Hi, i feel my fiddle playing is lacking a certain something. I feel i need to start getting into that zone that makes a tune sound so much better by playing in the groove. I have no trouble doing it when playing along with great players but it's something i struggle with when playing on my own. I think if i figured this out it would take my playing onto another level. Sorry if that's vague. I haven't really hit the nail on the head but I hope you know what i'm talking about here.
If anyone's been here before let's hear from you because I am wondering if i will ever break through this barrier or maybe i'm doomed to never progress from this situation i've found myself in.
I am 26 just now and have been playing like mad for the last year and a half or so.
I think you did hit the nail on the head when you said 'I am wondering if i will ever break through this barrier'. After I had been playing a few years I came to the conclusion that learning music was like plateau's, you seem not to be going anywhere for ages but it you persist then something happens and you are suddenly on the next plateau and then things seem to continue like that. After a few levels it does become easier. Someone one described it to me as like pushing a boulder up a hill - if you stop it is difficult to get the boulder started again. In a nutshell you just have to push yourself and let nature do the rest. Have a look at Jig's thread about the constant need to improve. You may find a level you are happy with or you may enjoy always looking for the next plateau.
Do you need to relax? Is your upper right arm still and your wrist loose? Do you have tension in your left hand, thumb, fingers? Are you remembering to breathe? (sounds like a ridiculous question, but I have to remind myself to breathe all the time!)
Do the fingers on your left hand know what notes they're playing, in what order, and when? A lot of times it's worth practicing just one measure over and over, drilling the note pattern into your fingers, so you're not frantically trying to keep up when you get to the tricky spot in a tune.
How tight are your ornaments? You can give a lot of shape to your playing by working on just the precise timing you need for your cuts, for example.
Last---can you take a lesson from any of those great players you're playing with? There is absolutely nothing like having a good player sitting right in front of you and showing you slowly exactly how they do something cool. Don't be shy---if they have what you want, go after it!
Well sure and your not the only one!, its often refered to as a plateau, where however much you practice you dont seem to progress. Dont worry, it is an illusion.You are progressing.perhaps not at the rate youd like but....
I recomend taking one tune and revisiting it , ie playing absolutely steady[with a metronome] nice and slowly ,not letting any mistakes get through. do this for a few hours, for a few days.This may sound extreme but i assure you it will pay off.
really get to know the tune. So that at some point you can mentally step back and observe what is happening, relax and watch. Distance your self from your mental involvement,
for eg, learning to walk. This was a complicated operation, yet you managed and you were just a kid!.... you just kept at it, without thinking.... i will never get this walking thing. Cos you had no doubt.
Have no doubt. mentally stepping back will allow you to look at how your body is behaving, your shoulders tense? breathing forced? Try yoga.Playing the fiddle is a complicated body activity, dont set a schedule. Let yourself develop naturally.
good luck
I think you should take a huge amount of encouragement from the fact that you recognise aspects of your playing on which you need to work. An awful lot of players of ITM get to a pretty basic standard (yeah, so you've learned 250 tunes sort of thing...) and then think they're the absolute dog's danglies. You don't think that so you'll go far!
If you can take a lesson from a great player, go for it. Even it it's a workshop at a festival. I've progressed more by taking lessons for a few months (and I'm talking 1 lesson per month for all of 2 months in a row now) than I had in the prior year or two by myself. Before lessons, I kept learning tunes, but it took a great player to help me see what I really needed to work on.
I don't know you (at least I don't know who you are), achisholm, but as a teacher, and someone who's been through the same trials, I'd put money on one thing:
Rhythm.
Rhythm, IMHO, is where that "groove" originates. If you're rhythm is good, you'll MAKE the groove--if it's weak, you'll only feel that groove when playing with other people that have it. It's a very common problem.
Try recording yourself, and listen to your own playing critically, especially your rhythm (both alone, and in a session). A very small shakiness in your rhythm will very quickly deep-six any groove you may be working towards.
achisholm, when you say, "I have no trouble doing it when playing along with great players" I feel I must ask the question: do you mean playing actually with great players? or playing along with recordings? (I'm sorry if I have the wrong end of the stick)
I hate to disagree with you screetch after you excellent post on the other thread but If the groove happens naturally then why do so many people not have it? I dont agree its too subtle to learn mechanically,
It is a mechanical skill just like any other, as georgi so clearly said its in the rhythm, and as you say in the relaxation.
Unfortunatly, it seems that for some people it really is too subtle to learn. But the upside is that if you realise that you are not there, then the probability is that you will get there.
The despair comes from hearing people play who think they have it.
"If the groove happens naturally then why do so many people not have it?"
I think it's because many people are too focused on what their hands are doing and not getting into the feeling that the music comes from.
Maybe I'm just over-generalizing from my own experience, but coming from a classical background I could never get the rhythm of trad right by focusing on the mechanics of the rhythm. Only when I started to feel the music on an emotional level did I get the groove right.
About the mechanical rhythm thing: you can play dead-on with a metronome and have the rhythm completely wrong. Keeping a beat and having the groove are very different things.
I think some people may simply practice to a metronome and consider it right if they stay on beat, but it's the rhythm between the beats that's the hard part. I think you guys all understand that, I'm just clarifying what I mean by mechanical rhythm.
Sure, keeping a beat is basic and you have to be able to play with a metronome. Otherwise you'll never be able to play with others and keep in time.
But the groove is different thing, and I think you have to know the feel of a jig, polka, etc. to get it right. Looking at the time signature and listening to a clicking machine won't get you there. Believe me, I've tried
Getting the right groove is about timing and emphasis, and of course relaxation. Some people think of it as something that's impossible to achieve unless you have natural ability, but you have to believe that we all have natural rhythm. It's just a case of finding it, and that may take some time.
First of all, if you're trying to learn tunes off sheetmusic, throw it out now and don't use it at all. You haven't got how to play the tunes yet so, until you can, don't use sheetmusic. It won't help.
It's the same with language. Take English as an example. If I write the word "pineapple", and I tell you that I'm saying it out aloud now in front of my computer screen, you know that I'm saying "PINE-app-le" and not "pine-APP-le" or "pine-app-LE", right? That's because you already know how to speak English, and you know how you're supposed to say "pineapple" properly. It's a given. It doesn't matter if you see an actual pineapple and want to tell a foreigner how to say it in English, or if you read the word somewhere or whatever, you'll always say it or "read" it in your head exactly the same way, with the stress on the 1st syllable, and the first syllable slightly longer than the others.
Your language has a natural rhythm, and that comes from inside you. If it didn't have that natural rhythm, then people would find it very difficult to understand what you were saying, so you'd have to write it down to communicate it, and your bad English would probably cause you to make mistakes in your writing as well. Same with people who don't have that groove. They're like speakers of a foreign language who haven't got the length and stress of each syllable right.
It's exactly the same thing with tunes. You have to learn to speak the language of Irish music. You're learning the music in your 20s, so that's quite late compared to Irish kids who learn it at school and can pick up the rhythms early. So as an adult, you've got your work cut out I'm afraid. You're going to have to spend a few years working hard on making your tunes sound authentic and not just like a bunch of notes. You need to work hard so you're not being carried by your session mates. Anyone can recite something in a foreign language along with a bunch of native speakers, hiding behind them, but not everyone could get away with reciting it solo and make it sound like a native speaker. You need to get to a stage where you can hold your own rhythm so your session mates can simply hold a normal, relaxed musical "conversation" with you. They don't want to have to slow their speech down to help you catch what they're saying, and they don't want to have to limit their vocabulary either.
At least you've got past the first stage. You've realised you haven't got it, and you've decided you want it. A lot of people don't even get to that stage. They think they're playing the music when in fact, to a seasoned Irish musician, they simply sound like "foreigners" or "non-native speakers" of the music.
So what you have to do now is decide you're going to put in the hard yards in order to sound like a native speaker. You're going to have to listen carefully to how long each note is and how much stress to place on each note. Listen to a lot of really good musicians play the same tune. Buy all the classic recordings and give them all a listen. These are your native speakers. Listen to how they communicate the same thing. They'll do it all in different ways (like slightly different accent in your pronunciation) but there'll be something they all have in common, and that's the groove.
Try this for starters. Take a jig you think you know really well and record yourself playing it and listen to it. Now say "panda bear" over and over again: "panda bear panda bear panda bear panda bear panda bear" without any gap or pause between the words. Notice that the first and third syllables "pan-" and "bear" are longer and slightly more accented than the "-da" in the middle. This is your natural speech rhythm. Notice that you don't have to "keep time" by tapping your foot. Your body is producing the right sounds in the right timing and stress extremely consistently because of the years of exposure you've had to your native tongue, and the years of practice you've had speaking it and understanding it. You don't go around tapping your foot to make sure your sentences are in time when you're having a conversation with a friend do you? With tunes you shouldn't have to tap your foot. Your body should be producing it naturally. That's not to say you shouldn't tap your foot; a lot of musos do, but, crucially, the good ones don't NEED to.
Now play the jig again, and play the notes in a kind of 6/8 rhythm but make them say "panda bear panda bear" etc. Sometimes it'll come out "PAN-da bear" and sometimes more like "pan-da BEAR" but that's ok. At least the rhythm will be consistent. Once you can do this, you can speed it up to any speed and your rhythm will still be consistent. Try saying "panda-bear-panda-bear-panda-bear" as fast as you can, but make the words make sense, so e.g. don't shorten the word "bear" to "beh", otherwise you've changed the meaning of the phrase. Notice that you can say it quite fast and the rhythm of what you're saying will always be consistent. At the same time, maintaining the "meaning of the phrase" will keep your rhythm in check. It's a two-way thing. Your rhythm communicates the meaning, and the meaning communicates the rhythm.
You can find your own phrases to repeat for reels, hornpipes and other types of tune. Just realise that you already have really solid rhythm there inside you. You just have to apply it to your music.
Having lived in Germany for 18 years, Munich for some 10 years, it was a great day when a local asked me if I was born in Stuttgart ( I had lived there first for 8 years). Then I realised it had taken me some 12 years to get to the stage of speaking like a native. (not identical to a native though)
The subtle combinations of vocabulary, intonation, accent and rythms of a language are identical to the musical learning journey that's for sure.
Achisholm, take the trip the same way I did with that language. Total immersion by listening wall to wall trad by native players every available minute. I also took the the rather difficult route to the language by only being around native speakers, which also applies to the music, I think.
The reward is great but the apprenticeship is long, once you accept that, learning becomes a pleasurable obsession.
panda bear, I like it.....
>>You don't go around tapping your foot to make sure your sentences are in time when you're having a conversation with a friend do you<<
Dow - good stuff. I'll be combing through that for ideas to steal...
As to the idea of "time" versus "groove", earlier in the thread, it's important to keep in mind that they are both important and they are totally different things. Groove is about phrasing, about hearing the ways notes relate to each other in "words" within a tune. Is this note a pickup to the beat, or is it the end of the last phrase? If it could be either, which do I want it to be - and which way is the other guy playing it? Playing whistle is pretty handy for this, because the instrument forces you to think about where you can breathe, which pretty much forces phrases to happen. Listen to flute and whistle players, and you'll get a boost on this part of "groove".
Groove is also about your relation to the beat - are you on top of the beat, are you behind the beat, are you pushing it a little? All are okay, as long as you know where you are and what you're doing and why. Listen to John Carty's recording of Silver Spear, the one from At It Again. First time through he's playing lazy, behind the beat. Second time it feels like he speeds up, and he does a little but what he's really doing is squaring up on top of the beat. Third time, again, he does speed up a little, but not so much as it feels like he does, because he starts to get out in front of the beat - not enough to be off time, of course, but enough to feel like he's really flying along, when if you tap your foot you'll find that he's playing at a pretty normal pace. That's groove, baby. Own that, and there's not a lot you can't do.
Martin Hayes is a master of this. Listen carefully to his "slow" tunes and a lot of the time he's actually playing at a pretty standard tempo - it's just his command of "groove" (I'd usually say phrasing) that makes it feel like it's slow and easy. Compare the actual tempo of, say his "Old Bush" to Molloy & Keane's - he's slower by a hair, but sounds like he's dripping honey while they're burning rubber. It's the groove. Of course, Molloy and Keane and the rest of them are also using the same tricks, but they're out to make it sound faster - same game, in reverse.
Trying to think a lot about pushing and dragging the beat will probably get in the way of playing, but you might play a game with yourself - pick a tune that you know pretty well and, without changing the tempo, see if you can play it slow and easy like Hayes and up-time like Molloy. If you can move smoothly between those two poles, I think you'll be closer to your groove.
What a great thread. Suddenly I feel so small! But if you ever rely on a metronome make it snappy then chuck it out. It's like a crutch that you have to cut your foot off to use. They have their uses, but not many for the likes of us. They are the destroyers of soul. You have one in your brain any way - all you have to do is find it!
I love my metronome [ if i could find it!] Aint never chuckin it, its my buddy.The only, sniff, friend i've got....I know i can , sniff, rely on it, []as long as i have batterys]. And it comes in handy for multi-tracking....Oh come back metronome... all is forgiven
i think you should relax and try not to think of anything when you play, obviously this wont help your playing long term because you need to think about timing, breathing ect.
But just try playing the tune once throughtout without thinking an you'll find your brain tells you what to do automatically and how to play, you serously need to clear your head of everything though and relax. It works for me if im struggling but it might not be for everyone.
Sometimes i think people can get to caught up in concentration that they lose their natural grove.
I'm sorting through these same issues myself with varying degrees of success, but I guess I'd simply add that listening a ton helps. Like if you do work that involves lots of reading and/or writing on a computer or whatever and minimal human interaction, you can have music going on headphones. Maybe by a process of osmosis the tunes will creep into your head if you have them around in the background. Or that's what I am hoping for.
I think that basic good technique is at the heart of getting in the groove (I'm following on from Kennedy's excellent post at the beginning of this thread). It's often simple, but not obvious, things like, for example,
coordinating bow and fingers when you go from one string to another - if the bow lags behind the fingers, then there's a problem to be worked on;
lifting the bow when you change to an adjacent string - this is likely to cause bow bounce when it comes down on the second string, and so a loss of timing - so keep bow in contact with the strings at the cross-over.
If there's a problem with a tune it's often not the tune as a whole but a small section of it, perhaps only two or three notes, where technique is somehow lacking and making the whole sound messy. The thing to do is to isolate that bit, analyze what's going wrong, and correct it (you may need advice from another player to do this), and practice slowly until it's right.
I'm not convinced Trev. I know loads of people with very sloppy technique who play with great great rhythm and drive. They do sound messy, but it doesn't interupt the "groove" at all
You can't actively get in the groove using mechanical techniques or exercises.
You can't really explain it unless you've got it et cetera...
"You just have to be cool, listen, relax into it and let it take over; stop thinking and just go on to the auto-pilot to Groovesville.
It's like, man, you either dig or you don't!!"
(puts away 70's ghetto hat and accent!)
I agree that rhythm & drive can be achieved without accuracy. I find this true in many other styles as well... All those blues players purposely creating a sloppy sound, yet maintaining more than their share of feel. Punk rock - maybe overly simplistic, but no denying the "drive" produced amid that mess of hormones. I grew up being told it was rooted in culture, I personally think it is more of a consistent attitude maintained by the player than anything else.
Something else I want to say on this topic is you can draw the language analogy thing with ornamentation too. Some players/teachers talk about ornamentation in terms of "articulation" as opposed to "decoration". No surprise that "articulation" is a term used in linguistics to describe how you make sounds by controlling airflow in different ways using the various parts of your mouth and throat. Try saying "give me the apple" in a normal voice with no strong intonation or stress. Most people would probably find that "the apple" kind of runs together and comes out as something like "thee-apple". Now say "give me the APPLE!" as in, "the APPLE, not the ORANGE!" This time, depending on how strongly you want to emphasize the word "apple", you might find yourself separating the "apple" from the "the", by articulating it with a glottal stop, or catch in your throat. A cut in Irish music can do a similar thing. It's used to accent a note and make it leap out at you.
I think that's what Michael means when he says ornamentation isn't separate from what some people call the "bare bones" of the tune. It's part of the whole "language" you're trying to speak. If you take the cuts and rolls from Irish music and analyse the bare bones of a tune, it's like taking that glottal stop from your repertoire of things you can do with the word "apple". You can do it of course. But do it across the board and nobody's going to mistake you for a native speaker.
And with repertoire too. The more words you know, the more practice you're going to get with various aspects of the language, and the better you'll be at it. Ever known an astounding musician who has done loads of recordings but who only knows 10 tunes. No, of course not. Knowing the Kesh and Drowsy Maggie and Out Across the Ocean and getting by in your local session with just those three tunes is like coming in and having the same, limited conversation ever week. "Hi, my name is Joe Bloggs. Nice to meet you. Bye". Then next week maybe the tunes are in a different order: "Hi. Nice to meet you. I'm Joe Bloggs. Bye". That makes Joe Bloggs a nice enough bloke to talk to but a bit boring
Dow's advice and ideas are very good.
I like the "panda bear" one especially!
However, "GROOVE" is esentially an ensemble thing.
You can't "get in the groove" if you are performing solo or practicing.
You have to be playing with at least one other.
And you have to LISTEN to each other and mimic each other's subtle rhythmic, pitch related and tonal variations.
One of the most important things is the gaps. The tiny moments of silence, too small to notate. This is what gives feel and groove.
And this can only happen if you have an ensemble (of any size) that can hear each other and listens to yourself, each other and the whole combined sound all at the same time.
(And playing along to some old record is pointless in this regard. You may be listening o the other players but they sure ain't listening to you!)
Solo grooving is the only cure for the dreaded groove clash, that is, when two grooves don't jive. Of course, that shouldn't happen if everyone's listening to each others' grooves...but then that brings us back to solo playing, which allows you to happily do your own groove without having to do any on-the-fly groove adjustment.
This is not to be mistaken for on-the-groove fly adjustment, which usually takes place after a trip to the lavatory.
To me, groove is more than playing in time, it is playing in time with feeling. It is far easier to bob happily in another's wake than it is to set the pace yourself. And after years of playing this stuff, I am just starting to be comfortable leading the "convoy" myself, and cutting a wake that others can follow.
You have gotten a lot of good advice on things you can try, achisolm. My own advice is work on fundamentals to the point where you no longer have to think about them while you play. At that point, your mind will be free to find the elusive groove. And it does feel great when you get there!
Al's advice was "work on fundamentals to the point where you no longer have to think about them while you play". Al's "fundamentals" is what I termed "basic good technique" in my post. That's the point I was trying to get across, but in different words using specific examples relating to bowing.
"I know loads of people with very sloppy technique who play with great great rhythm and drive. They do sound messy, but it doesn't interupt the "groove" at all"
Michael, didn't you just post in a recent thread that if your rolls are sloppy then you're a rubbish fiddle player? I'm fairly sure I saw something like that that you wrote. I agree that certain things about technique like bow hold and left palm position don't need to be standardized, but other things like flexibility and timing and coordination do. You can't say that a fiddler who misses half the notes in a tune but still has great rhythm is doing a good job. Or am I missing what you meant by "messy"?
Right. Timing can't be sloppy. So what part of technique do you think *can* be sloppy, and sound messy, but still let someone play with great rhythm and drive? I don't know that I've seen that, myself...
Groove depends on a steady beat, and then swinging or otherwise tweaking the timing of the notes between the beats. Any technique sloppiness that interferes with a steady beat or the intentional refinements of timing will impair the groove.
Intonation and tone don't matter much. But that's about it.
There is so much ' groovy' music out there to listen to, it is hardly a complicated subject! What makes the groove difficult in trad is , to my mind, the speed and number of notes. Obviously the mechanics of the instrument must be 'mastered' first off. Take a simple, operative word there; simple, tune say a straight forward polka and play it so much , carefully and slowly that it becomes part of you. Then play it faster, until it actually sounds like a polka; full of bounce, lift and energy. Thats it really.
I know I repeat myself with the metronome thing but it bears repeating, one note per click. you will then have a sharp, clear, rhythm. after that its up to you ....
Clearly immersing your self in trad if essential, it almost goes without saying... but i said it just to be really clear. spend your hard earned money , weekly ,listen constantly , well ok perhaps not when you sleep,...... though actually there is a school of thought that says you should listen when you sleep!!
Another thing, self hypnosis, program your main frame just as you fall asleep and as you wake with positive affirmations, this may sound 'hippy' but it aint.
once again... good luck.
Slop: leaving notes out completely, playing wrong notes, playing out of tune, accidentally hitting open strings, playing through rests, lack of phrasing, ignoring dynamics (loud/soft sections), random tempo changes, misc. scratch noises from poor bowing, misc. squeaks from not properly stopping strings, etc.
All this stuff can happen and the preformance of the tune can still have plenty of drive/bounce/lift/lilt/swing. Yeah, you won't be able to get away with this slop and still maintain a groove if you commit it repeatedly at the "wrong time".
So some of it is technique - being able to avoid mistakes at critical points - but technique won't solve the problem either.
To get the right lift, you just have to listen to enough of the music played this way. It isn't just a syncopation, but it is also articulation. I think it is too subtle yet at the same time too complex to mechanically break down and spoon feed to someone. But if you actively listen enough, and keep attempting to imitate it, you'll eventually find you are doing it.
The reason I say it is mostly attitude is because you have to have the right mindset to project a feeling and it has to be projected strongly to come across through your instrument. If think you're a timid mouse, your playing will come across the same regardless of what you are attempting to project and how well you understand the mechanics of producing it.
"Intonation and tone don't matter much." Forgive me if you think I'm picking on you, tat, but that is the single most egregious remark in this thread by a long chalk. How can you say that! Of course intonation and tone matter. I've seen more than one fiddle player whose intonation was sour in the extreme, sh!te in fact, who completely ruined a session. There's nothing more soul-destroying than sitting next to someone playing blatantly out of tune. And God-awful breathy whistles and flutes, not to speak of squawky harmonicas with vile tone...what less do you need!
Well steve, im with you on this one. But i can see what he means.Its a matter of degree, a degree out of intonation wont kill a tune, but a degree out of rhythm and its a gonner!
Steve, in the context of ***groove*** (ostensibly what this thread is about), intonation and tone don't matter much. You can have the scrapiest tone and most dissonant intonation in the world and still get a great groove going.
Paddy Canny didn't have the loveliest tone, and his intonation was different than modern standards, but boy did he have groove in spades.
Obviously tone and intonation matter. just not when it comes to groove. I often tell people who are learning an instrument to play a tune over and over to find the groove, and not to worry about their intonation or tone. Yes, their sound gets sloppy. But with less to worry about (as beginners), they usually find it easier to focus on the rhythm and timing. And they find the groove. Then they can build intonation and tone back in.
So...I do realize you're not picking on me. But it often seems that you like to jump to arguing a point without considering the contexty of the thread it's in. And you use fairly aggro language ("the single most egregious remark...."). YMMV, but for a lot of people, conversation is easier and more fun when it's not so antagonistic. Just my tuppence.
You might also read Kennedy's post directly above mine and see that I was responding to her query about what sorts of things don't matter when you're trying to get your groove on.
Well, tat, I've just checked your post again and you made no qualifications, so having a pot back at me for not precisely comprehending you is really quite silly. However, you've now clarified, so that's sorted. I'm not of the school of thought that says you can develop one aspect of your playing in isolation from the others. "It doesn't matter if you ignore your lousy intonation as long as you 'get the groove' (wonderful blues-man talk, eh! " just won't do for me. It is too mechanical. A good musician grows organically, not by dissecting his/her approach as described above. Mechanics don't make music. They play tunes but they don't make music.
Well now you're ignoring the context of this thread, splitting hairs, and twisting what I've posted above. That's your perogative, of course, but I can think of better ways to spend my time.
My good man, I just told you it was sorted but you seem to wish to continue to milk the bull. It's simple. Say what you mean in your posts. No need to leave us with a lot to process unnecessarily. You're an erudite enough chap so you should find it quite easy to do that. Better to spend your time agreeing or disagreeing with the substantive points of my posts, eh what?
It's just occurred to me - and I've just returned very late from a long session and walked past what may very well be a murder scene down by the river, judging by the number of police and forensic guys in white overalls there - that playing for set dancers will help you get in the groove quicker than anything.
Lazyhound, that's like the most disturbing, non-sequitur aside ever. Nice how you just tossed that in there
Seriously, let's all lighten up a bit. This is hardly the sort of discussion to have bruised feelings over.
Someone is sincerely asking for help with an important aspect of the music, why can't we just focus on that? Taking semantic potshots at each other isn't going to do anyone any good.
Steve, you definitely missed Will's point. First, Michael (Llig) suggested that good technique wasn't necessary for good rhythm. I pointed out that he had previously said sloppy timing (element of technique) makes for rubbish fiddle playing and asked how it was possible to have good rhythm without good technique. Will answered that intonation and tone (also elements of technique) aren't necessary for good rhythm.
Go back and read the thread and unbunch your knickers.
Skipping right past the spat - lovers' tiff, I assume - I have to concur on playing for dancers, it really puts you right. True in a lot of music - Flamenco without dancing is, in that tradition, not flamenco at all, for example - and for a lot of reasons. The main ones are, I think, two. When the dancers are on the floor, the requirement of solid and clear rhythm becomes brutally obvious for one. For another, and more subtle, the dance puts the music in context, and until you've either spent time dancing (tried it, not for me, thanks) or playing for dancers you don't have a full understanding of the music.
steve, >>A good musician grows organically, not by dissecting his/her approach as described above. Mechanics don't make music. They play tunes but they don't make music.<,
I disagree, One approach to improving technical aspects of a physical discipline is to isolate certain aspects of that discipline for focused analysis and practice. You might consider that unnecessary, but i can assure you it is a valid approach.
Now we may well agree that the spirit is more important than technique, but nonetheless without technique there is no vehicle for the spirit.
Jon, i fully agree.
Further to my post about playing for set dancers, if you don’t get the opportunity to do so, playing in a session with musicians who play regularly for set dancers isn’t a bad alternative.
A conductor of an amateur orchestra who knows his job will tell the musicians, if they're having problems with intonation or even playing some notes, to concentrate on rhythm, timing and dynamics. Occasional lapses in intonation will pass an audience by provided the rhythm, timing and dynamics are spot on.
If it's any consolation to the rest of us, even professional orchestras are quite capable of playing out of tune early in a rehearsal. However, they soon get their act together (their jobs on the line etc!) when this is pointed out to them by the conductor.
Jig's comment about "isolating certain aspects of that discipline for focused analysis and practice" is spot on. I've been concerned for a while about some aspects of my playing, so I'm having private lessons - from a fully-qualified Suzuki teacher, as it happens, who is very much into folk music - and these problems are now being sorted out.
I had one student who had spent some years as a youth playing in a 'student 'orchestra, god her intonation was bad! Its that same thing i go on about playing only in sessions and not being able to hear yourself clearly. All manner of errors can develop.
What got me about this student was that she had had lessons for years! what kind of teacher lets bad intonation past them like that?! one who is more interested in the money than the student?
Any how, once she realized, her ear simply wasn't trained to differentiate, and took my advice to heart she really improved, immensely, over the course of a couple of years. she sounds lovely now.
Now im not saying she wasn't a difficult case, but really, if you cant play in tune; you cant play.
Orchestras (or sessions, for that matter!) aren't always the best places to hone technique. In fact, I'd say that too much orchestral playing without occasional let-ups to do chamber music or solo recitals or play other kinds of music can cause your technique to - well perhaps not deterioate - but to become in need of polishing up. Failing the opportunity for chamber music or solo work then a few refresher lessons from a good teacher are very much in order.
In an amateur orchestra, if the conductor isn't on the ball and good enough to spot exactly where bad intonation is coming from, then players in the middle of string sections can play out of tune for the simple reason that most of the time they can't hear themselves and haven't got the experience to sense it. Ever been in sessions like that?
Even professional soloists, after a gruelling 3 or 4-month transcontinental tour of recitals, concertos, TV and radio broadcasts and interviews, find the need to spend a month repairing the damage all that has done to their technique, which by now will have started to sound ragged.
So is it safe to say that decent intonation is a staple of the ITM style, or is this a minority viewpoint? A lot of players of folk styles in general wouldn't accept that they need to play with accuracy, let alone actually be able to identify bad intonation on their own.
Safe? To my mind, in this day and age its essential, but this raises an interesting point. exactly what is 'in tune'? After all, perfection is not achievable, different peoples ears are more or less sensitive.
I view it like this; there is an area within the frequency spectrum which i would consider has a name , say D, how wide that area is is a matter of opinion. different people have different opinions on this.. So to me it may sound out of tune but to someone else's ear. trained to recognize a broader band, it may sound ok.
And some people, i find, just don't really care! As a fiddler, to me ,being in tune is the primary factor. After all some forms of music don't necessarily have ' rhythm' as such. ie. Unaccompanied slow airs and ballads.
It depends on the musical form whether rhythm is essential.
I consider that both rhythm and intonation are integral parts of a whole. one is not more important than the other, they are just different sides of the same thing.
I don't think anyone is claiming that bad intonation is something to strive for. All I was saying is that it's not a factor in finding the rhythmic groove. Learning players who are having a hard time finding the groove might experiment with focusing on that, and not worrying about what happens to their tone or intonation while they search for the groove.
Tone and intonation *are* generally held as less important than "lift" or pulse or groove when you're playing dance music, which this music has its roots as. But now that Irish trad has become a "listening music," played by professional, full-time musicians (not just peatharvesters and pig farmers), tone and intonation are part of the whole package that most listeners expect.
Personally I would rather play with someone whose tone is scrapey or intonation meandering but who has the lift than with someone whose tone and intonation are heavenly but they have no feel for the music.
There's also a difference between someone learning an instrument and someone who's mastered that instrument. I have yet to meet a beginning fiddler, say, who does not have to consciously consider when their intonation is on and when it's off. In fact, most people have to be taught to narrow the range of pitch that's acceptable as "on" (as jig describes above), especially with notes like C nat vs C sharp.
Sean Smyth made exactly this point once, saying that using the micro-tones between C nat and C sharp is an important part of playing this music, but in his mind you ought to be able to distinguish between those micro-tones and know what you're doing when you're playing them, not just hitting them by accident.
Fiddlers in other genres (notably classical and jazz) are taught the fingerings for both just and equal temperament tuning, so they can play with other strings, or with a piano, say.
Of course, once you've mastered the instrument, all of this is one organic whole when you play--intonation, tone, swing, etc are a seamless activity we call playing music. But I haven't met anyone yet who can put that all together in the first day, week, month, or year on fiddle.
I was taught to 'sing' through my fiddle. One day i hope to be able to completely forget any technical issues in playing the fiddle.
I mean i can sing through the fiddle but am often aware of how much i suck as a fiddler of 15yrs.Id been practicing 10yrs daily before i dared play in public! And i only now can comfortably play solo in public, as long as i don't have to push the volume level. That always throws me off a bit. As a mandolin player of 25 yrs i am comfortable on that instrument a lot more. The guitar is my first instrument.
Yep, an early mentor also told me to play as though singing. I may have taken it too literarly--after a session, my voice box is sometimes tired, even though I haven't sung a word all night, just played tunes on fiddle.
Learning flute is a real mind opener this same way--it teaches you to breathe sorta like a singer, and to feel the phrasings with your diaphragm and lungs. Very fun!
As a singer and as a whistler i had to really work at making a lungful last, using just enough air to do the job. And some of those trad ballads really push the envelope, like Mary mac or the Rocky road. Great fun alltogether.
Perhaps you are somehow vocalizing? I know i have a bad rabbit of humming the tune, generally its not heard, unless of course theres a mic.
My first (and best) violin teacher often demanded thatI literally sing notes before I actually played them. Especially learning double stops - always sing the lower note. The basics of phrasing was also explained to me as rooted in what the human voice does naturally when singing. High notes take more air so play louder as the pitch goes up, pause for a "breath", etc. One of my later teachers was all about breathing analogies when it came to bowing and planning out what to slur, what should be up or down, etc. For example, long legato bowing - breath in on an up bow and out on a down bow. Not hard and fast rules, but guidelines.
Their basic guidelines for what made musical common sense always seemed to go back to what a singer would do.
Well dearie me. I forgot about this thread until just now and what do I find when I revisit. Did I misunderstand something? Might I respectfully suggest that, in this plethora of posts in this plethora of threads in which we find ourselves, we try a little harder to make our points of view simple and clear. It's an easy matter to review the stuff you've just typed before you post it to ensure that it stands up in its own right and doesn't require a huge amount of mental processing or thread reviewing before it becomes clear what you intended. If I'm the only one around here who doesn't thoroughly read every post in desperately long threads rather than skimming though occasionally to pick out the diamonds from the crock of sh*te, well I'll be damned. Frankly, on reviewing, tat's post don't stand up to close scrutiny unless you wade through a load of cloudy nonsense that went before. I really wish I'd shut my big mouth after telling y'all what a great thread it was about two thousand years ago. Thanks, Dow. You had the last word (that made any bloody sense anyway! ) I appeal for clarity, simple bastard that I am.
Maybe we make ourselves deliberately obtuse to force people to think about what we are saying? ........ ok maybe not but....
I think Alan greenspan had a point; ''I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood what I've said. ''
If you make yourself ~deliberately~ obtuse you have two problems. You are bloody rude and you have a bloody big ego. It's just a horrible affectation, a bit like over-ornate handwring that everyone sees the beauty of but which no-one can actually read. It's polite to make yourseldf clear and simple. I'm not accusing anyone of having those traits because I don't think people deliberately set out to be misunderstood, on the whole. But we can all think of many an occasion when sloppiness has led to misunderstanding which had led to rancour, as here. It's completey avoidable. Just review what you've typed, have a think, then post. Easy.
Steve, despite what you've said, I'm not some arrogant, angry Yank who lives just to make your life diffifcult. Read the thread--pay attention to the ognoing conversation--before barging in and insisting that every comment stand alone. Kennedy got an answer to her question. It is possible (and not against Jeremy's rules) that whetheryou understand the question or my answer doesn't matter.
It strikes me that, instead of one person asking everyone else here to write to whatever level of effort that person is willing to put into reading the threads, the 40,000-plus rest of us might ask that one person to actually read and make a good faith effort at comprehending the discussion (and the context--there's a reason they're called "threads").
I read Gawd knows how many posts on The Session, Chiff, Mudcat and several other forums every day and I also want to have a life. I did not disingenuously misread this thread. I just didn't read it as thoroughly as I needed to in order to pick up the gist. That was not my fault, I offer you. Just look again at your "offending" post. Had you given it an extra 2.36 seconds you could have made yourself much clearer. There are people to whom this particular subject means a lot, and there are others, like me, who find a tangential interest only. We the latter skim and do not read every post in detail. There really are not enough hours in the day. So make it pithy and make it clear. What you wrote was ripe for misinterpretation. You will do better next time. This is very tedious and I apologise and will shut up now. There. How clear was that? Sleep tight!
Steve, good lord, have you bothered to read any of the posts from recent years on this site? If I had to nominate one person who writes the MOST pithy and clear posts (not to mention thoughtful and educational), it would be the one person with whom you are now picking a fight. Let it go, man. Tedious, indeed. Think of all the other posters who have to read all this tedious interpersonal ranting. I like your posts much better when you stick to the subject matter---music.
Regarding intonation, there's a lot that can be done with microtones, and it can be brilliant - but when you're playing at a session, it's really about a certain degree of unity of purpose. At least, for me the great glowing moment of a sesion is when you really lock onto another player, and it suddenly feels like the two of you are playing one instrument. That's a lot harder if you can't play in tune.
And that's really the key point - if you have the control to play exactly the microtone you want, it's great to play between the notes. If you're playing a tune and you can't hit the note right, microtones are not an adequate excuse.
This is not to say that everyone must be a perfect playing machine before they sit down at a session - I know I make plenty of mistakes on any Wednesday night, and it's okay. My favorite is starting into a tune, only to realize it's one I don't exactly know, and having to grind to a halt, but there's also just missing a note, or, god forbid, repeating a part one time too many, or something - it happens, and you take the ribbing and get on with it. The point is that there are some things to strive for, and good intonation is high on that list.
As for the snarking, all I can say is - shteady on, people. Settle down now!
Mr Shaw says, " There are people to whom this particular subject means a lot, and there are others, like me, who find a tangential interest only." He wades in without reading the thread (because he's got better things to do) and complains about something because he didn't understand the context. What an idiot
Intonation and tone huh? Who needs 'em! Good enough for folk and all that! Nah! Who's that idiot who keeps claiming that music contains many inseparable elements that add together to a sum greater than the parts? (me actually!) Just keep practising your intonational mistakes to perfection until your groove comes good! Squawk like a hawk, scratch like a match!
Now, chaps, about my commitment to this dear thread. Intonation and tone are absolutely crucial to me. The tangential bit is that the thread isn't really about them, or wasn't until a certain unwise post appeared. We give little children instruments that make nice noises, like recorders, whistles, triangles, tambourines. I am a harmonica player and I can demonstrate to anyone very bad, thin tone and I can play the low draw notes out of tune. I can also show you how to do it properly. Making a nice noise on your instrument is numero uno in playing music. You just have to get this - then you can start working on all the other elements together, not separately. That is not to say that you can't focus briefly on a technicality here and there, but the primary focus is on making music, not becoming a technician. 90-odd percent of kids in the UK who learn instruments via the grade system end up recoiling from their instrument for the rest of their lives because they have been forced to do interminable exercises and scales to play. No fun. When my dad taught me to drive, he parked on a main road and stuck me in the driving seat and made me drive two miles down the road. I wanted to drive the bloody car. I want to play tunes. I do not want lesson one, steering wheel, lesson two, clutch pedal, lesson three, brakes, lesson four, mirror, lesson five, have a drive! I'd rather catch the bloody bus! I hope I've satisfied your need for musical content, kennedy. Utterly unlike your last post. And Michael. I'm perfectly capable of calling meself an idiot and I will thank you to hold your tongue. You appear to be a social primitive, sir. Either that or you just need an aspirin.
"That is not to say that you can't focus briefly on a technicality here and there, but the primary focus is on making music, not becoming a technician."
I read that and just thought to myself---why doesn't Steve try playing fiddle for a few months and see if he can get away with learning to play by only focusing on a technicality here and there! Maybe it's because you play the harmonica and the harmonica doesn't have such complicated technique, I don't know. The more complicated instruments certainly require loads of technique---flute players spend years on embouchure, fiddlers on bowing and left-hand articulation, and pipers, my goodness, the technique it takes to play an octopus! You can't just sit down with any of these instruments and just play, and that goes for guitar and bouzouki and mandolin and banjo as well. Even whistle takes a good bit of attention to fingering.
I think you misconstrued the sentence "intonation and tone don't matter" because you missed the part about how they don't matter to *groove*. They matter to the music as a whole, of course. No one has been trying to say otherwise.
I'm sorry, kennedy, but I would never display my well-known ignorance of the fiddle in the way that you've just revealed your severe ignorance of the harmonica. One of the greatest players and teachers of the harmonica in the world said that playing the harmonica well is no easier than playing a Steinway grand well. The problem here is the problem of the whole thread. You're forgetting that playing music is what we do. You're mixing that up with technique. If your primary focus is technique, you are simply not making music. No-one is saying don't sort out that awkward twiddly bit in the Tarbolton or don't have a bash at your blow-bends every now and again to get them in tune, but isolating any one aspect of playing from all the others in a ~concerted manner~ -- say for example the endless practising of scales (which I think may have put more people off playing instruments than those who end up playing them) -- is not going to make a musician out of anyone. Many a fine potential musician has not become one because of these dusty old schoolroom methods. What a waste. It's the philosophy of how instruments are "taught" that I'm railing against. Instruments are physics. Music is humanity. Play tunes. Groove, tempo, tone, intonation, listening skills - they're all in it together and dissect 'em out at your peril. That's what I'm saying.
I would love to take a poll to see how many people think that it's just as easy to play a Steinway grand as it is to play a harmonica.
I think we probably just disagree on musical approaches. Some people think playing scales (and other bits of technique in isolation) is useful and therefore important, and other people think playing scales is boring, and therefore not important. You and I seem to fall on opposite sides of the question. That doesn't mean one of us is right and the other is wrong.
Apropos of your poll proposition. You would of course have to find a large enough body of people who are masters of both instruments. I'll leave it to you to find 'em. Good luck!
Actually, come to think of it, over a billion and a half harmonicas have now been sold worldwide. This compares with (I'm guessing) a few tens of thousands of concert grands. If harmonicas are so easy to play there ought to be an awful lot of virtuosos around. Met any lately?
Actually, pianos are remarkably easy to play, they are designed that way, there's a lot of clever engineering goes on under the lid that culminates in a very straightforward interface of colour coded levers you simply press. I taught my three year old to hold down the sustain peddle and just hit the black keys in what aver order she wants. Sounds lovely. She's not so hot on the mouth organ, but can suck and blow simple triads, again, it's a pretty easy instrument, it's designed that way.
>>but I would never display my well-known ignorance of the fiddle in the way that you've just revealed your severe ignorance of the harmonica<<
Steve, actually,you do . I dont mean to make a dig but the truth is that without basic technique on the fiddle you have nothing.
Some instruments are much much easier to get a sweet tone out of, for example, the whistle, the harmonica. ; place in mouth, blow. Ok, to advance beyond that is a different issue.
>>the endless practising of scales is not going to make a musician out of anyone.<<
No one said it was, But scales are the building blocks of music, they help in so many aspects.Show me an international level fiddler who never practised scales.
>>If your primary focus is technique, you are simply not making music.<<
Now we may well agree that the spirit is more important than technique, but nonetheless without technique there is no vehicle for the spirit.
I had to practice every day for a year before i had any, any , reward from the fiddle, now i know im a slow learner, but that has helped me be a good teacher, I know intimately the pitfalls and difficulty's inherant in this instrument.
Each aspect of the instrument needs to be isolated and attended to. The technical issues have to be addressed before any serious profficiancy can be achieved.
My advice for learning the fiddle is always; learn the tin whistle as well. enjoy making music on the whistle, learn your tunes on the whistle, that way, one day, when you can actually play doh re mi, on the fiddle without sounding like a dying cat you will have some tunes already in your head, which as we all know is where the tunes live, whatever instrument you wish to manifest them upon.
Im not saying my way is the right way, but it works for me and my students.
You're just flapping around, making Aunt Sallys out of some of the things I said. Hopeless. When have I ever said that basic technique is not important! I mean, are we talking here to someone who's never picked up a fiddle or are we talking to someone who plays the fiddle but who is worried about groove! I thought it was just me who wasn't supposed to be reading threads properly. I'm not a complete bloody anarchist, you know. "Place in mouth, blow. OK, to advance beyond that is a different issue." It certainly is. Your subtext is that you play a hard one, I play an easy one. Your statement is so silly it doesn't even suck. Well let me tell you something. I play music. I don't know whether it's good music or bad music, but it's music, and the harmonica is incidental as far as I'm concerned.
Have you got a spare two hours? I could regale you with the different embouchures involved in proper harmonica playing, which is rather a long way from Michael's three-year-old. I could talk to you at length about control using the diaphragm and about tone production, tone variation and projection. I could discuss with you the control of bending for expression. Or perhaps you'd rather go and practise your scales. Play some tunes. You'll learn an awful lot more an awful lot faster about ITM. And don't give me that teaching granny to suck eggs stuff either, tradpiper.
Yeah tell us about the different embouchures, and control of the diaphragm and tone production, tone variation and projection. You might just end up posting something useful and constructive for once
But Steve, you say you started playing trad in your 40's, and you are 52......
But there was no subtext, you just assumed that.
For a fiddler such as acisholm, and myself, the instrument is not incidental, You seem to suggest that because i spent years concentrating on technique that i, therefor dont make music? Not true .
As far as easy instrument goes!!! i can just about get the old whistle test out of the harp. In no way was i remotely suggesting that the Bharp is easy, on the contrary, its much too hard for me.Jeez, all that blowing sucking stuff justy baffles me.
But i do know one thing. that to play a scale well on the fiddle can take an awful lot of time and effort.
There are 2 separate issues here, the instrument, and what music you choose to play. They are completely separate issues.
Achisolm seems to say hes been playing a year and a half, in fiddlin terms that is not long. the basic techniques of the fiddle still trouble me after 15yrs of daily focus, Ok im a slow learner, but how to find a groove? Control of yourself,leads to control of instrument. control of instrument leads to beautiful music. logical progression?
Al, thank you for proving my point that the instrument is incidental! It is not there to act as a terrorist sitting between you and the beautiful music you want to make. It is not a thing to subdue 'til it carries out your every wish. It is actually an integral part of you. Don't tempt me, Dow. Actually, I am happy to provide my musings on such matters for anyone interested. Just PM. You'll get more than you bargained for. And Dow, you little g**sh*te, I did post something useful about fifteen miles up the thread. I praised you. Pay me later. Go back to sleep.
ok 56, sorry.
But really, i know from experience that some instruments are harder than others.in some ways.TheBowed string instruments being the hardest out of all i play. Sure they are all as hard as each other to master. But the fiddle....jeez why did i ever start. It became on ob-session with me i suppose. The dragon to defeat! If you think that the instrument is not something to subdue, you've obviously never tried playing the fiddle. OK im being light hearted here, im not really saying i had to fight to improve.... oh actually i am .oh well...... next
We have a saying, my mates and I, when we are done playing stately jigs and smooth hornpipes and steady reels. After we've been playing for an hour or so and are nice and relaxed it's time to "lose the head". What this basically means is push it until you lose control. (And it's nothing to do with speed)
Basically, to find the groove, you have to lose control
But you need to have control to lose it.
The brains has 2 halves , the technical, intellectual, methodical side, and the inspirational, artistic side. once the technical part has control, the artistic side can take over.
I guess what you are describing is this shift, In the sporting world this is known as the 'zone' . Where all the work done ,internalized , can just find its own natural expression.
Actually this is one reason why i am such a believer in major scale practice; the mechanical work is done independently of the artistic aspects. This allows, when playing modal music, an artistic fluency undisturbed by technical issues.
"lose the head", zone, groove... I also have to add that there is something about pushing the edge when playing live in tight group. I find that if you take the risks and play outside your comfort zone, your ceiling climbs a lot faster than just by practicing anonymously. Perhaps the adrenaline of the situation enhances your motor control, thought processes, and retention. I'm not sure what it is, but I've experienced it a lot. I've also seen the same kind growth in other players that were willing to lay out the intensity in performances after some prodding.
I think it may be some kind of muscle memory, once the body realizes it can do something, then you have expanded that comfort zone.
Perhaps you could see it as jumping off a diving board? once that leap of faith is made a certain freedom is achieved.
I remember another thread where people were discussing jazz players who were scared to do more than play certain pre ordained riffs, the complete antitheses of jazz and improvisation to my mind.
The point of that aside being that to take risks, allow yourself the possibility of failure, frees you from subtle barriers.
Also, playing ,as you describe, outside the comfort zone with others allows you to 'piggyback' on other players, which can be a cyclical thing, building up into a most amazing sound and feeling. We all have different abilities and specialties,and the sum of a 'group' can be more than the individuals.... with 4 people it can be like a 5th entity has been created. a living breathing being of pure music. What a buzz, Incredible. Its almost a shame when you have to stop and fragment back into separate individuals and egos.
Funny, my son was amazed when i got a record player and showed him records and the groove! Ahh. He even showed one to a guest the other day, like; look at this amazing thing......
I think i'm lacking groove
I think i'm lacking groove
Hi, i feel my fiddle playing is lacking a certain something. I feel i need to start getting into that zone that makes a tune sound so much better by playing in the groove. I have no trouble doing it when playing along with great players but it's something i struggle with when playing on my own. I think if i figured this out it would take my playing onto another level. Sorry if that's vague. I haven't really hit the nail on the head but I hope you know what i'm talking about here.
If anyone's been here before let's hear from you because I am wondering if i will ever break through this barrier or maybe i'm doomed to never progress from this situation i've found myself in.
I am 26 just now and have been playing like mad for the last year and a half or so.
Are there any tunes or exercises that can help?
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by achisholm
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Ah, the elusive groove. Keep playing like mad, and listen, listen, listen. Good luck
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Dragut Reis
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I think you did hit the nail on the head when you said 'I am wondering if i will ever break through this barrier'. After I had been playing a few years I came to the conclusion that learning music was like plateau's, you seem not to be going anywhere for ages but it you persist then something happens and you are suddenly on the next plateau and then things seem to continue like that. After a few levels it does become easier. Someone one described it to me as like pushing a boulder up a hill - if you stop it is difficult to get the boulder started again. In a nutshell you just have to push yourself and let nature do the rest. Have a look at Jig's thread about the constant need to improve. You may find a level you are happy with or you may enjoy always looking for the next plateau.
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by bogman
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well, I'll throw a few ideas out there...
Do you need to relax? Is your upper right arm still and your wrist loose? Do you have tension in your left hand, thumb, fingers? Are you remembering to breathe? (sounds like a ridiculous question, but I have to remind myself to breathe all the time!)
Do the fingers on your left hand know what notes they're playing, in what order, and when? A lot of times it's worth practicing just one measure over and over, drilling the note pattern into your fingers, so you're not frantically trying to keep up when you get to the tricky spot in a tune.
How tight are your ornaments? You can give a lot of shape to your playing by working on just the precise timing you need for your cuts, for example.
Last---can you take a lesson from any of those great players you're playing with? There is absolutely nothing like having a good player sitting right in front of you and showing you slowly exactly how they do something cool. Don't be shy---if they have what you want, go after it!
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Jig's thread... http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/15552
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by bogman
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well sure and your not the only one!, its often refered to as a plateau, where however much you practice you dont seem to progress. Dont worry, it is an illusion.You are progressing.perhaps not at the rate youd like but....
I recomend taking one tune and revisiting it , ie playing absolutely steady[with a metronome] nice and slowly ,not letting any mistakes get through. do this for a few hours, for a few days.This may sound extreme but i assure you it will pay off.
really get to know the tune. So that at some point you can mentally step back and observe what is happening, relax and watch. Distance your self from your mental involvement,
for eg, learning to walk. This was a complicated operation, yet you managed and you were just a kid!.... you just kept at it, without thinking.... i will never get this walking thing. Cos you had no doubt.
Have no doubt. mentally stepping back will allow you to look at how your body is behaving, your shoulders tense? breathing forced? Try yoga.Playing the fiddle is a complicated body activity, dont set a schedule. Let yourself develop naturally.
good luck
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I think you should take a huge amount of encouragement from the fact that you recognise aspects of your playing on which you need to work. An awful lot of players of ITM get to a pretty basic standard (yeah, so you've learned 250 tunes sort of thing...) and then think they're the absolute dog's danglies. You don't think that so you'll go far!
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
If you can take a lesson from a great player, go for it. Even it it's a workshop at a festival. I've progressed more by taking lessons for a few months (and I'm talking 1 lesson per month for all of 2 months in a row now) than I had in the prior year or two by myself. Before lessons, I kept learning tunes, but it took a great player to help me see what I really needed to work on.
Eric
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Jayhawk
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I don't know you (at least I don't know who you are), achisholm, but as a teacher, and someone who's been through the same trials, I'd put money on one thing:
Rhythm.
Rhythm, IMHO, is where that "groove" originates. If you're rhythm is good, you'll MAKE the groove--if it's weak, you'll only feel that groove when playing with other people that have it. It's a very common problem.
Try recording yourself, and listen to your own playing critically, especially your rhythm (both alone, and in a session). A very small shakiness in your rhythm will very quickly deep-six any groove you may be working towards.
Good luck!
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Georgi
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
achisholm, when you say, "I have no trouble doing it when playing along with great players" I feel I must ask the question: do you mean playing actually with great players? or playing along with recordings? (I'm sorry if I have the wrong end of the stick)
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Excellent advice there, Georgi.
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Since you can tell the difference, you've already learned the hard part.
I think the key is to relax and feel the music. You can't do the groove mechanically, you have to feel it. It's too subtle to learn it mechanically.
Just keep playing until you can relax and just feel the music without thinking about what you're doing. The groove will happen naturally.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I hate to disagree with you screetch after you excellent post on the other thread but If the groove happens naturally then why do so many people not have it? I dont agree its too subtle to learn mechanically,
It is a mechanical skill just like any other, as georgi so clearly said its in the rhythm, and as you say in the relaxation.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Unfortunatly, it seems that for some people it really is too subtle to learn. But the upside is that if you realise that you are not there, then the probability is that you will get there.
The despair comes from hearing people play who think they have it.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well said, Michael, even though it's what I said before. The un-rhythmical will be the death of us, unless the speeder-upperers get us first.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"If the groove happens naturally then why do so many people not have it?"
I think it's because many people are too focused on what their hands are doing and not getting into the feeling that the music comes from.
Maybe I'm just over-generalizing from my own experience, but coming from a classical background I could never get the rhythm of trad right by focusing on the mechanics of the rhythm. Only when I started to feel the music on an emotional level did I get the groove right.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
where's stella when you need her?
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by wyogal
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
About the mechanical rhythm thing: you can play dead-on with a metronome and have the rhythm completely wrong. Keeping a beat and having the groove are very different things.
I think some people may simply practice to a metronome and consider it right if they stay on beat, but it's the rhythm between the beats that's the hard part. I think you guys all understand that, I'm just clarifying what I mean by mechanical rhythm.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Fair enough screetch, but without the grounding and ability to play with the metronome, i feel the groove will remain elusive.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Sure, keeping a beat is basic and you have to be able to play with a metronome. Otherwise you'll never be able to play with others and keep in time.
But the groove is different thing, and I think you have to know the feel of a jig, polka, etc. to get it right. Looking at the time signature and listening to a clicking machine won't get you there. Believe me, I've tried
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Getting the right groove is about timing and emphasis, and of course relaxation. Some people think of it as something that's impossible to achieve unless you have natural ability, but you have to believe that we all have natural rhythm. It's just a case of finding it, and that may take some time.
First of all, if you're trying to learn tunes off sheetmusic, throw it out now and don't use it at all. You haven't got how to play the tunes yet so, until you can, don't use sheetmusic. It won't help.
It's the same with language. Take English as an example. If I write the word "pineapple", and I tell you that I'm saying it out aloud now in front of my computer screen, you know that I'm saying "PINE-app-le" and not "pine-APP-le" or "pine-app-LE", right? That's because you already know how to speak English, and you know how you're supposed to say "pineapple" properly. It's a given. It doesn't matter if you see an actual pineapple and want to tell a foreigner how to say it in English, or if you read the word somewhere or whatever, you'll always say it or "read" it in your head exactly the same way, with the stress on the 1st syllable, and the first syllable slightly longer than the others.
Your language has a natural rhythm, and that comes from inside you. If it didn't have that natural rhythm, then people would find it very difficult to understand what you were saying, so you'd have to write it down to communicate it, and your bad English would probably cause you to make mistakes in your writing as well. Same with people who don't have that groove. They're like speakers of a foreign language who haven't got the length and stress of each syllable right.
It's exactly the same thing with tunes. You have to learn to speak the language of Irish music. You're learning the music in your 20s, so that's quite late compared to Irish kids who learn it at school and can pick up the rhythms early. So as an adult, you've got your work cut out I'm afraid. You're going to have to spend a few years working hard on making your tunes sound authentic and not just like a bunch of notes. You need to work hard so you're not being carried by your session mates. Anyone can recite something in a foreign language along with a bunch of native speakers, hiding behind them, but not everyone could get away with reciting it solo and make it sound like a native speaker. You need to get to a stage where you can hold your own rhythm so your session mates can simply hold a normal, relaxed musical "conversation" with you. They don't want to have to slow their speech down to help you catch what they're saying, and they don't want to have to limit their vocabulary either.
At least you've got past the first stage. You've realised you haven't got it, and you've decided you want it. A lot of people don't even get to that stage. They think they're playing the music when in fact, to a seasoned Irish musician, they simply sound like "foreigners" or "non-native speakers" of the music.
So what you have to do now is decide you're going to put in the hard yards in order to sound like a native speaker. You're going to have to listen carefully to how long each note is and how much stress to place on each note. Listen to a lot of really good musicians play the same tune. Buy all the classic recordings and give them all a listen. These are your native speakers. Listen to how they communicate the same thing. They'll do it all in different ways (like slightly different accent in your pronunciation) but there'll be something they all have in common, and that's the groove.
Try this for starters. Take a jig you think you know really well and record yourself playing it and listen to it. Now say "panda bear" over and over again: "panda bear panda bear panda bear panda bear panda bear" without any gap or pause between the words. Notice that the first and third syllables "pan-" and "bear" are longer and slightly more accented than the "-da" in the middle. This is your natural speech rhythm. Notice that you don't have to "keep time" by tapping your foot. Your body is producing the right sounds in the right timing and stress extremely consistently because of the years of exposure you've had to your native tongue, and the years of practice you've had speaking it and understanding it. You don't go around tapping your foot to make sure your sentences are in time when you're having a conversation with a friend do you? With tunes you shouldn't have to tap your foot. Your body should be producing it naturally. That's not to say you shouldn't tap your foot; a lot of musos do, but, crucially, the good ones don't NEED to.
Now play the jig again, and play the notes in a kind of 6/8 rhythm but make them say "panda bear panda bear" etc. Sometimes it'll come out "PAN-da bear" and sometimes more like "pan-da BEAR" but that's ok. At least the rhythm will be consistent. Once you can do this, you can speed it up to any speed and your rhythm will still be consistent. Try saying "panda-bear-panda-bear-panda-bear" as fast as you can, but make the words make sense, so e.g. don't shorten the word "bear" to "beh", otherwise you've changed the meaning of the phrase. Notice that you can say it quite fast and the rhythm of what you're saying will always be consistent. At the same time, maintaining the "meaning of the phrase" will keep your rhythm in check. It's a two-way thing. Your rhythm communicates the meaning, and the meaning communicates the rhythm.
You can find your own phrases to repeat for reels, hornpipes and other types of tune. Just realise that you already have really solid rhythm there inside you. You just have to apply it to your music.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Dr. Dow
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I like the analogies Dow.
Having lived in Germany for 18 years, Munich for some 10 years, it was a great day when a local asked me if I was born in Stuttgart ( I had lived there first for 8 years). Then I realised it had taken me some 12 years to get to the stage of speaking like a native. (not identical to a native though)
The subtle combinations of vocabulary, intonation, accent and rythms of a language are identical to the musical learning journey that's for sure.
Achisholm, take the trip the same way I did with that language. Total immersion by listening wall to wall trad by native players every available minute. I also took the the rather difficult route to the language by only being around native speakers, which also applies to the music, I think.
The reward is great but the apprenticeship is long, once you accept that, learning becomes a pleasurable obsession.
Good luck...........
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by tctelboy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Oh, by the way Dow, thanks for the "panda bear" tip. It's great we have the yellow board with this sort of simple but so valuable snippets.....
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by tctelboy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
panda bear, I like it.....
>>You don't go around tapping your foot to make sure your sentences are in time when you're having a conversation with a friend do you<<
Nice analogy dow. great post.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Dow - good stuff. I'll be combing through that for ideas to steal...
As to the idea of "time" versus "groove", earlier in the thread, it's important to keep in mind that they are both important and they are totally different things. Groove is about phrasing, about hearing the ways notes relate to each other in "words" within a tune. Is this note a pickup to the beat, or is it the end of the last phrase? If it could be either, which do I want it to be - and which way is the other guy playing it? Playing whistle is pretty handy for this, because the instrument forces you to think about where you can breathe, which pretty much forces phrases to happen. Listen to flute and whistle players, and you'll get a boost on this part of "groove".
Groove is also about your relation to the beat - are you on top of the beat, are you behind the beat, are you pushing it a little? All are okay, as long as you know where you are and what you're doing and why. Listen to John Carty's recording of Silver Spear, the one from At It Again. First time through he's playing lazy, behind the beat. Second time it feels like he speeds up, and he does a little but what he's really doing is squaring up on top of the beat. Third time, again, he does speed up a little, but not so much as it feels like he does, because he starts to get out in front of the beat - not enough to be off time, of course, but enough to feel like he's really flying along, when if you tap your foot you'll find that he's playing at a pretty normal pace. That's groove, baby. Own that, and there's not a lot you can't do.
Martin Hayes is a master of this. Listen carefully to his "slow" tunes and a lot of the time he's actually playing at a pretty standard tempo - it's just his command of "groove" (I'd usually say phrasing) that makes it feel like it's slow and easy. Compare the actual tempo of, say his "Old Bush" to Molloy & Keane's - he's slower by a hair, but sounds like he's dripping honey while they're burning rubber. It's the groove. Of course, Molloy and Keane and the rest of them are also using the same tricks, but they're out to make it sound faster - same game, in reverse.
Trying to think a lot about pushing and dragging the beat will probably get in the way of playing, but you might play a game with yourself - pick a tune that you know pretty well and, without changing the tempo, see if you can play it slow and easy like Hayes and up-time like Molloy. If you can move smoothly between those two poles, I think you'll be closer to your groove.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
What a great thread. Suddenly I feel so small! But if you ever rely on a metronome make it snappy then chuck it out. It's like a crutch that you have to cut your foot off to use. They have their uses, but not many for the likes of us. They are the destroyers of soul. You have one in your brain any way - all you have to do is find it!
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I don't really believe that "anyway" is two words by the way.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I love my metronome [ if i could find it!] Aint never chuckin it, its my buddy.The only, sniff, friend i've got....I know i can , sniff, rely on it, []as long as i have batterys]. And it comes in handy for multi-tracking....Oh come back metronome... all is forgiven
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
i think you should relax and try not to think of anything when you play, obviously this wont help your playing long term because you need to think about timing, breathing ect.
But just try playing the tune once throughtout without thinking an you'll find your brain tells you what to do automatically and how to play, you serously need to clear your head of everything though and relax. It works for me if im struggling but it might not be for everyone.
Sometimes i think people can get to caught up in concentration that they lose their natural grove.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Lollypoll
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I'm sorting through these same issues myself with varying degrees of success, but I guess I'd simply add that listening a ton helps. Like if you do work that involves lots of reading and/or writing on a computer or whatever and minimal human interaction, you can have music going on headphones. Maybe by a process of osmosis the tunes will creep into your head if you have them around in the background. Or that's what I am hoping for.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by TheSilverSpear
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I think that basic good technique is at the heart of getting in the groove (I'm following on from Kennedy's excellent post at the beginning of this thread). It's often simple, but not obvious, things like, for example,
coordinating bow and fingers when you go from one string to another - if the bow lags behind the fingers, then there's a problem to be worked on;
lifting the bow when you change to an adjacent string - this is likely to cause bow bounce when it comes down on the second string, and so a loss of timing - so keep bow in contact with the strings at the cross-over.
If there's a problem with a tune it's often not the tune as a whole but a small section of it, perhaps only two or three notes, where technique is somehow lacking and making the whole sound messy. The thing to do is to isolate that bit, analyze what's going wrong, and correct it (you may need advice from another player to do this), and practice slowly until it's right.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I'm not convinced Trev. I know loads of people with very sloppy technique who play with great great rhythm and drive. They do sound messy, but it doesn't interupt the "groove" at all
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
You can't actively get in the groove using mechanical techniques or exercises.
You can't really explain it unless you've got it et cetera...
"You just have to be cool, listen, relax into it and let it take over; stop thinking and just go on to the auto-pilot to Groovesville.
It's like, man, you either dig or you don't!!"
(puts away 70's ghetto hat and accent!)
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by yhaalhouse
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I agree that rhythm & drive can be achieved without accuracy. I find this true in many other styles as well... All those blues players purposely creating a sloppy sound, yet maintaining more than their share of feel. Punk rock - maybe overly simplistic, but no denying the "drive" produced amid that mess of hormones. I grew up being told it was rooted in culture, I personally think it is more of a consistent attitude maintained by the player than anything else.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by monkey440
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Something else I want to say on this topic is you can draw the language analogy thing with ornamentation too. Some players/teachers talk about ornamentation in terms of "articulation" as opposed to "decoration". No surprise that "articulation" is a term used in linguistics to describe how you make sounds by controlling airflow in different ways using the various parts of your mouth and throat. Try saying "give me the apple" in a normal voice with no strong intonation or stress. Most people would probably find that "the apple" kind of runs together and comes out as something like "thee-apple". Now say "give me the APPLE!" as in, "the APPLE, not the ORANGE!" This time, depending on how strongly you want to emphasize the word "apple", you might find yourself separating the "apple" from the "the", by articulating it with a glottal stop, or catch in your throat. A cut in Irish music can do a similar thing. It's used to accent a note and make it leap out at you.
I think that's what Michael means when he says ornamentation isn't separate from what some people call the "bare bones" of the tune. It's part of the whole "language" you're trying to speak. If you take the cuts and rolls from Irish music and analyse the bare bones of a tune, it's like taking that glottal stop from your repertoire of things you can do with the word "apple". You can do it of course. But do it across the board and nobody's going to mistake you for a native speaker.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Dr. Dow
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
And with repertoire too. The more words you know, the more practice you're going to get with various aspects of the language, and the better you'll be at it. Ever known an astounding musician who has done loads of recordings but who only knows 10 tunes. No, of course not. Knowing the Kesh and Drowsy Maggie and Out Across the Ocean and getting by in your local session with just those three tunes is like coming in and having the same, limited conversation ever week. "Hi, my name is Joe Bloggs. Nice to meet you. Bye". Then next week maybe the tunes are in a different order: "Hi. Nice to meet you. I'm Joe Bloggs. Bye". That makes Joe Bloggs a nice enough bloke to talk to but a bit boring
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Dr. Dow
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Dow's advice and ideas are very good.
I like the "panda bear" one especially!
However, "GROOVE" is esentially an ensemble thing.
You can't "get in the groove" if you are performing solo or practicing.
You have to be playing with at least one other.
And you have to LISTEN to each other and mimic each other's subtle rhythmic, pitch related and tonal variations.
One of the most important things is the gaps. The tiny moments of silence, too small to notate. This is what gives feel and groove.
And this can only happen if you have an ensemble (of any size) that can hear each other and listens to yourself, each other and the whole combined sound all at the same time.
(And playing along to some old record is pointless in this regard. You may be listening o the other players but they sure ain't listening to you!)
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by yhaalhouse
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Gotta disagree with you there, yhaalhouse. Groove can certainly be a feature of one person's playing. I wouldn't bother playing alone otherwise.
Proof? Just listen to any of Bobby Casey's recordings.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Absolutly. Solo playing can be the grooviest of all
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Solo grooving is the only cure for the dreaded groove clash, that is, when two grooves don't jive. Of course, that shouldn't happen if everyone's listening to each others' grooves...but then that brings us back to solo playing, which allows you to happily do your own groove without having to do any on-the-fly groove adjustment.
This is not to be mistaken for on-the-groove fly adjustment, which usually takes place after a trip to the lavatory.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
To me, groove is more than playing in time, it is playing in time with feeling. It is far easier to bob happily in another's wake than it is to set the pace yourself. And after years of playing this stuff, I am just starting to be comfortable leading the "convoy" myself, and cutting a wake that others can follow.
You have gotten a lot of good advice on things you can try, achisolm. My own advice is work on fundamentals to the point where you no longer have to think about them while you play. At that point, your mind will be free to find the elusive groove. And it does feel great when you get there!
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by AlBrown
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Al's advice was "work on fundamentals to the point where you no longer have to think about them while you play". Al's "fundamentals" is what I termed "basic good technique" in my post. That's the point I was trying to get across, but in different words using specific examples relating to bowing.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"I know loads of people with very sloppy technique who play with great great rhythm and drive. They do sound messy, but it doesn't interupt the "groove" at all"
Michael, didn't you just post in a recent thread that if your rolls are sloppy then you're a rubbish fiddle player? I'm fairly sure I saw something like that that you wrote. I agree that certain things about technique like bow hold and left palm position don't need to be standardized, but other things like flexibility and timing and coordination do. You can't say that a fiddler who misses half the notes in a tune but still has great rhythm is doing a good job. Or am I missing what you meant by "messy"?
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I think I said said that if your timing is rubbish, you'd be a rubbish fiddle play. That includes your rolls of course.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Poor bowing technique and/or poor coordination between left-hand and bow is likely to upset or prevent good timing.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Right. Timing can't be sloppy. So what part of technique do you think *can* be sloppy, and sound messy, but still let someone play with great rhythm and drive? I don't know that I've seen that, myself...
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Groove depends on a steady beat, and then swinging or otherwise tweaking the timing of the notes between the beats. Any technique sloppiness that interferes with a steady beat or the intentional refinements of timing will impair the groove.
Intonation and tone don't matter much. But that's about it.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
There is so much ' groovy' music out there to listen to, it is hardly a complicated subject! What makes the groove difficult in trad is , to my mind, the speed and number of notes. Obviously the mechanics of the instrument must be 'mastered' first off. Take a simple, operative word there; simple, tune say a straight forward polka and play it so much , carefully and slowly that it becomes part of you. Then play it faster, until it actually sounds like a polka; full of bounce, lift and energy. Thats it really.
I know I repeat myself with the metronome thing but it bears repeating, one note per click. you will then have a sharp, clear, rhythm. after that its up to you ....
Clearly immersing your self in trad if essential, it almost goes without saying... but i said it just to be really clear. spend your hard earned money , weekly ,listen constantly , well ok perhaps not when you sleep,...... though actually there is a school of thought that says you should listen when you sleep!!
Another thing, self hypnosis, program your main frame just as you fall asleep and as you wake with positive affirmations, this may sound 'hippy' but it aint.
once again... good luck.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Slop: leaving notes out completely, playing wrong notes, playing out of tune, accidentally hitting open strings, playing through rests, lack of phrasing, ignoring dynamics (loud/soft sections), random tempo changes, misc. scratch noises from poor bowing, misc. squeaks from not properly stopping strings, etc.
All this stuff can happen and the preformance of the tune can still have plenty of drive/bounce/lift/lilt/swing. Yeah, you won't be able to get away with this slop and still maintain a groove if you commit it repeatedly at the "wrong time".
So some of it is technique - being able to avoid mistakes at critical points - but technique won't solve the problem either.
To get the right lift, you just have to listen to enough of the music played this way. It isn't just a syncopation, but it is also articulation. I think it is too subtle yet at the same time too complex to mechanically break down and spoon feed to someone. But if you actively listen enough, and keep attempting to imitate it, you'll eventually find you are doing it.
The reason I say it is mostly attitude is because you have to have the right mindset to project a feeling and it has to be projected strongly to come across through your instrument. If think you're a timid mouse, your playing will come across the same regardless of what you are attempting to project and how well you understand the mechanics of producing it.
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by monkey440
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Good topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who keeps reading achisolm as alcoholism? And is that a bad sign?
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Bob himself
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"Intonation and tone don't matter much." Forgive me if you think I'm picking on you, tat, but that is the single most egregious remark in this thread by a long chalk. How can you say that! Of course intonation and tone matter. I've seen more than one fiddle player whose intonation was sour in the extreme, sh!te in fact, who completely ruined a session. There's nothing more soul-destroying than sitting next to someone playing blatantly out of tune. And God-awful breathy whistles and flutes, not to speak of squawky harmonicas with vile tone...what less do you need!
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
me, too Bob!
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by wyogal
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well steve, im with you on this one. But i can see what he means.Its a matter of degree, a degree out of intonation wont kill a tune, but a degree out of rhythm and its a gonner!
# Posted on October 23rd 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Steve, in the context of ***groove*** (ostensibly what this thread is about), intonation and tone don't matter much. You can have the scrapiest tone and most dissonant intonation in the world and still get a great groove going.
Paddy Canny didn't have the loveliest tone, and his intonation was different than modern standards, but boy did he have groove in spades.
Obviously tone and intonation matter. just not when it comes to groove. I often tell people who are learning an instrument to play a tune over and over to find the groove, and not to worry about their intonation or tone. Yes, their sound gets sloppy. But with less to worry about (as beginners), they usually find it easier to focus on the rhythm and timing. And they find the groove. Then they can build intonation and tone back in.
So...I do realize you're not picking on me. But it often seems that you like to jump to arguing a point without considering the contexty of the thread it's in. And you use fairly aggro language ("the single most egregious remark...."). YMMV, but for a lot of people, conversation is easier and more fun when it's not so antagonistic. Just my tuppence.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
You might also read Kennedy's post directly above mine and see that I was responding to her query about what sorts of things don't matter when you're trying to get your groove on.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well, tat, I've just checked your post again and you made no qualifications, so having a pot back at me for not precisely comprehending you is really quite silly. However, you've now clarified, so that's sorted. I'm not of the school of thought that says you can develop one aspect of your playing in isolation from the others. "It doesn't matter if you ignore your lousy intonation as long as you 'get the groove' (wonderful blues-man talk, eh!
" just won't do for me. It is too mechanical. A good musician grows organically, not by dissecting his/her approach as described above. Mechanics don't make music. They play tunes but they don't make music.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well now you're ignoring the context of this thread, splitting hairs, and twisting what I've posted above. That's your perogative, of course, but I can think of better ways to spend my time.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
My good man, I just told you it was sorted but you seem to wish to continue to milk the bull. It's simple. Say what you mean in your posts. No need to leave us with a lot to process unnecessarily. You're an erudite enough chap so you should find it quite easy to do that. Better to spend your time agreeing or disagreeing with the substantive points of my posts, eh what?
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Blimey. I didn't see what?!!?'s post before I typed "Eh what?" I wasn't referring to you, what?!!? old boy!
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
It's just occurred to me - and I've just returned very late from a long session and walked past what may very well be a murder scene down by the river, judging by the number of police and forensic guys in white overalls there - that playing for set dancers will help you get in the groove quicker than anything.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Lazyhound, that's like the most disturbing, non-sequitur aside ever. Nice how you just tossed that in there
Seriously, let's all lighten up a bit. This is hardly the sort of discussion to have bruised feelings over.
Someone is sincerely asking for help with an important aspect of the music, why can't we just focus on that? Taking semantic potshots at each other isn't going to do anyone any good.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Steve, you definitely missed Will's point. First, Michael (Llig) suggested that good technique wasn't necessary for good rhythm. I pointed out that he had previously said sloppy timing (element of technique) makes for rubbish fiddle playing and asked how it was possible to have good rhythm without good technique. Will answered that intonation and tone (also elements of technique) aren't necessary for good rhythm.
Go back and read the thread and unbunch your knickers.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Skipping right past the spat - lovers' tiff, I assume - I have to concur on playing for dancers, it really puts you right. True in a lot of music - Flamenco without dancing is, in that tradition, not flamenco at all, for example - and for a lot of reasons. The main ones are, I think, two. When the dancers are on the floor, the requirement of solid and clear rhythm becomes brutally obvious for one. For another, and more subtle, the dance puts the music in context, and until you've either spent time dancing (tried it, not for me, thanks) or playing for dancers you don't have a full understanding of the music.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
steve, >>A good musician grows organically, not by dissecting his/her approach as described above. Mechanics don't make music. They play tunes but they don't make music.<,
I disagree, One approach to improving technical aspects of a physical discipline is to isolate certain aspects of that discipline for focused analysis and practice. You might consider that unnecessary, but i can assure you it is a valid approach.
Now we may well agree that the spirit is more important than technique, but nonetheless without technique there is no vehicle for the spirit.
Jon, i fully agree.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Further to my post about playing for set dancers, if you don’t get the opportunity to do so, playing in a session with musicians who play regularly for set dancers isn’t a bad alternative.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
A conductor of an amateur orchestra who knows his job will tell the musicians, if they're having problems with intonation or even playing some notes, to concentrate on rhythm, timing and dynamics. Occasional lapses in intonation will pass an audience by provided the rhythm, timing and dynamics are spot on.
If it's any consolation to the rest of us, even professional orchestras are quite capable of playing out of tune early in a rehearsal. However, they soon get their act together (their jobs on the line etc!) when this is pointed out to them by the conductor.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Jig's comment about "isolating certain aspects of that discipline for focused analysis and practice" is spot on. I've been concerned for a while about some aspects of my playing, so I'm having private lessons - from a fully-qualified Suzuki teacher, as it happens, who is very much into folk music - and these problems are now being sorted out.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I had one student who had spent some years as a youth playing in a 'student 'orchestra, god her intonation was bad! Its that same thing i go on about playing only in sessions and not being able to hear yourself clearly. All manner of errors can develop.
What got me about this student was that she had had lessons for years! what kind of teacher lets bad intonation past them like that?! one who is more interested in the money than the student?
Any how, once she realized, her ear simply wasn't trained to differentiate, and took my advice to heart she really improved, immensely, over the course of a couple of years. she sounds lovely now.
Now im not saying she wasn't a difficult case, but really, if you cant play in tune; you cant play.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Orchestras (or sessions, for that matter!) aren't always the best places to hone technique. In fact, I'd say that too much orchestral playing without occasional let-ups to do chamber music or solo recitals or play other kinds of music can cause your technique to - well perhaps not deterioate - but to become in need of polishing up. Failing the opportunity for chamber music or solo work then a few refresher lessons from a good teacher are very much in order.
In an amateur orchestra, if the conductor isn't on the ball and good enough to spot exactly where bad intonation is coming from, then players in the middle of string sections can play out of tune for the simple reason that most of the time they can't hear themselves and haven't got the experience to sense it. Ever been in sessions like that?
Even professional soloists, after a gruelling 3 or 4-month transcontinental tour of recitals, concertos, TV and radio broadcasts and interviews, find the need to spend a month repairing the damage all that has done to their technique, which by now will have started to sound ragged.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Trevor Jennings
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
How far is it from the first chair to the last chair in the viola section?
About half a step.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Marklar
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
So is it safe to say that decent intonation is a staple of the ITM style, or is this a minority viewpoint? A lot of players of folk styles in general wouldn't accept that they need to play with accuracy, let alone actually be able to identify bad intonation on their own.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by monkey440
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Safe? To my mind, in this day and age its essential, but this raises an interesting point. exactly what is 'in tune'? After all, perfection is not achievable, different peoples ears are more or less sensitive.
I view it like this; there is an area within the frequency spectrum which i would consider has a name , say D, how wide that area is is a matter of opinion. different people have different opinions on this.. So to me it may sound out of tune but to someone else's ear. trained to recognize a broader band, it may sound ok.
And some people, i find, just don't really care! As a fiddler, to me ,being in tune is the primary factor. After all some forms of music don't necessarily have ' rhythm' as such. ie. Unaccompanied slow airs and ballads.
It depends on the musical form whether rhythm is essential.
I consider that both rhythm and intonation are integral parts of a whole. one is not more important than the other, they are just different sides of the same thing.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I don't think anyone is claiming that bad intonation is something to strive for. All I was saying is that it's not a factor in finding the rhythmic groove. Learning players who are having a hard time finding the groove might experiment with focusing on that, and not worrying about what happens to their tone or intonation while they search for the groove.
Tone and intonation *are* generally held as less important than "lift" or pulse or groove when you're playing dance music, which this music has its roots as. But now that Irish trad has become a "listening music," played by professional, full-time musicians (not just peatharvesters and pig farmers), tone and intonation are part of the whole package that most listeners expect.
Personally I would rather play with someone whose tone is scrapey or intonation meandering but who has the lift than with someone whose tone and intonation are heavenly but they have no feel for the music.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
There's also a difference between someone learning an instrument and someone who's mastered that instrument. I have yet to meet a beginning fiddler, say, who does not have to consciously consider when their intonation is on and when it's off. In fact, most people have to be taught to narrow the range of pitch that's acceptable as "on" (as jig describes above), especially with notes like C nat vs C sharp.
Sean Smyth made exactly this point once, saying that using the micro-tones between C nat and C sharp is an important part of playing this music, but in his mind you ought to be able to distinguish between those micro-tones and know what you're doing when you're playing them, not just hitting them by accident.
Fiddlers in other genres (notably classical and jazz) are taught the fingerings for both just and equal temperament tuning, so they can play with other strings, or with a piano, say.
Of course, once you've mastered the instrument, all of this is one organic whole when you play--intonation, tone, swing, etc are a seamless activity we call playing music. But I haven't met anyone yet who can put that all together in the first day, week, month, or year on fiddle.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I was taught to 'sing' through my fiddle. One day i hope to be able to completely forget any technical issues in playing the fiddle.
I mean i can sing through the fiddle but am often aware of how much i suck as a fiddler of 15yrs.Id been practicing 10yrs daily before i dared play in public! And i only now can comfortably play solo in public, as long as i don't have to push the volume level. That always throws me off a bit. As a mandolin player of 25 yrs i am comfortable on that instrument a lot more. The guitar is my first instrument.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Yep, an early mentor also told me to play as though singing. I may have taken it too literarly--after a session, my voice box is sometimes tired, even though I haven't sung a word all night, just played tunes on fiddle.
Learning flute is a real mind opener this same way--it teaches you to breathe sorta like a singer, and to feel the phrasings with your diaphragm and lungs. Very fun!
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
As a singer and as a whistler i had to really work at making a lungful last, using just enough air to do the job. And some of those trad ballads really push the envelope, like Mary mac or the Rocky road. Great fun alltogether.
Perhaps you are somehow vocalizing? I know i have a bad rabbit of humming the tune, generally its not heard, unless of course theres a mic.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
No, I don't actually vocalize, but apparently my vocal chords are flexing all the while, in sympathy with the music in my head.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
This discussion is taking all kinds of turns...
My first (and best) violin teacher often demanded thatI literally sing notes before I actually played them. Especially learning double stops - always sing the lower note. The basics of phrasing was also explained to me as rooted in what the human voice does naturally when singing. High notes take more air so play louder as the pitch goes up, pause for a "breath", etc. One of my later teachers was all about breathing analogies when it came to bowing and planning out what to slur, what should be up or down, etc. For example, long legato bowing - breath in on an up bow and out on a down bow. Not hard and fast rules, but guidelines.
Their basic guidelines for what made musical common sense always seemed to go back to what a singer would do.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by monkey440
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Well dearie me. I forgot about this thread until just now and what do I find when I revisit. Did I misunderstand something?
Might I respectfully suggest that, in this plethora of posts in this plethora of threads in which we find ourselves, we try a little harder to make our points of view simple and clear. It's an easy matter to review the stuff you've just typed before you post it to ensure that it stands up in its own right and doesn't require a huge amount of mental processing or thread reviewing before it becomes clear what you intended. If I'm the only one around here who doesn't thoroughly read every post in desperately long threads rather than skimming though occasionally to pick out the diamonds from the crock of sh*te, well I'll be damned. Frankly, on reviewing, tat's post don't stand up to close scrutiny unless you wade through a load of cloudy nonsense that went before. I really wish I'd shut my big mouth after telling y'all what a great thread it was about two thousand years ago. Thanks, Dow. You had the last word (that made any bloody sense anyway! 
) I appeal for clarity, simple bastard that I am.
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Maybe we make ourselves deliberately obtuse to force people to think about what we are saying? ........ ok maybe not but....
I think Alan greenspan had a point; ''I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood what I've said. ''
# Posted on October 24th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
If you make yourself ~deliberately~ obtuse you have two problems. You are bloody rude and you have a bloody big ego. It's just a horrible affectation, a bit like over-ornate handwring that everyone sees the beauty of but which no-one can actually read. It's polite to make yourseldf clear and simple. I'm not accusing anyone of having those traits because I don't think people deliberately set out to be misunderstood, on the whole. But we can all think of many an occasion when sloppiness has led to misunderstanding which had led to rancour, as here. It's completey avoidable. Just review what you've typed, have a think, then post. Easy.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Handwring is handwriting. If only it was. I just can't type.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Steve, despite what you've said, I'm not some arrogant, angry Yank who lives just to make your life diffifcult. Read the thread--pay attention to the ognoing conversation--before barging in and insisting that every comment stand alone. Kennedy got an answer to her question. It is possible (and not against Jeremy's rules) that whetheryou understand the question or my answer doesn't matter.
It strikes me that, instead of one person asking everyone else here to write to whatever level of effort that person is willing to put into reading the threads, the 40,000-plus rest of us might ask that one person to actually read and make a good faith effort at comprehending the discussion (and the context--there's a reason they're called "threads").
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"ognoing"??? Is that some sort of pig latin for drinking egg nog? Geesh, I can't type eithe....
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
hahaha "either"
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I read Gawd knows how many posts on The Session, Chiff, Mudcat and several other forums every day and I also want to have a life. I did not disingenuously misread this thread. I just didn't read it as thoroughly as I needed to in order to pick up the gist. That was not my fault, I offer you. Just look again at your "offending" post. Had you given it an extra 2.36 seconds you could have made yourself much clearer. There are people to whom this particular subject means a lot, and there are others, like me, who find a tangential interest only. We the latter skim and do not read every post in detail. There really are not enough hours in the day. So make it pithy and make it clear. What you wrote was ripe for misinterpretation. You will do better next time. This is very tedious and I apologise and will shut up now. There. How clear was that? Sleep tight!
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Steve, good lord, have you bothered to read any of the posts from recent years on this site? If I had to nominate one person who writes the MOST pithy and clear posts (not to mention thoughtful and educational), it would be the one person with whom you are now picking a fight. Let it go, man. Tedious, indeed. Think of all the other posters who have to read all this tedious interpersonal ranting. I like your posts much better when you stick to the subject matter---music.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"I just didn't read it as thoroughly as I need to in order to pick up the gist."
And somehow that's my fault?
C'mon old bean, take a sip of Talisker and blow us a tune through the reeds....
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
LOL, Mr. A., sir, I'll gladly take a gulp of grappa!
Can I imagine you in the cottage by the creek, or are you in town?
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Regarding intonation, there's a lot that can be done with microtones, and it can be brilliant - but when you're playing at a session, it's really about a certain degree of unity of purpose. At least, for me the great glowing moment of a sesion is when you really lock onto another player, and it suddenly feels like the two of you are playing one instrument. That's a lot harder if you can't play in tune.
And that's really the key point - if you have the control to play exactly the microtone you want, it's great to play between the notes. If you're playing a tune and you can't hit the note right, microtones are not an adequate excuse.
This is not to say that everyone must be a perfect playing machine before they sit down at a session - I know I make plenty of mistakes on any Wednesday night, and it's okay. My favorite is starting into a tune, only to realize it's one I don't exactly know, and having to grind to a halt, but there's also just missing a note, or, god forbid, repeating a part one time too many, or something - it happens, and you take the ribbing and get on with it. The point is that there are some things to strive for, and good intonation is high on that list.
As for the snarking, all I can say is - shteady on, people. Settle down now!
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Mr Shaw says, " There are people to whom this particular subject means a lot, and there are others, like me, who find a tangential interest only." He wades in without reading the thread (because he's got better things to do) and complains about something because he didn't understand the context. What an idiot
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
My definition of a good musician is that they sound like a 'band.' and my definition of a good 'band' is they sound like one person.
Band in this context means a group of musicians playing together.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
*Stretch* *yawn* Ah, morning Michael!
Intonation and tone huh? Who needs 'em! Good enough for folk and all that! Nah! Who's that idiot who keeps claiming that music contains many inseparable elements that add together to a sum greater than the parts? (me actually!) Just keep practising your intonational mistakes to perfection until your groove comes good! Squawk like a hawk, scratch like a match!
Now, chaps, about my commitment to this dear thread. Intonation and tone are absolutely crucial to me. The tangential bit is that the thread isn't really about them, or wasn't until a certain unwise post appeared. We give little children instruments that make nice noises, like recorders, whistles, triangles, tambourines. I am a harmonica player and I can demonstrate to anyone very bad, thin tone and I can play the low draw notes out of tune. I can also show you how to do it properly. Making a nice noise on your instrument is numero uno in playing music. You just have to get this - then you can start working on all the other elements together, not separately. That is not to say that you can't focus briefly on a technicality here and there, but the primary focus is on making music, not becoming a technician. 90-odd percent of kids in the UK who learn instruments via the grade system end up recoiling from their instrument for the rest of their lives because they have been forced to do interminable exercises and scales to play. No fun. When my dad taught me to drive, he parked on a main road and stuck me in the driving seat and made me drive two miles down the road. I wanted to drive the bloody car. I want to play tunes. I do not want lesson one, steering wheel, lesson two, clutch pedal, lesson three, brakes, lesson four, mirror, lesson five, have a drive! I'd rather catch the bloody bus! I hope I've satisfied your need for musical content, kennedy. Utterly unlike your last post. And Michael. I'm perfectly capable of calling meself an idiot and I will thank you to hold your tongue. You appear to be a social primitive, sir. Either that or you just need an aspirin.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Jig, I like that, good that. And I like your Alan Greenspan quote. He is one bright guy, I've always had a soft spot for him
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"That is not to say that you can't focus briefly on a technicality here and there, but the primary focus is on making music, not becoming a technician."
I read that and just thought to myself---why doesn't Steve try playing fiddle for a few months and see if he can get away with learning to play by only focusing on a technicality here and there! Maybe it's because you play the harmonica and the harmonica doesn't have such complicated technique, I don't know. The more complicated instruments certainly require loads of technique---flute players spend years on embouchure, fiddlers on bowing and left-hand articulation, and pipers, my goodness, the technique it takes to play an octopus! You can't just sit down with any of these instruments and just play, and that goes for guitar and bouzouki and mandolin and banjo as well. Even whistle takes a good bit of attention to fingering.
I think you misconstrued the sentence "intonation and tone don't matter" because you missed the part about how they don't matter to *groove*. They matter to the music as a whole, of course. No one has been trying to say otherwise.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I'm sorry, kennedy, but I would never display my well-known ignorance of the fiddle in the way that you've just revealed your severe ignorance of the harmonica. One of the greatest players and teachers of the harmonica in the world said that playing the harmonica well is no easier than playing a Steinway grand well. The problem here is the problem of the whole thread. You're forgetting that playing music is what we do. You're mixing that up with technique. If your primary focus is technique, you are simply not making music. No-one is saying don't sort out that awkward twiddly bit in the Tarbolton or don't have a bash at your blow-bends every now and again to get them in tune, but isolating any one aspect of playing from all the others in a ~concerted manner~ -- say for example the endless practising of scales (which I think may have put more people off playing instruments than those who end up playing them) -- is not going to make a musician out of anyone. Many a fine potential musician has not become one because of these dusty old schoolroom methods. What a waste. It's the philosophy of how instruments are "taught" that I'm railing against. Instruments are physics. Music is humanity. Play tunes. Groove, tempo, tone, intonation, listening skills - they're all in it together and dissect 'em out at your peril. That's what I'm saying.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I would love to take a poll to see how many people think that it's just as easy to play a Steinway grand as it is to play a harmonica.
I think we probably just disagree on musical approaches. Some people think playing scales (and other bits of technique in isolation) is useful and therefore important, and other people think playing scales is boring, and therefore not important. You and I seem to fall on opposite sides of the question. That doesn't mean one of us is right and the other is wrong.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by kennedy
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Quite so. It's a discussion board after all.
Apropos of your poll proposition. You would of course have to find a large enough body of people who are masters of both instruments. I'll leave it to you to find 'em. Good luck!
Actually, come to think of it, over a billion and a half harmonicas have now been sold worldwide. This compares with (I'm guessing) a few tens of thousands of concert grands. If harmonicas are so easy to play there ought to be an awful lot of virtuosos around. Met any lately?
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Actually, pianos are remarkably easy to play, they are designed that way, there's a lot of clever engineering goes on under the lid that culminates in a very straightforward interface of colour coded levers you simply press. I taught my three year old to hold down the sustain peddle and just hit the black keys in what aver order she wants. Sounds lovely. She's not so hot on the mouth organ, but can suck and blow simple triads, again, it's a pretty easy instrument, it's designed that way.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
>>but I would never display my well-known ignorance of the fiddle in the way that you've just revealed your severe ignorance of the harmonica<<
Steve, actually,you do . I dont mean to make a dig but the truth is that without basic technique on the fiddle you have nothing.
Some instruments are much much easier to get a sweet tone out of, for example, the whistle, the harmonica. ; place in mouth, blow. Ok, to advance beyond that is a different issue.
>>the endless practising of scales is not going to make a musician out of anyone.<<
No one said it was, But scales are the building blocks of music, they help in so many aspects.Show me an international level fiddler who never practised scales.
>>If your primary focus is technique, you are simply not making music.<<
Now we may well agree that the spirit is more important than technique, but nonetheless without technique there is no vehicle for the spirit.
I had to practice every day for a year before i had any, any , reward from the fiddle, now i know im a slow learner, but that has helped me be a good teacher, I know intimately the pitfalls and difficulty's inherant in this instrument.
Each aspect of the instrument needs to be isolated and attended to. The technical issues have to be addressed before any serious profficiancy can be achieved.
My advice for learning the fiddle is always; learn the tin whistle as well. enjoy making music on the whistle, learn your tunes on the whistle, that way, one day, when you can actually play doh re mi, on the fiddle without sounding like a dying cat you will have some tunes already in your head, which as we all know is where the tunes live, whatever instrument you wish to manifest them upon.
Im not saying my way is the right way, but it works for me and my students.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
You're just flapping around, making Aunt Sallys out of some of the things I said. Hopeless. When have I ever said that basic technique is not important! I mean, are we talking here to someone who's never picked up a fiddle or are we talking to someone who plays the fiddle but who is worried about groove! I thought it was just me who wasn't supposed to be reading threads properly. I'm not a complete bloody anarchist, you know. "Place in mouth, blow. OK, to advance beyond that is a different issue." It certainly is. Your subtext is that you play a hard one, I play an easy one. Your statement is so silly it doesn't even suck. Well let me tell you something. I play music. I don't know whether it's good music or bad music, but it's music, and the harmonica is incidental as far as I'm concerned.
Have you got a spare two hours? I could regale you with the different embouchures involved in proper harmonica playing, which is rather a long way from Michael's three-year-old. I could talk to you at length about control using the diaphragm and about tone production, tone variation and projection. I could discuss with you the control of bending for expression. Or perhaps you'd rather go and practise your scales. Play some tunes. You'll learn an awful lot more an awful lot faster about ITM. And don't give me that teaching granny to suck eggs stuff either, tradpiper.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Yeah tell us about the different embouchures, and control of the diaphragm and tone production, tone variation and projection. You might just end up posting something useful and constructive for once
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Dr. Dow
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
But Steve, you say you started playing trad in your 40's, and you are 52......
But there was no subtext, you just assumed that.
For a fiddler such as acisholm, and myself, the instrument is not incidental, You seem to suggest that because i spent years concentrating on technique that i, therefor dont make music? Not true .
As far as easy instrument goes!!! i can just about get the old whistle test out of the harp. In no way was i remotely suggesting that the Bharp is easy, on the contrary, its much too hard for me.Jeez, all that blowing sucking stuff justy baffles me.
But i do know one thing. that to play a scale well on the fiddle can take an awful lot of time and effort.
There are 2 separate issues here, the instrument, and what music you choose to play. They are completely separate issues.
Achisolm seems to say hes been playing a year and a half, in fiddlin terms that is not long. the basic techniques of the fiddle still trouble me after 15yrs of daily focus, Ok im a slow learner, but how to find a groove? Control of yourself,leads to control of instrument. control of instrument leads to beautiful music. logical progression?
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Steve, I had no idea so much was going on when I played my harmonica!
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Al, thank you for proving my point that the instrument is incidental! It is not there to act as a terrorist sitting between you and the beautiful music you want to make. It is not a thing to subdue 'til it carries out your every wish. It is actually an integral part of you. Don't tempt me, Dow. Actually, I am happy to provide my musings on such matters for anyone interested. Just PM. You'll get more than you bargained for. And Dow, you little g**sh*te, I did post something useful about fifteen miles up the thread. I praised you. Pay me later. Go back to sleep.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Show me where it says I'm 52. I bloody wish.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I'm declaring this a dead thread.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
ok 56, sorry.
But really, i know from experience that some instruments are harder than others.in some ways.TheBowed string instruments being the hardest out of all i play. Sure they are all as hard as each other to master. But the fiddle....jeez why did i ever start. It became on ob-session with me i suppose. The dragon to defeat! If you think that the instrument is not something to subdue, you've obviously never tried playing the fiddle. OK im being light hearted here, im not really saying i had to fight to improve.... oh actually i am .oh well...... next
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
We have a saying, my mates and I, when we are done playing stately jigs and smooth hornpipes and steady reels. After we've been playing for an hour or so and are nice and relaxed it's time to "lose the head". What this basically means is push it until you lose control. (And it's nothing to do with speed)
Basically, to find the groove, you have to lose control
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
But you need to have control to lose it.
The brains has 2 halves , the technical, intellectual, methodical side, and the inspirational, artistic side. once the technical part has control, the artistic side can take over.
I guess what you are describing is this shift, In the sporting world this is known as the 'zone' . Where all the work done ,internalized , can just find its own natural expression.
Actually this is one reason why i am such a believer in major scale practice; the mechanical work is done independently of the artistic aspects. This allows, when playing modal music, an artistic fluency undisturbed by technical issues.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Michael....you've got MATES???
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
And that, tradninejig, is the cloudiest, densest post I've read all week.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Are you sure thats the post steve?
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
And whats with the tradnine stuff? my handle here is jig.
# Posted on October 25th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
"lose the head", zone, groove... I also have to add that there is something about pushing the edge when playing live in tight group. I find that if you take the risks and play outside your comfort zone, your ceiling climbs a lot faster than just by practicing anonymously. Perhaps the adrenaline of the situation enhances your motor control, thought processes, and retention. I'm not sure what it is, but I've experienced it a lot. I've also seen the same kind growth in other players that were willing to lay out the intensity in performances after some prodding.
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by monkey440
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Absolutely my experience too, monkey!
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
I think it may be some kind of muscle memory, once the body realizes it can do something, then you have expanded that comfort zone.
Perhaps you could see it as jumping off a diving board? once that leap of faith is made a certain freedom is achieved.
I remember another thread where people were discussing jazz players who were scared to do more than play certain pre ordained riffs, the complete antitheses of jazz and improvisation to my mind.
The point of that aside being that to take risks, allow yourself the possibility of failure, frees you from subtle barriers.
Also, playing ,as you describe, outside the comfort zone with others allows you to 'piggyback' on other players, which can be a cyclical thing, building up into a most amazing sound and feeling. We all have different abilities and specialties,and the sum of a 'group' can be more than the individuals.... with 4 people it can be like a 5th entity has been created. a living breathing being of pure music. What a buzz, Incredible. Its almost a shame when you have to stop and fragment back into separate individuals and egos.
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Your handle is jig NOW you mean. Has Jeremy given you special dispensation then?
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
?.
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by piobagusfidil
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Oh, come on.
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: I think i'm lacking groove
Funny, my son was amazed when i got a record player and showed him records and the groove! Ahh. He even showed one to a guest the other day, like; look at this amazing thing......
# Posted on October 26th 2007 by piobagusfidil