16 Apr 10

[Leo]

Maylaysia

Brid Og Ni Mhaille

__________

 

France

holanderne.MPG

__________

 

UK

Deadmoney Duo playing Rochdale Coconut Dance, Bodenham, April 10th 2010

__________

 

US

Peggy Seeger at Common Fence Music - April 10, 10 #1

 

Evidence Of Flora/The Presbyterian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQw07poGrLU&fmt=18

 

Byrne's(MVI_0012).wmv

__________

 

Ireland

jigs:munster buttermilk; paddy fahys played on khene/khaen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7DH67i-qtw&fmt=18

__________

 

Czech Republic

Concertina - Black Orpheus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AmeTGg5Q0U&fmt=18

__________

 

New Zealand

Concertina report 06 MidApril100Days-Concertina with Guitar.wmv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5NrGCwx_H4&fmt=18

__________

 

Thanks

Leo

[fernando]

Very nice The Presbyterian! first time I listen to this tune, and I loved it!

 

Do anybody know about that tune? In the video it is written that it is a hornpipe. Is it an english hornpipe? I'm not sure about this... and I wonder which time signature is.. is it a 3/2?

 

If anyone know whatever thing about this tune please tell me! In the meantime I will try to learn it, if I can...

 

Fernando

[Tradman]

In the video it's being played as a waltz. I get the feeling that the musicians are paper trained and are not at all familiar with the tune conventions or dance traditions.

 

Very nice The Presbyterian! first time I listen to this tune, and I loved it!

 

Do anybody know about that tune? In the video it is written that it is a hornpipe. Is it an english hornpipe? I'm not sure about this... and I wonder which time signature is.. is it a 3/2?

 

If anyone know whatever thing about this tune please tell me! In the meantime I will try to learn it, if I can...

 

Fernando

[Steve Mansfield]

Very nice The Presbyterian! first time I listen to this tune, and I loved it!

 

Do anybody know about that tune? In the video it is written that it is a hornpipe. Is it an english hornpipe? I'm not sure about this... and I wonder which time signature is.. is it a 3/2?

 

If anyone know whatever thing about this tune please tell me! In the meantime I will try to learn it, if I can...

 

Fernando

 

It is indeed an 'English hornpipe', also known as Cheshire or Lancashire hornpipes, e.g. one of the old 3/2 hornpipes.

 

It appears in the bible of the 3/2 hornpipe, John Offord's magnificent collection John Of The Green The Cheshire Way, which contains more excellent 3/2 hornpipes than you can shake a concertina at.

 

The video performance Leo links to does seem to have the stuffing knocked out of it by playing it as a sort of unbalanced waltz. Cnetter Ratface posted his much better version of the tune in this thread here, and the versions by Blowzabella and the Plain Brown Wrapper Band (I've not heard the Battlefield Band one) are all also worth tracking down to get the real 3/2 drive this tune deserves.

 

That's definately reminded me of one to start at the next session ....

[Dirge]

 

The video performance Leo links to does seem to have the stuffing knocked out of it by playing it as a sort of unbalanced waltz. Cnetter Ratface posted his much better version of the tune in this thread here, and the versions by Blowzabella and the Plain Brown Wrapper Band (I've not heard the Battlefield Band one) are all also worth tracking down to get the real 3/2 drive this tune deserves.

 

Could you enlarge on this please? I can't see how you can play 3/2 as anything else but ONE two three.

[Steve Mansfield]

Could you enlarge on this please? I can't see how you can play 3/2 as anything else but ONE two three.

 

Well I'll certainly try (all the following is strictly IMNSHO and open to correction by thems as knows better of course).

 

Waltz: to exaggerate for explanatory effect, the ONE is a much heavier/stronger beat than the two and three, resulting in

ONE two three ONE two three. (or even, if you will, the brass band Oomp - pah - pah).

 

In a 3/2 hornpipe time the three main beats are more evenly emphasised (less of a ONE two three than a ONE TWO THREE): and there may additionally be smaller sub-divisions discernible within the three individual beats. If you'll pardon an excursion into abc, the final two bars of the A part of the Presbyterian go

 

GB A/B/c/A/ B/c/d | DG GB AG :|

 

note the rhythmic reversal in the third beat of the first bar I quote, and the sheer variety of different rhythms in the two bars - a feature often found in 3/2 hornpipes, less likely to crop up in the stricter rhythm of a dance (e.g. not art-music) waltz.

 

It's all about the emphasis of the main and subsiduary beats within the bars. Waltz, 3/2 hornpipe, and mazurka all share a basic three-time structure, but the weight of the different strong beats, and what goes on between the strong beats, are the distinguishing feature.

 

And just don't get me started on the Swedish polska, where (although, again, they can often be seen notated in 3/4 time) the second beat of the three is lighter and is temporally pulled much closer to the first beat, creating a noticeable rhythmic fingerprint that gives the dance its shape.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dirge]

 

In a 3/2 hornpipe time the three main beats are more evenly emphasised (less of a ONE two three than a ONE TWO THREE): and there may additionally be smaller sub-divisions discernible within the three individual beats. If you'll pardon an excursion into abc, the final two bars of the A part of the Presbyterian go

 

GB A/B/c/A/ B/c/d | DG GB AG :|

 

note the rhythmic reversal in the third beat of the first bar I quote, and the sheer variety of different rhythms in the two bars - a feature often found in 3/2 hornpipes, less likely to crop up in the stricter rhythm of a dance (e.g. not art-music) waltz.

 

It's all about the emphasis of the main and subsiduary beats within the bars. Waltz, 3/2 hornpipe, and mazurka all share a basic three-time structure, but the weight of the different strong beats, and what goes on between the strong beats, are the distinguishing feature.

 

 

Thanks for that Steve, but I'm afraid I'm still puzzled. So if I've understood you right; the 3/2 is a pretty arbitrary description because there is NO emphasis on the first beat of the bar and all beats are even, so there is no bar structure really. The ABC's no use to me I'm afraid, and I had already listened to Mr. Chapman's version without working out what was going on before I asked. (This is 'paper trained' showing it's ugly head I suppose.)

[Boney]

the 3/2 is a pretty arbitrary description because there is NO emphasis on the first beat of the bar and all beats are even

No, there's a three feel, but it's not as strongly dominated by the "one" as a waltz's is. Most traditional players couldn't make a laundry list of rhythmic feels for each tune type, even if they play them correctly -- they'd probably just demonstrate. Actually, it may not be possible to make a definitive list, since there are so many subtle shades of differences that are context-dependent on the region, instrumentation, melodic content, tempo, age of the tune, etc.

 

In a 3/2 hornpipe, the beats are not exactly even, but more of the three-feel comes from the melody as opposed to emphasizing the accents or timing. It may be a bit syncopated, or the rhythm may cross the bar lines sometimes. To me, 3/2 hornpipes are supposed to sound "slippery" and not so metrically obvious. I felt the guitarist's rigid waltz-like accompaniment didn't suit the tune at all.

 

This is the kind of thing I always think of when classically trained musicians call traditional music "simple."

[Dirge]

the 3/2 is a pretty arbitrary description because there is NO emphasis on the first beat of the bar and all beats are even

No, there's a three feel, but it's not as strongly dominated by the "one" as a waltz's is. Most traditional players couldn't make a laundry list of rhythmic feels for each tune type, even if they play them correctly -- they'd probably just demonstrate. Actually, it may not be possible to make a definitive list, since there are so many subtle shades of differences that are context-dependent on the region, instrumentation, melodic content, tempo, age of the tune, etc.

 

In a 3/2 hornpipe, the beats are not exactly even, but more of the three-feel comes from the melody as opposed to emphasizing the accents or timing. It may be a bit syncopated, or the rhythm may cross the bar lines sometimes. To me, 3/2 hornpipes are supposed to sound "slippery" and not so metrically obvious. I felt the guitarist's rigid waltz-like accompaniment didn't suit the tune at all.

 

This is the kind of thing I always think of when classically trained musicians call traditional music "simple."

 

Oh OK Jeff, I think I'm finally there. Thanks.

[fernando]

Thank you very much everybody! this is just what I needed! I'm not very familiar with 3/2, I knew there was something different to me in this tune, and I have it a bit clearer now. I cannot really understand all the details yet, but I'm learning first to recognise them, that's I think a good starting point.

 

I will keep asking every time I don't understand! with so many people in this forum, there is always someone who knows!

 

Fernando

[Boney]

Well...don't take anything I say as definitive. I've listened to quite a few real traditional players, but wouldn't call myself one. Which is why I was somewhat vague.

[Dirge]

Now I understand this business of what makes the thing sound right a bit I went and listened to the version that everyone was being rude about. I didn't like it either. Dull. (But better than the first part, what was that about?) But I don't think this goes as deep as 'paper training' I think this is a one-fingered concertina player who never self accompanies telling the guitarist that 'such-and-such is a good tune' so he is obligingly bom-chick-chicking along.

 

Now I really like Danny's version, it's a most pleasing piece of music. But the interesting thing is if I was told that the Chapman version was a classical baroque piece I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Now Danny, we know, has had serious training on the 'cello. So has he drawn on classical music knowledge, in particular experience of baroque accompaniment techniques to produce an effect that is being hailed as a more authentic treatment? Sounds like it to me.

 

I think what I'm saying boils down to is that this is more about straight musicianship than perceived divisions between styles or training.

[Boney]

if I was told that the Chapman version was a classical baroque piece I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Now Danny, we know, has had serious training on the 'cello. So has he drawn on classical music knowledge, in particular experience of baroque accompaniment techniques to produce an effect that is being hailed as a more authentic treatment? Sounds like it to me.

I don't know if I'd call it more "authentic". I do like it better, but Danny gives it a Baroque feel more than a "traditional English" feel. Quite likely musicianship is one reason for the fact that it comes off better, but I also think the tune is more adaptable to a Baroque feel, which is more period appropriate, at least. It's still a bit "dainty" and "refined" for my tastes, but I'm sure quite a few people prefer that approach to a more rough and tumble take on it.

[Steve Mansfield]

Back home after a day out playing for The Powderkegs, and in my absence Boney has explained things much better than I did, so thanks for that Boney!

[Daniel Hersh]

if I was told that the Chapman version was a classical baroque piece I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Now Danny, we know, has had serious training on the 'cello. So has he drawn on classical music knowledge, in particular experience of baroque accompaniment techniques to produce an effect that is being hailed as a more authentic treatment? Sounds like it to me.

I don't know if I'd call it more "authentic". I do like it better, but Danny gives it a Baroque feel more than a "traditional English" feel. Quite likely musicianship is one reason for the fact that it comes off better, but I also think the tune is more adaptable to a Baroque feel, which is more period appropriate, at least. It's still a bit "dainty" and "refined" for my tastes, but I'm sure quite a few people prefer that approach to a more rough and tumble take on it.

I agree. I like Danny's version, but I generally like Danny's recordings. I also generally like yours, so I'd love to hear a rough and tumble Hayden version of it if you feel like recording one.