home for a day and remember the tune and its name as best they can. They
were as likely as we to make it up as necessary. If you play with intent and
will and work at it you are the tradition.Your here now. In 5o years people
will be trying to figure out your way as the source. With all this
technologu none of us can claim to be old traditional only old
traditionally oriented. How ever we can claim to be what we are which is
modern and playing now.Modern hunting is different than the past because
hunters have four wheel drive,scopes,state of the art clothing and amazing
firepower. They still have to get the game but something is different and i
think its similar. Mr Jabbour once talked in a workshop in Port Townsend. He
talked about the Hammonds family and how they were schooled to learn by ear.
They were told things like riddles and stories perhaps tunes one time only.
They learned to listen. Buddy Thomas learned some of his tunes from his moms
whistling. He learned to listen.Nothing soon will replace listening and that
is as traditional as we can ever hope to be. All the rest is art and
evolution for better or worse. One more thing. People respond to the
feeling. The folks listed below and many more are favorites because people
relate to the feelings. You can play like any one you choose and if people
dont get excited by your playing it is not going to have any effect other
than for you. People are looking for a story, a feeling and they arent gonna
care much how they got it when they get it. The popular players{of now and
then} are popular for one reason they produce excitement. POP CORN.
----------
Ericplatt
> All I'm saying is that
>I personally prefer not to drift more than 1 step away from the
>documented music of 80 years ago if I can help it. With the bombardment
>of so many modern influences, I think it's a mighty challenge to remain
>1 step away even when immersing myself exclusively in the old
>recordings.
I do not disagree with your approach to doing this. However, may I disagree
when I say that you rely on, is not necessarily "pure". The player who
recorded it was influenced by other players and may have shaped the tune to his
or her imperfect memory of it (as has been mentioned by others). Because we
do not have an "ur" text of these tunes, every version out there is a variant
to some extent.
>I'm not saying everyone should do as I do - only that in my perception,
>the more contemporary old-time players drift from these source
>recordings, the less it seems like old-time music to me.
True, but are you not drifting away from the source? You appear to have access
to a computer, and presumably other modern influences inflict themselves upon
you, whether you are aware of it or not. Even if you feel you are using the
same bow strokes and fingerings that your source fiddler used, because you have
access to more modern rosin, strings, and even bowhair, your tone is not
_exactly_ like the source. It is evolved.
Now how far to take this is certainly up to the individual player. I'm a
guitarist, but I don't want to go back to Black Diamond strings just because
they were used originally. I will attempt to create a flavor of an older
recording using what I have at hand.
Of course, I will happily admit, I'm not into a total recreation of an old
sound. I've been influenced by too much media and too many other forms of
music during my life for that to happen. For me to say I can forget it would
be false. I can try to minimize it, but I could never eliminate the
influences.
David Lynch
<eric...@aol.com> wrote:
> I do not disagree with your approach to doing this. However, may I disagree
> when I say that [which] you rely on, is not necessarily "pure".
I never said any of this stuff was pure. All we have to go on from 80
years ago are early recordings, which are mere snapshots of a bygone
era. I am fully aware that a tune recorded by a fiddler in 1925 may be
different than the way that same fiddler played the tune in 1915.
However, the body of tunes recorded in the 20s -40s, incomplete an
assessment as it may be, is a much more accurate portrayal of the music
of that time than the same repertoire as played by a young old-time
musician in the 70s.
> True, but are you not drifting away from the source? You appear to have
> access
> to a computer, and presumably other modern influences inflict themselves upon
> you, whether you are aware of it or not.
I think I made that very point in my last post.
In the morning, I make an espresso with my Krups machine and play a few
fiddle tunes before I shower. I order my fiddle strings on the
internet, I use an electronic tuner. I'm not going to move up into the
deepest recesses of some hollow in Madison County, NC, do away with all
modern conveniences, kill a critter with a musket and make my own gut
strings for my fiddle. It still wouldn't undo all the rock n roll
that's coursed past my ears.
But when I want to play, say, Chinquapin Hunting, I prefer to heed the
way Norm Edmonds played it, and pattern my version after his. I won't
play it exactly like Uncle Norm, nor do I want to. But I think I'll be
closer to the feel of his version, which in my opinion is a lot more
old-time that the ubiquitous "festival" version.
I prefer that approach than to relent and say "aw, heck, there's so
many modern influences tainting my interpretation of old-time music,
why should I even bother trying to sound more like the musicians of 80
years ago?"
Lyle Lofgren
<to...@waypt.com> wrote:
He
>talked about the Hammonds family and how they were schooled to learn by ear.
>They were told things like riddles and stories perhaps tunes one time only.
>They learned to listen. Buddy Thomas learned some of his tunes from his moms
>whistling. He learned to listen.Nothing soon will replace listening and that
>is as traditional as we can ever hope to be. All the rest is art and
>evolution for better or worse.
>
This is somewhat off topic, but I woke up this morning with a
recently-learned fiddle tune running through my mind. As I lay there,
I realized that I was not only rehearsing listening to the tune, I was
visualizing the bowing pattern, and even sending motor impulses to my
right arm. So it's possible to practice fiddle without having a
fiddle handy. The only thing I'm lacking is the ability to remember a
tune after hearing it only once. Thank goodness for modern music
reproduction techniques.
CSBSteve
just sitting on the porch every weekend and tapeing and my grandfather learned
from a man, Quincey Dillion.
Jeff Titon
there may not be much more to add. But maybe a little.
I think some old-time musicians begin by getting inspired by festival
versions of tunes--there's an awful lot of energy and good feeling
there--or by good recordings not made by people we'd consider source
musicians. By contrast I think it's hard for a musician who's fairly new
to this music to hear much of what is going on in a recording by Edden
Hammons, for instance. It just sounds like a bunch of notes and noise. In
fact, some banjo players I know (who don't play fiddle) have a hard time
hearing the nuances in the tunes by those fiddlers you've been mentioning,
even though they can listen and play reasonably sensitively with other
fiddlers, live, just because what they hear doesn't translate into some
kind of fiddle bowing or fingering but rather into something that has
meaning vis-a-vis their response on banjo.
But--after years and years of listening and playing, an old-time fiddler
begins to hear a lot more of what is going on in the music of the source
musicians, and at some point realizes that there's an awful lot more
interesting going on there than in the festival or "revival" versions--and
wants to figure out what it is, and how to do it, and whether to put it
into his/her playing. (Of course some never get to that point--they're
usually off trying to play some other style or genre, maybe Irish, maybe
klezmer, who knows what.) At that point the old-time fiddler craves the
field recordings of source musicians like Edden Hammons (and the
recordings of the very best interpreters, like Bruce Greene) because the
fiddler automatically filters out the noise, scratchiness, occasional
missed notes, arthritis-induced rigidities, and so forth and hears not
only the setting but the idea of the setting which is almost always so
richly conceived.
I say this partly as a result of my own experiences, and partly as a
result of teaching a string band class in a university for some 20 years.
A number of the "students" are people in the community who have been in
the "class" for several years, and I've seen them move from guitar to
banjo to fiddle, all the while deepening their appreciation of source
musicians and learning how to hear what is in their recordings. It's
rewarding to me, too, to see how some of them can get a lot out of
settings by fiddlers like Hiram Stamper, Manon Campbell, Jake Phelps, or
Isham Monday, all recorded near the ends of their lives, past their
primes--by hearing through the recordings to the conceptions behind the
settings (and their occasional realizations).
My two cents... with thanks to David, who may or may not agree.
Best to all,
Jeff Titon
Joel Shimberg
the usual simplistic cries of "purist".
Joel
>But--after years and years of listening and playing, an old-time fiddler
>begins to hear a lot more of what is going on in the music of the source
>musicians, and at some point realizes that there's an awful lot more
>interesting going on there than in the festival or "revival" versions--and
>wants to figure out what it is, and how to do it, and whether to put it
>into his/her playing....
>At that point the old-time fiddler craves the
>field recordings of source musicians like Edden Hammons (and the
>recordings of the very best interpreters, like Bruce Greene) because the
>fiddler automatically filters out the noise, scratchiness, occasional
>missed notes, arthritis-induced rigidities, and so forth and hears not
>only the setting but the idea of the setting which is almost always so
>richly conceived.
....
>Jeff Titon
--
Insanity is hereditary.
You get it from your kids.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Duc de Savoie
Dillon" and "Quincy Dillion." Do you know which is right?
Steve Goldfield
#>begins to hear a lot more of what is going on in the music of the source
#>musicians, and at some point realizes that there's an awful lot more
#>interesting going on there than in the festival or "revival"
#versions--and
#>wants to figure out what it is, and how to do it, and whether to put it
#>into his/her playing....
#>At that point the old-time fiddler craves the
#>field recordings of source musicians like Edden Hammons (and the
#>recordings of the very best interpreters, like Bruce Greene) because the
#>fiddler automatically filters out the noise, scratchiness, occasional
#>missed notes, arthritis-induced rigidities, and so forth and hears not
#>only the setting but the idea of the setting which is almost always so
#>richly conceived.
#....
#>Jeff Titon
This reminds me of a friend who plays old-time tunes
on the autoharp and told me he'd rather listen to
Brad Leftwich than to the scratchy fiddling of Tommy
Jarrell. I told him that Brad probably wouldn't see
it the same way. A very graphic example of what Jeff
is talking about is visible in the bowing light video.
The motions of Tommy's hand while he is bowing are so
intricate and sophisticated that they resemble a very
filigreed kind of calligraphy. Another analogy that
may be apt is in fencing. I think it's very hard for
people who didn't fence to understand what is going
on in a fencing match. That's because a lot is going
on, and it happens very quickly.
As a banjo player who is trying to learn to fiddle,
I can say that I hear some of what Jeff is discussing,
but I am only beginning to appreciate it as I learn to
use the bow. Another good example is in the new Clyde
Davenport video. At first Clyde says that he really
doesn't enjoy fiddling, that he's just doing it because
his visitors have requested it. But then he plays a
tune, his eyes light up, he grins and says, "Isn't
that beautiful." I think we're talking about a musical
equivalent of eloquence, a fluidity of expression in
which the melody of a fiddle tune is adapted into a
particular fiddler's style so that it flows smoothly
in a way that seems the best possible way to do it.
But then you hear another fiddler do it in an entirely
different way that is equally successful. After a
while you start to sort out what they have in
common and what it unique in each fiddler's voice.
In what we are calling the festival versions of many
tunes, most of that is missing and thus those versions
lack continuity with the great old-time fiddling of
the source versions. More and more I'm seeing
continuity as the essential element in what makes
things traditional. That doesn't eschew change, but
it requires change to be rooted in continuity.
All that said, there are multiple reasons to play
old-time music. It is certainly very enjoyable to
play with people because you like them and not just
because they are the best musicians you can find. I
think that also motivates some of the old-timers who
share so willingly with us younger folks. It also
facilitates the spread of the festival versions
because they are easier to learn and play and are
thus more accessible to beginners whom we certainly
want to welcome to the community. But there also has
to be room for playing fully realized settings of
tunes. And most of the people who have learned to
do that have learned it by listening to what we
are calling source musicians.
David Lynch
<Jeff_Titon-20...@level3-ppp-171.level3.brown.edu>, Jeff
Titon <Jeff_...@brown.edu> wrote:
>By contrast I think it's hard for a musician who's fairly new
> to this music to hear much of what is going on in a recording by Edden
> Hammons, for instance.
I agree wholeheartedly. When someone who's never been exposed to
old-time music asks me for recommendations, I don't steer them straight
to Isham Monday, etc. I point them towards The Freight Hoppers, The
Horseflies, Bruce Molsky, etc. A great deal of contemporary old-time
does an invaluable job of bridging the gap between the modern and early
recordings which I think helps ease some folks into the genre.
I, too began my fiddling listening to whatever I could get my hands on
- a good deal of revivalist music at first. This was partially due to
my tastes at the time, and availability. I listened quite a bit to the
Rounder Fiddle CD, but found myself gravitating more towards Wilson
Douglas' "Yew Piney Mountain". Eventually, this lead me to Edn Hammons,
but it took some digging to realize I could first get a copy of the
out-of-print LP (now on CD), and even more digging to find out I could
get the full archive from WVU. There were times with old-time music
when I realized I could either be content with what I had and stop
there, or "up" my commitment and dig further.
I apologize if in my previous posts it may have seemed like I was
criticizing folks who don't feel like digging as far as I have. Heck,
there are a great many people on this group who have dug much deeper
than I. I think it's fantastic that anyone show an interest in this
music - to whatever degree. In the interest of preservation, however, I
hope that enough people embrace the source recordings to keep the "old"
sound relatively intact.
In article <38d718fb$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, Steve Goldfield
<stev...@best.com> wrote:
>More and more I'm seeing
> continuity as the essential element in what makes
> things traditional. That doesn't eschew change, but
> it requires change to be rooted in continuity.
Well put, Steve. It brings to mind people like Luther Davis, who
stubbornly clung to the old ways of playing, even in the face of the
rising popularity of Arthur Smith, Bill Monroe, etc. If they hadn't
been stubborn, we may well have lost a valuable piece of tradition.
Luther Davis recounted his visit as a young man to see his old Uncle
Friel Lowe, who taught him how to fiddle in a traditional style.
Luther said Friel said "I want you to have 'em [the tunes] the way that
I play 'em. Let everyone else play 'em like they want to."
In order to more accurately preserve the flavor of early recorded
old-time music, I think we need to adopt a similar attitude, and not be
afraid to be a little stubborn, too.
GNelson700
>Rounder Fiddle CD, but found myself >gravitating more towards Wilson
>Douglas' "Yew Piney Mountain".
ah, yes....the single most beautiful fiddle tune in the whole world..:>{)
Nelson
Cleoma
Suzy Thompson
To reply to this posting, remove "nojunk" from my email address.