sessions again
Martin Fagan
earlier post about singers sessions - what makes a song "tired and old"?
What's on peoples current no-no list... I always thought in terms of the
songs they taught you at school - such as the "Wild Rover", "Black
Velvet Band", any other cod-Oirish songs, and of course, "Streets of
London" or is it any song I know a parody version of? (Ends sentence
with a preposition, which any fule kno is a bad rule to live by.)
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Molly
mygate.mailgate.org>, Martin Fagan (Martin Fagan <maarti...@aol.com>)
wrote
>I've been thinking, a rather slow job for me, about a reply to my
>earlier post about singers sessions - what makes a song "tired and old"?
It was a fairly shattering experience when, as a nervous 17-year-old in
London, I started to attend the Co-op Club, where Ewan MacColl and Peggy
Seeger appeared once a month (other people doing the other sessions). I
went alone, because I didn't know anyone else who liked folk music. At
one point, in the interval, I nervously approached Peggy Seeger (the
floor would have opened and swallowed me if I had had the temerity to
speak to Ewan MacColl) and asked whether there might be a chance of
hearing "Dark as a Dungeon". Her response was short and sharp: that
song had been "sung out in 1948". It probably never occurred to her
that that was the year I was born.
Songs may well become "sung out", but it is a temporary state. Along
comes another generation, who hear them afresh, with delight, and start
to sing them again. Even if it's "Wild Rover" - that song has been an
introduction to folk music for many people who might otherwise not have
taken an interest.
>What's on peoples current no-no list... I always thought in terms of the
>songs they taught you at school - such as the "Wild Rover", "Black
>Velvet Band", any other cod-Oirish songs, and of course, "Streets of
>London"
The songs *I* was taught at school were things like "The Lincolnshire
Poacher" and "Scots Wha Hae". Neither of which I have any great problem
with!
> or is it any song I know a parody version of? (Ends sentence
>with a preposition, which any fule kno is a bad rule to live by.)
I could just about survive if I never again heard "Kilgarry Mountain"...
--
Molly
Spammers are like tapeworms: they leech the life from the Internet and
provide nothing of benefit in return. (Patricia A. Shaffer)
cliff lee
mind...
cliff.
Chris Rockcliffe
Martin Fagan wrote:
> What's on peoples current no-no list... I always thought in terms of the
> songs they taught you at school - such as the "Wild Rover", "Black
> Velvet Band", any other cod-Oirish songs, and of course, "Streets of
> London" (snip)
Yes, those songs - and others too numerous to list - were all done to death
in the 60's and since. These days too, there are many songs/tunes - which
although generally still considered 'cool' to sing/play - we can still be
sick of hearing.
The trouble is, everyone gets tired of hearing the same stuff again and
again, week after week. Hackneyed songs and hackneyed performers often as
not, go together - don't they? Of course, what's hackneyed and tired to one
generation in one region or country, can be fresh to another group of people
elsewhere.
Those songs you mention are good strong tunes, but the folk who sing them
generally aren't very good singers or interpreters of songs. A good singer
can bring any song alive - and a great fiddler say - also just about any
tune. Even with meagre talent, IMO, with a new arrangement or a fresh
interpretation, it's still possible to make just about any 'tired' old song
or tune come alive again. Arrangements though often need serious work and
experimentation performed on them, and it's almost impossible to get that
special something in a spontaneous free-for-all session in a pub.
I've heard the 'Wild Rover' done literally hundreds of times... 80% were
really dire; 15%+ were OK-ish to good; -5% of them were brilliant. The best
I've heard to date was sung accapella in glorious harmony by 3 lads -
youngsters - wish to hell I could remember where it was now.
There's a story though about Roy Williamson, one of the Corries duo who
sadly died of cancer (IIRC?)... Visiting him in hospital in the final days
was his long time playing partner Ronnie (IIRC?). It was of course a very
sad time for Ronnie...
"Anyway, Ronnie, just look on the bright side!...", says Roy cheerily from
his bed. ..."The bright side?... er what do you mean?", says Ronnie.
"Well, for starters we won't have to sing that fuckin' 'Wild Rover' any
more, will we?"
Gan canny,
Chris R
Jim Lucas
>
> The trouble is, everyone gets tired of hearing the same stuff
> again and again, week after week.
On the contrary. Some people prefer it. Some even *demand* it... of
those who don't want to do it. And therein lies the real conflict.
/Jim Lucas
Molly
>, Chris Rockcliffe (Chris Rockcliffe <chrisro...@scripto99.demon.c
o.uk>) wrote
>Those songs you mention are good strong tunes, but the folk who sing them
>generally aren't very good singers or interpreters of songs. A good singer
>can bring any song alive - and a great fiddler say - also just about any
>tune. Even with meagre talent, IMO, with a new arrangement or a fresh
>interpretation, it's still possible to make just about any 'tired' old song
>or tune come alive again.
I remember some years ago at the Cambridge Folk Festival, Martin Carthy
telling us all how sick he had got of "Geordie" (in case there is any
other song by that name, this is the one about the poacher who "stole
sixteen of the King's royal deer") - he saw no merit in the song
whatsoever. Then he heard an old lady sing it to him, and she sang it
with such feeling, such anger, that he was forced to reconsider - and he
started singing it again. (Brilliantly.)
Marjorie Clarke
"Martin Fagan" <maarti...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:72196d8e02568305ec2...@mygate.mailgate.org...
> I've been thinking, a rather slow job for me, about a reply to my
> earlier post about singers sessions - what makes a song "tired and old"?
Looking through the responses so far, I'd say the answer is "the singer(s)".
If they're singing it as if it means nothing at all, and as if they've done
it a hundred times, it comes over as tired and old, even if it's a perfectly
good song. If they sing it as if both the words and the tune really matter,
they may manage to put new life into even a very familiar song
But the context counts for a lot, too. If it's in a club where people are
really attentive, those who do the same old songs week after week don't go
down well. But if it's in a noisy pub where no-one's really paying much
attention, many of the punters will be very happy to hear Black Velvet Band
every time they go there, as a sort of musical wallpaper, and they won't
thank you for introducing anything new.
--
Marjorie Clarke
To reply, remove nospam from address
Pete Willow
Marjorie Clarke <marj...@theclarkes99nospam.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
message news:a33dqh$jq5$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> But the context counts for a lot, too. If it's in a club where people are
> really attentive, those who do the same old songs week after week don't go
> down well. But if it's in a noisy pub where no-one's really paying much
> attention, many of the punters will be very happy to hear Black Velvet
Band
> every time they go there, as a sort of musical wallpaper, and they won't
> thank you for introducing anything new.
>
in a band that performs a lot of the Whiskey In The Jar / Athenry / County
Down / and yes Black Velvet Band type of material along with tune sets on
fiddle, melodeon, whistle, etc. We don't do many folk clubs and most of our
work comes from music pubs, beer festivals, private parties and some folk
festivals (we've even done arts festivals!) But we do get booked at some
folk clubs, or perform sessions for folk audiences, and the material always
goes down well without any loss of audience attentiveness.
The feedback we get is that people enjoy our approach - we don't take
ourselves too seriously and in fact most members of the band can and do play
more creative stuff in other line-ups and guises. But I think the reason why
the folk club sets go down well is that we provide a refreshing change from
artists on the folk circuit who *do* take themselves too seriously, or are
generally rather intense or precious about what they do. I don't imagine
that the clubs who book us would want our style of music every week, but as
long as their audiences find us entertaining and they go home feeling
they've had a great night out, we're happy to rush in with the songs that
others fear to admit to playing.
There's a place for everything - even cheesey music.
Pete W
Paul Burke
>
> I've been thinking, a rather slow job for me, about a reply to my
> earlier post about singers sessions - what makes a song "tired and old"?
>
Probably when it becomes so widespread and standardised that, if you
sing a variant of the "accepted" version, people complain that you are
singing it "wrong".
Years ago when Derek and Dorothy Elliot were on in Sheffield, they sang
their take on 'Here's Adieu to Old England': just after M. Carthy had
done the same song but slightly different. When it came to the chorus,
the audience all launched into Carthy's version, which annoyed the
Elliots greatly, and we all got a good telling off for not listening.
In other words, when the words become a given, and are no longer really
listened to, the song is tired, whether it's old or not.
Paul Burke
Dick Gaughan
-0000, "Marjorie Clarke"
<marj...@theclarkes99nospam.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Looking through the responses so far, I'd say the answer is "the singer(s)".
I agree with that 100%.
>If they're singing it as if it means nothing at all, and as if they've done
>it a hundred times, it comes over as tired and old, even if it's a perfectly
>good song. If they sing it as if both the words and the tune really matter,
>they may manage to put new life into even a very familiar song
A few years ago, Tonder festival put on a special extra concert
headlined by Pete Seeger and Arlo Guthrie. When they went on
stage, there was a large bunch of hardnosed, been-there done-it
pros crammed in the backstage area to watch them. It's not
everyday you get the chance to see Pete Seeger so everybody wanted
to see him.
Pete walked to the mic, and opened the set with "Michael, Row the
Boat Ashore". Instead of wincing at this, perhaps the ultimate
hackneyed tired old song, I found myself singing along and
realising that I'd always overlooked what a great song it was.
Then I woke up to what I was doing and looked around. Without
exception, every other one of us road-hardened old farts was
singing their heart out, as was the entire audience.
Had I (or anyone else I can think of offhand) gone up there and
tried to sing that song, we'd have died on our arses amid cringes
of embarrassment. But Pete believed every word of that song, it
was a core part of his life, and that belief and confidence filled
the hall.
You can't fake that. To return to an earlier (tedious) debate
here, if you don't understand and believe what you're singing,
nobody else is going to understand or believe it either. The magic
ingredient in that performance wasn't the song. It wasn't Pete's
voice - he's an old man and his voice is cracked and thin - nor
was it his banjo playing, which is adequate but not exactly
jaw-dropping stuff. It was, start and finish, his absolute belief
in the truth of what the song had to say and his desire to show
that truth to everybody there. And every pro there, no matter how
experienced we might be, learned something from that performance
and had the humility to look at each other and just say "wow, I'm
glad I was here".
In my opinion, those of us who get paid for doing it, that's a
large part of what we get paid for - the belief in the truth of
what we do (whatever it might be) and the ability and confidence
to show the listener that we believe in what we're doing. Yes, I
have seen people fake it and make a living, become "big stars",
even - for a time. Most of them graduate to the "Whatever happened
to" department.
--
DG
Molly
com>, Dick Gaughan (Dick Gaughan <di...@dickalba.demon.co.uk>) wrote
>Had I (or anyone else I can think of offhand) gone up there and
>tried to sing that song, we'd have died on our arses amid cringes
>of embarrassment. But Pete believed every word of that song, it
>was a core part of his life, and that belief and confidence filled
>the hall.
Listening to Bob Copper and Pete Seeger talk about their lives on Radio
4 at lunchtime, I was struck by something else I hadn't previously
realised about Pete Seeger - that he really loves to sing songs that
people can sing along with. (Witness his account of singing "Give Peace
a Chance" because the crowd was just too big for them all to be able to
join in on a faster song, because of the time it took for sound to
travel the distance!) Just about all his songs are those to which
people can join in the verses, not just the chorus - and he loves that.
Probably because then all those people will go away and sing those songs
elsewhere, passing them on in the good old oral tradition.
By contrast, where an audience sits in respectful silence listening to a
singer, they are likely to go away remembering little of the song but
the chorus (if there is one). There is, undoubtedly, a case for such
silent listening - especially when the singer is a guest in a folk club
and can reasonably expect to be listened to (and you can buy the CD
afterwards to learn the songs) - but if the purpose is, as Pete's
purpose seems to be, to spread the song far and wide, then all-join-in-
at-once most certainly has its place.
Jim Lucas
> A few years ago, Tonder festival put on a special extra
> concert headlined by Pete Seeger and Arlo Guthrie.
> Pete walked to the mic, and opened the set with
> every other one of us road-hardened old farts was
> singing their heart out, as was the entire audience.
Pete can do that to you. But so can the atmosphere at Tønder. Putting
the two together is... indescribable.
/Jim
Mark Bluemel
news:679d5uktkh3m74sq9...@4ax.com...
> In <a33dqh$jq5$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk> on Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:47:02
> -0000, "Marjorie Clarke"
> <marj...@theclarkes99nospam.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Looking through the responses so far, I'd say the answer is "the
singer(s)".
>
> I agree with that 100%.
>
> >If they're singing it as if it means nothing at all, and as if they've
done
> >it a hundred times, it comes over as tired and old, even if it's a
perfectly
> >good song. If they sing it as if both the words and the tune really
matter,
> >they may manage to put new life into even a very familiar song
>
[Good stuff on Pete Seeger snipped]
> You can't fake that. To return to an earlier (tedious) debate
> here, if you don't understand and believe what you're singing,
> nobody else is going to understand or believe it either. The magic
> ingredient in that performance wasn't the song. It wasn't Pete's
> voice - he's an old man and his voice is cracked and thin - nor
> was it his banjo playing, which is adequate but not exactly
> jaw-dropping stuff. It was, start and finish, his absolute belief
> in the truth of what the song had to say and his desire to show
> that truth to everybody there. [...]
Yep - I've many times heard a local performer, who is a moderate guitarist
and adequate vocalist. He performs with total conviction - he really
believes in what he does and shows it. Great performance.
Similarly, in self-referential mode, the nicest thing anyone said about me
(reported at second-hand) was "I wouldn't say he has a great voice, but he
can put a song across...". I have a very small repertoire, only songs which
I find fit me and which I can believe in.
> In my opinion, those of us who get paid for doing it, that's a
> large part of what we get paid for - the belief in the truth of
> what we do (whatever it might be) and the ability and confidence
> to show the listener that we believe in what we're doing. Yes, I
> have seen people fake it and make a living, become "big stars",
> even - for a time. Most of them graduate to the "Whatever happened
> to" department.
And it's true of all good music, surely?
Mark
Dick Gaughan
19:26:17 -0000, "Mark Bluemel" <mark_b...@pobox.com> wrote:
>"Dick Gaughan" <di...@dickalba.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:679d5uktkh3m74sq9...@4ax.com...
>> In my opinion, those of us who get paid for doing it, that's a
>> large part of what we get paid for - the belief in the truth of
>> what we do (whatever it might be) and the ability and confidence
>> to show the listener that we believe in what we're doing. Yes, I
>> have seen people fake it and make a living, become "big stars",
>> even - for a time. Most of them graduate to the "Whatever happened
>> to" department.
>
>And it's true of all good music, surely?
Agreed. And of all art. I would go so far as to say that (IMO) the
desire to tell a truth as perceived by the teller is the essence
of art.
--
DG
Hamish Currie
Molly <nos...@mockfords.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:mxBr7jAedfU8Ew$S...@clara.net...
> It was a fairly shattering experience when, as a nervous 17-year-old in
> London, <snip> I nervously approached Peggy Seeger <snip> and asked
whether there might be a chance of hearing "Dark as a Dungeon". Her
response was short and sharp: that
> song had been "sung out in 1948".
Just confirms what I'd always thought about Peggy.
_______
My answer about tired songs is "go and see Johnny Silvo" some old songs,
sure, but what a great night's entertainment is guaranteed. Yes: it's all in
the performance and the belief.
_______
I've always had a problem with "One misty, moisty morning". That guy
"clothed all in leather" just gives me the creeps.
John Spiers
*snip*> I nervously approached Peggy Seeger (the
> floor would have opened and swallowed me if I had had the temerity to
> speak to Ewan MacColl) and asked whether there might be a chance of
> hearing "Dark as a Dungeon". Her response was short and sharp: that
> song had been "sung out in 1948". It probably never occurred to her
> that that was the year I was born.
> *snip*
I come across the same problem time and time again - myself & Jon Boden have
been considering performing "The Larks / (Twas Pleasant & delightful)" as we
sing it in our local sessions. Loads of people have told us that it has
been done to death and it would be silly to do it.
The fact is that it's a great song! we love doing it, and the reason that
the song has become tired is because a lot of people had done it so many
times that they just went through the motions until all feeling in the song
had disappeared. What people have to realise is that songs go through
phases the same as fashions do. We wouldn't have a tradition of singing if
people had permanently consigned songs to the graveyard through over use.
The only exception I make is for "The Fields of Athenry" which for my money
can happily rot in hell as I don't believe it was ever a good song!!
Squeezy