English V Anglo

[AlanEgan]

Hi, Skinsegan,

I just edited your last posting to remove the words "Irish" and "traditional". Here's how it reads then:

Modified posting:

If you knew anything about (***) Music you would understand that it comes from within the musician, yes anybody can play it but only some can master it. You cannot learn to be a good (***) musician you have to have it in you. To even suggest that (***) Musicians who spend their lives playing (one genre) are not "serious" musicians only validates my point.

I know a lot of (genre) trained musicians with full grades who have tried to cross over to (other genre) music and failed because they lack music! Everything seems so analysed and robotic and really does not work for (other genre) music. If "accentuation, universality, education, phrasing, depth of nuance, complexity of harmony, elegance of application" were that of what you consider a "serious" musician then we would really have a problem in (***) Music. You cannot learn from a book to be a good (***) musician, you need to immerse yourself in the tradition where you can develop your own style and not just play a tune the exact same as everyone else plays it.

 

Put that way, it rings true for any genre of music. It really contradicts your summing-up:

 

So as I stated before, you cannot compare Genres! You may aswell be trying to compare Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt.

Don't quite get the analogy of Phelps and Bolt. They're both exceptional athletes, dedicated to winning and probably doped to the gills, and have a lot more in common with each other than with normal people, like us musicians.

 

Cheers,

John

 

The words were there for a reason. If you edit anything and take it out of context you will have contradiction.

I was showing that Irish musicians and classical musicicians or any other could not be compared as m3838 suggested that irish musicians were not "serious" musicians because we lacked certain aspects that classically trained musicians had.

 

And yes excuse my ignorance, I forgot that swimming and sprinting were the exact same thing.

[m3838]

you are off the wall again with your last. If you knew anything about Irish Traditional Music

Sometimes I have the impression that many English-Irish-Welshmen are actually Russians, so grumpy and opinionated they are. You successfully destroyed yet another stereotype.

If I wasn't bred in Grumpy and opinionated Russia, I would have formed an opinion of you, that is very close to opinions of some of your countrymen, formed about me.

But I like straight talk, (only with condescension toned down some 87.98%).

Like many self-centered folks, we tend to attribute greater knowledge than earned to ourselves, and deny others their due.

It looks to me that you consider ITM yet another separately standing mountain. Perhaps your binoculars are too strong. And I hold more holistic point of view, that music is music, and all the qualities you attribute to ITM musicians, are just as equally important to all the rest. I agree, you can't be taught real music, be it ITM or Classical, or Jazz or any other artificial genre denomination. You have to be born with it. ITM, as form of folk music, is simpler than, say, classical Jazz, so instead of technical proficiency the emphasis heavily lays on those basic foundations, all arts and crafts stand on, and you named them all.

In comparison, modern architecture is immensely more difficult to design, than Barocco, that uses lots of ornamentation, bordering sometimes on kitch. Modern Architecture depends wholly on composition, and one has to be born with the feel of it. It can't be taught, and much of modern architecture problems lay there.

Now you may argue that ITM is not any simpler than Jazz or Classical music, but we have been there before, and obviously your ears are trained better than mine.

There are two usual reasons for such an assumption: One, is that your ears are better trained, but in such a case you wouldn't be picturing many mountains, but see a more harmonious world. Two, that your ears are simply... yours. But the same token we can easily assume that since my ears are mine, they are trained better than yours. Overall formula:

"Mine is better than yours" is universal, convenient and undeniably correct, although sometimes leads to wars, which are good for the Mankind.

So everything is just as usual.

Best of luck.

[chiton1]

I play Irish music on English concertina for many years now, and although I was often advised to turn to Anglo instead I never did. I find the challenge of producing a sound on my EC that suits Irish music as good as any music made by an AC quite interesting. In fact playing Irish music on an AC would be too easy (for me); there are zillions doing that already, and there are only very few that can make convincing good Irish music on an EC.

Good for you, chiton1. I'm sure we will enjoy hearing a sample of your playing.

 

For inspiration, check out this outstanding example of Irish on English: Paddy Fahy jig. The player also recorded his own bouzouki backing.

 

Hee Michael,

 

I had only the opportunity to listen to the sample you sent us today due to technical PC problems. And I really love it! This is great Irish music in my view.

Do you know who plays this track - who is this DOW?

Hermann

[AlanEgan]

you are off the wall again with your last. If you knew anything about Irish Traditional Music

Sometimes I have the impression that many English-Irish-Welshmen are actually Russians, so grumpy and opinionated they are. You successfully destroyed yet another stereotype.

If I wasn't bred in Grumpy and opinionated Russia, I would have formed an opinion of you, that is very close to opinions of some of your countrymen, formed about me.

But I like straight talk, (only with condescension toned down some 87.98%).

Like many self-centered folks, we tend to attribute greater knowledge than earned to ourselves, and deny others their due.

It looks to me that you consider ITM yet another separately standing mountain. Perhaps your binoculars are too strong. And I hold more holistic point of view, that music is music, and all the qualities you attribute to ITM musicians, are just as equally important to all the rest. I agree, you can't be taught real music, be it ITM or Classical, or Jazz or any other artificial genre denomination. You have to be born with it. ITM, as form of folk music, is simpler than, say, classical Jazz, so instead of technical proficiency the emphasis heavily lays on those basic foundations, all arts and crafts stand on, and you named them all.

In comparison, modern architecture is immensely more difficult to design, than Barocco, that uses lots of ornamentation, bordering sometimes on kitch. Modern Architecture depends wholly on composition, and one has to be born with the feel of it. It can't be taught, and much of modern architecture problems lay there.

Now you may argue that ITM is not any simpler than Jazz or Classical music, but we have been there before, and obviously your ears are trained better than mine.

There are two usual reasons for such an assumption: One, is that your ears are better trained, but in such a case you wouldn't be picturing many mountains, but see a more harmonious world. Two, that your ears are simply... yours. But the same token we can easily assume that since my ears are mine, they are trained better than yours. Overall formula:

"Mine is better than yours" is universal, convenient and undeniably correct, although sometimes leads to wars, which are good for the Mankind.

So everything is just as usual.

Best of luck.

 

ITM is as simple or complicated as the musician playing it. Two musicians can play the same tune on the same instrument and make it sound completely different depending on their interpretation and style. This relies solely on their own composition and as you say cannot be taught. Some people play very simple with great effect and others are just as technical as any other musician of any genre. You stated a very important and valid point about trained ears. Not everyone can hear what a musician plays, lots of ornaments, nuance, etc.. can skip by a lot of people who are not as exposed to that genre.

 

The fact of the matter is, music is music, and everyone is different in what they like. My preference is Irish Traditional Music and I have a respect and amazement for a lot of other genres and their musicians. I am not so egotistical to even comment on who should be called "world-class" or not, there are many an Irish musician worthy of this title as there are in every genre, to try and compare them under one category of music is just ridiculous.

 

I was not being grumpy or opinionated, just stating a fact that it is nobodies place to knock a particular genre or its musicians. Different talents and abilities are needed for each form of music. Just because some of these are not as emphasised in one genre does not make it any less "professional" or "serious".

 

So maybe a little thought would be nice before disrespecting a whole genre and its musicians the next time.

 

Best of Luck,

Alan.

Edited September 28, 2008 by skinsegan

[tombilly]

tom billy youare entiled to your opinion,but tongueing on the whistle is traditional,it is an ulster style,players likePackie Byrne[donegal] also used to use it .admittedly thay didnt tongue constantly,but they did use it a fair bit.

 

I can only add that our daughter was playing in good style as an 8yr old on the whistle ... until her music teacher at school got hold of her and got her playing recorder. She now habitually tongues notes on the whistle and it's not great is all I can say.

[Azalin]

I thought that might be the answer. You only name some contemporary players. That's not a definition of a "style" that one could gauge one's own or someone else's playing by. I don't know if they're all Anglo players, but if they are, they'r no gauge of how to play flute, fiddle or EC.

 

Good phrasing is not irish, it's just what really musical people do.

 

This does all seem rather pointless. Why don't you ITM lot just honestly say that the rules state that no ECs or bul-bul-tarangs are allowed in you genre (like they're not allowed in string quartets), and let the rest of us get creative with our traditional material!

 

I never said irish music had good phrasing and other styles didnt... I just said a previous clip didnt have good "irish music phrasing", I didnt say it didnt have good phrasing.

 

As for the rest, well, a good analogy of what you're doing would be to try to lecture people on politics when you don't even know who George Bush is, it's a bad start if you want to be credible.

 

By the way those musicians cover pretty much all instruments played in ITM, but there's no harmonica or hammer dulcimer I must admit :-)

[catty]

As for the rest, well, a good analogy of what you're doing would be to try to lecture people on politics when you don't even know who George Bush is, it's a bad start if you want to be credible.

 

BTW--at the risk of obfuscating this thread, but in the interest of taste...it's poor form to use the terms "George Bush" and "credible" in the same sentence.

[Azalin]

BTW--at the risk of obfuscating this thread, but in the interest of taste...it's poor form to use the terms "George Bush" and "credible" in the same sentence.

 

You're absolutely right. Maybe I should have made an analogy comparing "George Bush" / "credibility" with "English Concertina" / "irish music" instead... HAHA!!

 

Darn I'm really evil.

[Michael Reid]

For inspiration, check out this outstanding example of Irish on English: Paddy Fahy jig. The player also recorded his own bouzouki backing.

I had only the opportunity to listen to the sample you sent us today due to technical PC problems. And I really love it! This is great Irish music in my view.

Do you know who plays this track - who is this DOW?

Hermann

He's a member of thesession.org (and frequent poster there) who lives in Australia. "Dow" is a pseudonym. I've never met him but I know people who have met him and played with him in the U.K. That's about all I know.

[m3838]

ITM is as simple or complicated as the musician playing it.

 

Then out of curiosity open an ITM transcription and compare it with any Rag. It'll show you something very interesting, namely: that musical composition may be very complex just in the bare bones. Then comes the interpretation. Initial reading of any ITM tune is supremely easy. To the point that there is no music in it, just diddling. Like in much of any other folk music, it doesn't exist written, it's too simple. So there comes the artist. It doesn't bash nor it elevates any genre over any other. Just simple fact of life. In a way it is more difficult to make an art piece of Folk tune, it takes more talent. But immensely less technical proficiency.

 

Not everyone can hear what a musician plays, lots of ornaments, nuance, etc.. can skip by a lot of people who are not as exposed to that genre.

 

Very true. Just don't skip one important fact that Folk and "serious" musics have different goals, different target audiences and different appeal. Folk music doesn't require virtuosity (at least it's denomination of "virtuosity" is different). If it does, it's not Folk anymore. As far as I'm concerned, I can't care less about Folk music played by Symphony Orchestra, and I've heard lots of it. Don't forget, I'm born in USSR, where good 50% of orchestras' repertore was arranged Folk music.

 

The fact of the matter is, music is music, and everyone is different in what they like. My preference is Irish Traditional Music and I have a respect and amazement for a lot of other genres and their musicians. I am not so egotistical to even comment on who should be called "world-class" or not, there are many an Irish musician worthy of this title as there are in every genre, to try and compare them under one category of music is just ridiculous.

 

You contradict yourself. If music is music, then where are the divisions between the genres? And who is denominator of the Genre? You? We always have to remember, that all the "genres" are there only for convenience of conversation, they are more of a metaphor, unless we compare genres that are very far apart, but it's specific case and we have to agree to use such comparison. Since we didn't agree to it, I can suggest to go from village to village of Ireland until it becomes England and see, if you notice change of genre. If not, than indeed, we can compare musicians of different genres all right. If you did notice sudden change, universal along all the border, then we can't compare and we must treat the borders as Divine Intention.

 

I was not being grumpy or opinionated, just stating a fact that it is nobodies place to knock a particular genre or its musicians.

 

You are been over sensitive. Nobody knocks your beloved ITM by saying that folk music is simpler. And coming back to the topic, unlike Cajun's mainstream, shaped by one row accordion, ITM's mainstream is not shaped by AC. Just how many Irish musicians can tell the difference between the concertina types?

As to your unwillingness to compare the two mentioned athletes, you deliberately change subject of comparison. You understand the point very well.

[AlanEgan]

I see now where the problems are and I realise that I am wasting my time repeating myself, I can see from your comments that you really don't have a great understanding of Irish Traditional Music and have obviously not been exposed to some of its amazing musicians who can just about do anything on their instrument with very technical proficiency.

 

You are generalising all folk music and this is another problem. You seem to class the depth of music on what can be written down on paper and analysed, this might work for some genres but definitely not Irish Trad. If you asked one of the many great Irish musicians to play a tune, ask them again the day after and compare both, I can guarantee that there will be many differences. To try and confine ITM and put it in writing is not what trad is about and that is why we have "simple" notation that anybody can learn.

 

There is no point in me explaining myself over and over. I just hope you allow yourself to be more open-minded and take in some of the wealth of music that is out there, and not just what you consider to be "professional" or "serious" music.

[Mark Evans]

Misha, let da lads up fer pity's sake! You've stepped into the realm of religion here. Like me an' a bunch of oprea queens discussing who's the better soprano...Callas or Tibaldi. Only thing settled will be the amount of blood on the floor. A cyber pint to ye all on my account and let's move on.

[m3838]

I see now where the problems are and I realise that I am wasting my time repeating myself, I can see from your comments that you really don't have a great understanding of Irish Traditional Music and have obviously not been exposed to some of its amazing musicians who can just about do anything on their instrument with very technical proficiency.

Example please. I want to hear and see that "anything". Really do. What I'm talking about is not whether "me" or "you" are exposed to some "great" - it's all matter of taste. I'm comparing particular thing: physical complexity of composition, just how many notes are there, and how many key modulations, how rhythm is changing etc. Because all that you say about ITM is applicable to any other genre in full sail. Agree or not?

ITM doesn't stand alone, the only reason we are talking about it is it's sudden and probably short lived world spread popularity. In comparison the Gypsy music has been super popular all over Russia since times immemorable.

 

You are generalising all folk music and this is another problem. You seem to class the depth of music on what can be written down on paper and analysed

Not at all. I can't care less about written notation. I talk about bare bones melody and harmony. A Ragtime is more complex than a jig. Not better, not more interesting, but more difficult to play, it has two hands in it. Then you interpret it any way you want and never play twice the same. What made you think that variety lives only in ITM?

 

There is no point in me explaining myself over and over. I just hope you allow yourself to be more open-minded and take in some of the wealth of music that is out there, and not just what you consider to be "professional" or "serious" music.

Why is it people never give themselves the trouble to actually listen to opponent? Why engage in a conversation, when it's is not your objective to listen? First you don't listen, then accuse me of been negative. May be you should read my comments before replying?

It's second case of Folk vs. "serious" knee jerk reaction.

[catty]

Example please. I want to hear and see that "anything". Really do. What I'm talking about is not whether "me" or "you" are exposed to some "great" - it's all matter of taste.

 

May be you should read my comments before replying?

 

I occasionally read what you write . . . sometimes I think it would be more effective if accompanied by a musical soundtrack.

[Boney]

I'm comparing particular thing: physical complexity of composition, just how many notes are there, and how many key modulations, how rhythm is changing etc. Because all that you say about ITM is applicable to any other genre in full sail. Agree or not?

First of all, I grant classical music has more complex composition than Irish traditional music (or really any traditional music). I think everyone here would grant that. But complexity does not imply quality. A short, simple poem that distills a thought perfectly can be much more difficult to write than a complex, long one. And someone who can consistently write very effective, simple poems is a virtuoso poet, no matter that they don't write epics.

 

If the composition of traditional pieces was too complex, it would dilute their purpose. It is music to get you dancing, or music to set a mood for a song with a melody you remember and can hum. It's meant to appeal to a more basic, earthy, spontaneous part of us than lofty "art" music is meant to. So, how do you add interest to simple music without making the structure too complex? This is a skill that traditional musicians have been developing for hundreds, even thousands of years, but it's a question that hardly concerns classical musicians at all.

 

Traditional musicians bend notes, add rapid-fire "twiddles" (much faster than classical "grace notes") at will, they'll dig into certain notes with a gritty drive, they'll stomp their feet, thay'll add or leave out notes, they'll "spank" their instruments, they'll add spontaneous variations, they'll play ahead or behind of the beat while others stay on it, they'll play in a "ragged unison," in which everyone is listening to and spontaneously responding to the other musicians' input, and the audience. They'll play instruments with gritty or nasal tones that would be considered unsuitable for classical use. They'll let their fingers fly with abandon instead of using precise, efficient movements. They'll sway and bob, or even dance, while playing. All of these things, and many more, belong to an ethos that is not part of classical music. The musician who brings it all together in an organic, living, dynamic way, who can use a great variety of the traditional musicians' techniques subconsciously, effectively, and musically, is a true virtuoso, and is creating a very complex effect of ever-changing variation on many levels, even if the bare bones of the tune they're playing is "simple."

 

Yes, things similar to many of these techniques are used by classical musicians, but they are generally used as "special effects" -- it's not integral to the style. The whole idea of spontaneous, physical, rough-and-ready grit, sweat, and dirt is not part of classical music. Some classical soloists may dance at the fringes of it...and some traditional musicians dance on the fringes of compositional complexity...but they both risk very quickly losing what gives their style of music its identity.

 

It's like the old joke: "what's the difference between a violin and a fiddle? A fiddle is fun to listen to." You can't quantify "fun" like you can the compositional elements you listed, but you can hear it, and it takes skill and experience to create. Some amazingly technically proficient musicians that would rank high in every category you listed just don't get toes tapping, whereas other musicians who play much more simply composed music get people jumping to their feet and shaking their butts. Does any classical music get people shaking their butts? I'd say no -- as a corollary to what you said earlier, I'd say, "the more they get your butt shaking, the less of a classical player they are."

 

Can you accept the possibility that there is a rhythmic, energetic, dynamic "something" that expert traditional musicians achieve which is just not part of the classical idiom? And that this "something" at its highest levels takes an extremely rare level of talent and skill? If you don't hear it, perhaps you should consider the possibility that others can sense something you can't?

 

I can see from your comments that you really don't have a great understanding of Irish Traditional Music and have obviously not been exposed to some of its amazing musicians who can just about do anything on their instrument with very technical proficiency.

Example please. I want to hear and see that "anything".

Here's Johnny Doran, playing solo Uilleann pipes: Colonel Fraser - My Love Is In America - Rakish Paddy. This was recorded live in 1947, first take, no edits or re-dos. The acetate ran out, which is why there's a fade at the end. What do you think?

 

For the record, there are classical pieces I truly love too. Both can make my hair stand on end. But they do it in different ways.

 

[Edited to fix a few unfortunate typos]

Edited September 30, 2008 by Boney

[tombilly]

Nice piece of writing Boney, though 'dogs and bones' come to mind with M8383 ..

[Mark Evans]

Guess I'll be drinking alone.

 

To be honest this is almost as much fun as watching Massachusetts drivers cutting each other of in traffic....

[AlanEgan]

Need I say more, and believe me this is just the tip of the iceberg. Recordings only portray half of a live performance.

 

And by the way m3838 "need I say more" was a rhetorical question. I'm done with this discussion.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOw3tszDJ6A

Reel.mp3

Edited October 1, 2008 by skinsegan