There has been the recent thread of the opinion that the Session website should not be used as a method of passing on the tunes because of the notation of the notes flies in the face of tradition. I have to disagree, in part, with that suggestion. It is true that the notations are not the heart and soul of any of the tunes, but are, as others have stated, a beginning or jumping off point. In my case the Session has been invaluable as a learning/teaching tool in what has becoome my arsenal of tools. I use the framework set forth in the Session, listen to other recordings of that tune, and I talk to as many musicians as I possibly can to learn more. I do know that a tune I learn from the Session's tune section sounds so much more differently when I play that tune at a session than it did when I first started playing it. In my humble opinion, keep up the good work Jeremy. Lowhistle
" the notation of the notes flies in the face of tradition"
Well, whether it be right or wrong, people have been writing down tunes and learning by this method for an exceedingly long time. Almost as long as "the tradition"(whetever) itself.
Yes, it's not the ideal way to learn the music and even the best transcriptions are only a "snapshot in time".
However, this method and many other "aids" will always be with us. If they didn't exist, someone would invent them.
It's a very simple equation that doesn't get comprehended, for whatever reason.
Your ears come first. Unless you’re a master music craftsman, it’s impossible for most of us to take dots of something we’ve never heard before and play it properly.
Sure, dot away. Ear first please, then dots. The tune is the whole body, the dots are the skeleton. If you don’t know what color the hair is, how skinny or fat the person is, etc., how can you build a whole person from their skeleton?
"it’s impossible for most of us to take dots of something we’ve never heard before and play it properly"
Surely, it also depends on what we mean by "played properly"?
It's possible for a good player to learn a tune from the dots and "interpret" same in his/her own style which, of course, may be different from what the original composer intended or even what is universally accepted. Perhaps, this might even give an individual more scope in this respect than listening to a "live" or "recorded" version? i.e. it could be easier to strip down and rebuild.
(I fully expect a lot of flak for that suggestion!)
However, I fully agree that it's very difficult task to represent how a piece of music should be played from "the dots". Theoretically, every ornament, bow stroke etc along with innumerable instructions can be added to the notation. I've seen plenty of written music like this but it always seems to be overcomplicated and "busy". Even if you could successfully learn to play the tune "as intended", why should you restrict yourself to that particular version?
So, if we are having to make use of the dots, I'd suggest that simple "bare bones" are probably preferable and the music can be interpreted as the player wishes. Of course, he/she should also have listened to other players and recordings before doing so although with the more experienced and better traditional players(Which I don't claim to be) this will probably come naturally.
If you've never heard anyone else play it, how can you know you are playing it properly? Unless you're a master, of course.
Also, have you ever looked at the versions of tunes transcribed from different players, in the comments on each tune?
So I guess in my mind, I'd rather hear the tune played by a few different people before I tried to learn it. Then, the dots from here scream their differences plainly between what I've heard played and what they are trying to say, and I can discard the dot nonsense and make it jive with what's in my ears.
Like just recently, got some polkas in my ears from a Creagh CD. Happily, it went right from my ears to my fingers, but still I went and looked up the dots just for fun. Not too horrible, but had I never heard Seamus Creagh play it, how would I know that what I made from the dots is correct, or proper? I wouldn't, I'd be winging it.
Same with hearing a tune from a friend or anyone, live and in person. They put it in your head, you go and learn it, maybe look up the dots on here, and then the inevitable reaction:
"Hey! What the heck is this nonsense! That's not what Bob/Mary/John/Joan plays!"
I'm not disagreeing with you but just suggesting that a *good player*
(I wouldn't claim to be that. So, for me, listening is very important)
should be able to manage a "fair enough" interpretation of a tune is his/her own style.
However, I'm not sure there's such a thing as "playing it properly" in this music? Surely, it's mostly down to individual interpretation and/or adapting to the styles of other players?
I had always loved ITM since I was a kid, but never played any instrument. I carried a tin whistle with me for many years, and never could get a tune out of it by trying to play along with a recording. It was only when I took to the notes did I begin to get some success. I will admit that tunes that I had played on record, tape or cd repeatedly were the ones that now come more easily, but in my mind I would not be the player (for good or bad) I am if not for the notes. It was what got me started. Lowhistle
Well yes, but that's what I mean. If there's no frame of reference, if you've never heard the tune before, then what is there to make sure you're at least playing one person's version correctly?
People's own versions of tunes come from them hearing other people's and then having their own naturally develop over time.
I mean, if challenged, what can you say? "Well, the dots are like that on the session.org"?
Better to able to say "Well, that's the way Bob plays it at the session I go to" or "That's the way X plays it on his/her CD", etc.
Even more interesting and perhaps, dare I say, valid, is "Well, Bob plays it that way, X plays it this way on his/her CD, and then I met Mary, and she played it a third way, so now Bob and I play it a fourth way..."
I don't think you read my last post correctly SWFL. I agree with your point about learning by ear. The retention of the tune is much greater with the ear than the written dots, at least for me, but I think back to when I first started playing. I was in my mid forties, never taken a lesson, but eager to learn. Without those written notes, I never would have progressed. I did, as I said in my original post, that I had been listening to ITM since I was a kid. I had an understanding of what was needed from a ornamentation/rythym/melody standpoint, but without the dots I was never going to get any where close to that. Lowhistle
I am a definite ear player and always will put that first, and I certainly will chime in with SWFL's skeleton analogy---but, what I like about the dots is that I can map out the primary "roadmap"
in my mind. Then I coordinate this mental picture of the structure
while trying to match the recorded sounds. Once the "route" is chosen and committed to memory, I never go back to the paper
again--but have a notated sheet for other players to follow.
The only remaining "task" then, is to create, borrow or steal interesting licks. At that point, It's no longer a task, but a thrill !!!
I am a definite ear player and always will put that first, and I certainly will chime in with SWFL's skeleton analogy---but, what I like about the dots is that I can map out the primary "roadmap"
in my mind. Then I coordinate this mental picture of the structure
while trying to match the recorded sounds. Once the "route" is chosen and committed to memory, I never go back to the paper
again--but have a notated sheet for other players to follow.
The only remaining "task" then, is to create, borrow or steal interesting licks. At that point, It's no longer a task, but a thrill !!!
Hauke, well said. I agree with everything you said, and try to put that into practice. It was so well stated that I can understand why you said it twice. Lowhistle
I might chime in here gentlemen, I find the session an invaluable resource, for example my friend comes to me with a name of a tune she heard at a session in Donegal say, I can likely pop in here and print out the dots for her, job done. I have loads of books from a lifetime of collecting but to search through them ! ye gods no thanks! so just for the tune section alone its great.
It also gives me somewhere to hang out and chat about trad. It offers the opportunity to point newbies in the right direction when they ask for help, as I was pointed i the right direction all those years ago, so I can give something back.
It also has been great as a resource for listening material; I nearly always buy recordings recommended here and its been a great way of getting to listen to stuff I never would have heard about otherwise.
So I for one think its a great site and I visit it regularly.
Another post in support of the dots.
Spare a thought for those of us that don't have acces to sessions or othe ITM musicians. I'm fairly new to Irish music, but have grown up with Scottish music. I read the posts and hear about highly reccomended tunes and am building up a reasonable repertoir - from the dots. If I didn't have that I wouldn't know what the tunes were.
I am slowly (due to money restraints) building up a
cd collection and when I hear a tune I've learned I often think - "Oh that;s how it's supposed to sound!" Then I modify my own version.
Just because you learn a tune from the dots doesn't mean you can't learn to change your interpretation as you hear others play. At least I have the notes down pat and the basic rhythm so when I hear it being played I only have to concentrate on picking up the Irish flavour.
It may not be the ideal way to learn but its the best I've got and surely it's better than not having the enjoyment of playing this music at all.
Learning by ear isn't difficult. It just takes effort and patience. More effort and patience than using dots, true, but: Big effort, big gain. Little effort, little gain.
Listening is a skill. Don't take if for granted; practice listening, and you'll start to hear music in a whole different way. Learning tunes by ear, without the dots, forces you to really listen. Using the dots alongside recordings, you'll never attain the same concentration.
And being able to listen will transform the way you play. Ever record yourself and then, on playback, notice mistakes you weren't aware of while you were playing? Learning to listen is part of learning to play: forcing yourself to learn by ear (and only by ear) is the way you learn to listen.
The dots have only a very small percentage of what an actual tune is. There's little disagreement here.
The problem arises when you take into account that that proportion is actually the easiest bit to learn by ear. The rest, the twiddley bits, the phrasing etc is harder to learn. So if you are having trouble getting the easy bit by ear, how are you gonna manage with the rest of it?
Listening, as Hammurabi Breathnach puts it, is the key to it all. You are not gonna be able to get any of it if you can't hear it.
Thank everyone who has posted tunes to share. These tunes are a big help in learning. There is more than one path one can take, to learn traditional music. I like using the dots and my ears.
session as worthwhile
session as worthwhile
There has been the recent thread of the opinion that the Session website should not be used as a method of passing on the tunes because of the notation of the notes flies in the face of tradition. I have to disagree, in part, with that suggestion. It is true that the notations are not the heart and soul of any of the tunes, but are, as others have stated, a beginning or jumping off point. In my case the Session has been invaluable as a learning/teaching tool in what has becoome my arsenal of tools. I use the framework set forth in the Session, listen to other recordings of that tune, and I talk to as many musicians as I possibly can to learn more. I do know that a tune I learn from the Session's tune section sounds so much more differently when I play that tune at a session than it did when I first started playing it. In my humble opinion, keep up the good work Jeremy. Lowhistle
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by LoWhistle
Re: session as worthwhile
" the notation of the notes flies in the face of tradition"
Well, whether it be right or wrong, people have been writing down tunes and learning by this method for an exceedingly long time. Almost as long as "the tradition"(whetever) itself.
Yes, it's not the ideal way to learn the music and even the best transcriptions are only a "snapshot in time".
However, this method and many other "aids" will always be with us. If they didn't exist, someone would invent them.
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by Johnny Jay
Re: session as worthwhile
Oops, i meant to say........ "the tradition"(Whatever that is)
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by Johnny Jay
Re: session as worthwhile
It's a very simple equation that doesn't get comprehended, for whatever reason.
Your ears come first. Unless you’re a master music craftsman, it’s impossible for most of us to take dots of something we’ve never heard before and play it properly.
Sure, dot away. Ear first please, then dots. The tune is the whole body, the dots are the skeleton. If you don’t know what color the hair is, how skinny or fat the person is, etc., how can you build a whole person from their skeleton?
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: session as worthwhile
"it’s impossible for most of us to take dots of something we’ve never heard before and play it properly"
Surely, it also depends on what we mean by "played properly"?
It's possible for a good player to learn a tune from the dots and "interpret" same in his/her own style which, of course, may be different from what the original composer intended or even what is universally accepted. Perhaps, this might even give an individual more scope in this respect than listening to a "live" or "recorded" version? i.e. it could be easier to strip down and rebuild.
(I fully expect a lot of flak for that suggestion!)
However, I fully agree that it's very difficult task to represent how a piece of music should be played from "the dots". Theoretically, every ornament, bow stroke etc along with innumerable instructions can be added to the notation. I've seen plenty of written music like this but it always seems to be overcomplicated and "busy". Even if you could successfully learn to play the tune "as intended", why should you restrict yourself to that particular version?
So, if we are having to make use of the dots, I'd suggest that simple "bare bones" are probably preferable and the music can be interpreted as the player wishes. Of course, he/she should also have listened to other players and recordings before doing so although with the more experienced and better traditional players(Which I don't claim to be) this will probably come naturally.
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by Johnny Jay
Re: session as worthwhile
If you've never heard anyone else play it, how can you know you are playing it properly? Unless you're a master, of course.
Also, have you ever looked at the versions of tunes transcribed from different players, in the comments on each tune?
So I guess in my mind, I'd rather hear the tune played by a few different people before I tried to learn it. Then, the dots from here scream their differences plainly between what I've heard played and what they are trying to say, and I can discard the dot nonsense and make it jive with what's in my ears.
Like just recently, got some polkas in my ears from a Creagh CD. Happily, it went right from my ears to my fingers, but still I went and looked up the dots just for fun. Not too horrible, but had I never heard Seamus Creagh play it, how would I know that what I made from the dots is correct, or proper? I wouldn't, I'd be winging it.
Same with hearing a tune from a friend or anyone, live and in person. They put it in your head, you go and learn it, maybe look up the dots on here, and then the inevitable reaction:
"Hey! What the heck is this nonsense! That's not what Bob/Mary/John/Joan plays!"
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: session as worthwhile
I'm not disagreeing with you but just suggesting that a *good player*
(I wouldn't claim to be that. So, for me, listening is very important)
should be able to manage a "fair enough" interpretation of a tune is his/her own style.
However, I'm not sure there's such a thing as "playing it properly" in this music? Surely, it's mostly down to individual interpretation and/or adapting to the styles of other players?
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by Johnny Jay
Re: session as worthwhile
I had always loved ITM since I was a kid, but never played any instrument. I carried a tin whistle with me for many years, and never could get a tune out of it by trying to play along with a recording. It was only when I took to the notes did I begin to get some success. I will admit that tunes that I had played on record, tape or cd repeatedly were the ones that now come more easily, but in my mind I would not be the player (for good or bad) I am if not for the notes. It was what got me started. Lowhistle
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by LoWhistle
Re: session as worthwhile
Well yes, but that's what I mean. If there's no frame of reference, if you've never heard the tune before, then what is there to make sure you're at least playing one person's version correctly?
People's own versions of tunes come from them hearing other people's and then having their own naturally develop over time.
I mean, if challenged, what can you say? "Well, the dots are like that on the session.org"?
Better to able to say "Well, that's the way Bob plays it at the session I go to" or "That's the way X plays it on his/her CD", etc.
Even more interesting and perhaps, dare I say, valid, is "Well, Bob plays it that way, X plays it this way on his/her CD, and then I met Mary, and she played it a third way, so now Bob and I play it a fourth way..."
HA!
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: session as worthwhile
Cross post, that was to John Jay.
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: session as worthwhile
I don't think you read my last post correctly SWFL. I agree with your point about learning by ear. The retention of the tune is much greater with the ear than the written dots, at least for me, but I think back to when I first started playing. I was in my mid forties, never taken a lesson, but eager to learn. Without those written notes, I never would have progressed. I did, as I said in my original post, that I had been listening to ITM since I was a kid. I had an understanding of what was needed from a ornamentation/rythym/melody standpoint, but without the dots I was never going to get any where close to that. Lowhistle
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by LoWhistle
Re: session as worthwhile
Actually, my last post was to John Jay, I think we're all on the same page.
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: session as worthwhile
I am a definite ear player and always will put that first, and I certainly will chime in with SWFL's skeleton analogy---but, what I like about the dots is that I can map out the primary "roadmap"
in my mind. Then I coordinate this mental picture of the structure
while trying to match the recorded sounds. Once the "route" is chosen and committed to memory, I never go back to the paper
again--but have a notated sheet for other players to follow.
The only remaining "task" then, is to create, borrow or steal interesting licks. At that point, It's no longer a task, but a thrill !!!
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by hauke
Re: session as worthwhile
I am a definite ear player and always will put that first, and I certainly will chime in with SWFL's skeleton analogy---but, what I like about the dots is that I can map out the primary "roadmap"
in my mind. Then I coordinate this mental picture of the structure
while trying to match the recorded sounds. Once the "route" is chosen and committed to memory, I never go back to the paper
again--but have a notated sheet for other players to follow.
The only remaining "task" then, is to create, borrow or steal interesting licks. At that point, It's no longer a task, but a thrill !!!
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by hauke
Re: session as worthwhile
Hauke, well said. I agree with everything you said, and try to put that into practice. It was so well stated that I can understand why you said it twice. Lowhistle
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by LoWhistle
Re: session as worthwhile
I might chime in here gentlemen, I find the session an invaluable resource, for example my friend comes to me with a name of a tune she heard at a session in Donegal say, I can likely pop in here and print out the dots for her, job done. I have loads of books from a lifetime of collecting but to search through them ! ye gods no thanks! so just for the tune section alone its great.
It also gives me somewhere to hang out and chat about trad. It offers the opportunity to point newbies in the right direction when they ask for help, as I was pointed i the right direction all those years ago, so I can give something back.
It also has been great as a resource for listening material; I nearly always buy recordings recommended here and its been a great way of getting to listen to stuff I never would have heard about otherwise.
So I for one think its a great site and I visit it regularly.
# Posted on April 16th 2009 by piobagusfidil
Re: session as worthwhile
Another post in support of the dots.
Spare a thought for those of us that don't have acces to sessions or othe ITM musicians. I'm fairly new to Irish music, but have grown up with Scottish music. I read the posts and hear about highly reccomended tunes and am building up a reasonable repertoir - from the dots. If I didn't have that I wouldn't know what the tunes were.
I am slowly (due to money restraints) building up a
cd collection and when I hear a tune I've learned I often think - "Oh that;s how it's supposed to sound!" Then I modify my own version.
Just because you learn a tune from the dots doesn't mean you can't learn to change your interpretation as you hear others play. At least I have the notes down pat and the basic rhythm so when I hear it being played I only have to concentrate on picking up the Irish flavour.
It may not be the ideal way to learn but its the best I've got and surely it's better than not having the enjoyment of playing this music at all.
# Posted on April 17th 2009 by Taminka
Re: session as worthwhile
A post against the dots.
Learning by ear isn't difficult. It just takes effort and patience. More effort and patience than using dots, true, but: Big effort, big gain. Little effort, little gain.
Listening is a skill. Don't take if for granted; practice listening, and you'll start to hear music in a whole different way. Learning tunes by ear, without the dots, forces you to really listen. Using the dots alongside recordings, you'll never attain the same concentration.
And being able to listen will transform the way you play. Ever record yourself and then, on playback, notice mistakes you weren't aware of while you were playing? Learning to listen is part of learning to play: forcing yourself to learn by ear (and only by ear) is the way you learn to listen.
# Posted on April 17th 2009 by Hammurabi Breathnach
Re: session as worthwhile
The dots have only a very small percentage of what an actual tune is. There's little disagreement here.
The problem arises when you take into account that that proportion is actually the easiest bit to learn by ear. The rest, the twiddley bits, the phrasing etc is harder to learn. So if you are having trouble getting the easy bit by ear, how are you gonna manage with the rest of it?
Listening, as Hammurabi Breathnach puts it, is the key to it all. You are not gonna be able to get any of it if you can't hear it.
# Posted on April 17th 2009 by ...
Re: session as worthwhile
Thank everyone who has posted tunes to share. These tunes are a big help in learning. There is more than one path one can take, to learn traditional music. I like using the dots and my ears.
# Posted on April 18th 2009 by Leendah