So, there we were, discussing a beautiful tune just submitted called Soft Mild Morning. Wonderful tune that it is ...
Anyway, then I noticed that the key was wrong ... I've moved past that now ...
What I 'couldn't' move past was a discussion that ensued about the chords that were marked for the tune.
The tune itself is in a 'gapped' mode. There are lots of those in the tradition and, in my mind, and if it's a good tune, the gap lends an added poignancy and beauty to the tune. It's just lovely to hear. There's a sort of bleakness created by the gap - the missing note - that is heartbreaking given the right tune and the right musician.
So, when those gaps are, as they mostly are, 'filled in' by crass guitar thrashers ... well, all that stark beauty is kind of 'levelled out' in my view. As if one were to fill in the gaps in the Cliffs of Moher (not the tune - the cliffs).
Now, I can't help feeling that this filling in of gaps is created by ignorance of the tradition ... but ...
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
not at all ben. i agree with you. what also ticks me off about accompaniment is when the guitar is louder than the melody and drowns it out. it drives me up a blinking wall! don't get me wrong, i think accompaniment is a vital part of all music, but it should be interesting in a subtle, unnoticed way.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry, I should maybe have posted my reply here. I didn't realise you'd started a discussion thread. Hmm, I think you're a sad, pedantic old git No seriously, I think it's a bit arrogant to suggest that it has to do with ignorance of the tradition. Of course you get accompanists who are ignorant of the tradition, but that's cause they can't play. But just because someone has a different idea of what the music should sound like from you doesn't necessarily mean that they are ignorant and you are all-knowing. You get into dangerous territory if you start thinking like that. Like I said, it all boils down to personal taste. If you're offended by the crashing chords a particular person is playing, or if you don't agree with the harmonies they're using and that irritates you and stresses you out, then just don't play with them. It really is as simple as that. If you think that their harmonies are wrong because they are beginners and lack experience, just help them. Give them pointers on what chords you think would work. Be constructive about it. Don't just dismiss them as "ignorant".
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Heh, trouble is, Dow, that only a sad, pedantic young git would respond that way. Think how much sadder, more pedantic, and gittier you'll be when you reach my age....
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
The SPOG club! Here in the UK we have a TV series called "Grumpy Old Men" and when I watch it (to the amusement of my wife and daughter) I keep jumping up and agreeing with these guys who are SPOGs to a man and enjoying a good old whinge. BTW this is not a sexist thing - there is also a program called "Grumpy Old Women".
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Absolutely, puddy tat. There's a line you cross at a certain point, where you can't get up from a chair without at least a slight "oof" or other sort of moan or grunt. I crossed it a while ago, myself. And yet I still aspire to pedantry...
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm p*ssed now. But thanks so far, guys.
"SPOG" - love it.
Dow - you're wrong. I think you're just arrogant accusing me of being arrogant for accusing other people of being ignorant ... 'cos they're wrong too, so there!
Ah well, maybe there'll be some serious replies in the morning.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry, benhall.1, I actually agree with you. I just don't have the knowledge to help support your case--had not heard the term "gapped mode" before. Yet another thing to put on my depressingly long "Things I Must Learn More About" list.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I love how ambiguous gapped tunes can be but are you just saying that any accompaniment is wrong or have you some specific ideas that you feel work well with gapped mode tunes?
Crass guitar thrashers are as much of a worry to other guitarists as they are to melody players. But I guess I was wondering if this was really just a subtly disguised guitar-bashing thread.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
No. I really didn't mean it to be a guitar-bashing thread. And I do have ideas as to how to accompany 'gapped' modes.
Simple, really. Just don't play the note that's missing from the mode. An effective way of doing this is to use those chords which I believe are nowadays referred to as 'power chords', by which I mean chords without a third, like DAd, or AEa, or something - very effective on mandolin, btw.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Nah, that's crap Ben. Look at it this way, if you have a pentatonic tune in G, with a scale G-A-B-d-e, going by your rules, you're going to be too limited with the chords you can use. You can't even use your basic G-C-D 3-chord trick which you really need for any G tune to make sense. You wouldn't be able to have Am, Bm, C, D... in fact the only chords out of your normal G repertoire you'd be able to use would be G and Em. That'd make for a very boring accompaniment. With all the chords at your disposal, you could make a beautiful accompaniment line for a pentatonic tune, and yes, lo and behold, all the trad backers do, even the likes of Alec Finn who goes for picking very basic power chords on 3 courses - even he needs his chord IV.
I see what you're trying to say. It's just very poorly thought out. I'm also beginning to wonder now whether this is just another guitar bashing thread for grumpy tunes players.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I think I see what you're saying, though. You'd prefer backers to stick to the "obvious" chord instead of trying to be too flash, and you'd like them to concentrate on power chords that omit the 5th. It's just that your "scale as reference for chords" rule isn't the way to attain that style. To achieve that "sparse", "minimalist" style of backing, you have to do as any other backer does: learn your chords and use your ear and learn the tunes. The rest is down to personal taste.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the whole idea of harmonising Irish music is based around using chords that contain notes that aren't in the scale of the melody. That's how it has to be for most of the time, because a lot of the tunes use gapped scales, but the rules of resolution in harmonic chord progressions mean that you *have* to use certain chords, otherwise you don't get an accompaniment line that moves anywhere, and that goes for the sparser styles that use drones and countermelodies too. So if you don't like that, that's fine, but the logical conclusion is that if you're not happy using those notes absent in the scale of the melody, then you're not happy with backing full stop.
Which brings us in a full circle to guitar bashing.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
ben,
I would agree with you, this tune is in A or an A mode dispite absence of Gs or G# s, and using chords which leave out the third often seem to work well with these sort of slightly ambiguous tunes.
(by the way I didn't see Dublin Moran yet, but I havn't forgotten about passing on your regards)
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm going to have to reply to your posts one by one, Dow.
Firstly, I don't think it's "very poorly thought out". It may be a different opinion from yours, but it's something that I've been thinking about for 40 years or so, so, either my brain is peculiarly slow and stupid, or you'll have to accept that I may have something in there.
Now, for instance, your point about pentatonic tunes. There are, of course, well nigh no pentatonic tunes - please correct me on this one if you know a whole rake of such tunes, cos I don't come across them. There are, however, loads and loads of hexatonic tunes. If I was faced with a pentatonic tune and was considering backing, I actually *would* prefer it not to destroy the beauty of the extremely sparse mode, but to stick to just the five notes of that scale.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
You picked up something in one of those posts, Dow, that you attributed to me, and yet I can't remember saying ... It's totally OK, though, 'cos I agree absolutely - it's just you must be psychic or something. The point is: yes I definitely *would* rather guitarists stuck to the 'obvious' chords, because other chords too often sound crass, twee, or terribly 'pan-Celtic' and mushy. I hasten to add that there are a VERY few, exceptional guitarists who seem to be able to get away with extraordinary chords that I couldn't possbly 'approve of', but find myself liking nonetheless ...
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yeh, it's a bit like jazz guitarists who play too many passing or transitional chords and so flatten out the peaks and troughs too much. Sometimes a simple 2 or three chords with the odd bass note is just what's needed
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Now, here we come to one of the - in my opinion - more dangerous (? - too strong a word, but something along those lines ...) points in your musical ITM world-view, Dow:
"the rules of resolution in harmonic chord progressions mean that you *have* to use certain chords, otherwise you don't get an accompaniment line that moves anywhere"
One of my strong arguments in all this, is that you don't *need* and shouldn't *expect* the harmony to 'resolve' or 'follow harmonic rules' or do any of the 'normal' things that harmony does in other idioms. *All* that accompaniment should do in ITM is point up the melody.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
"There are, of course, well nigh no pentatonic tunes - please correct me on this one if you know a whole rake of such tunes, cos I don't come across them."
No, there are. I correct you.
"Now, here we come to one of the - in my opinion - more dangerous (? - too strong a word, but something along those lines ...) points in your musical ITM world-view, Dow... blah blah blah"
Whether you like it or not, Ben, *all* the backers on *any* CD you have, whether it be Alec Finn, Donal Lunny out of the Bothy Band and Planxty, any of the younger generation backers, they're all following the rules of diatonic modal harmony. If you don't like what they do, that's fine. I'm just telling you that that's a fact that that's what they're doing. I happen to like it, and don't think it's particularly "dangerous".
I'm afraid that's all I have to say on this thread. I'm afraid this isn't about a difference of opinion anymore. You're just wrong.
Don't see any F#s or Cs in there. Must be one of those oh-so-rare pentatonic tunes. Of course you could put some F#s or Cs in if you liked, for variation - (which is sort of my point - often tune players will fill the gaps themselves in a gapped scale tunes, horror of horrors)... But let's say we don't.
My point is, most backers putting chords to this would use more than just G and Em.
Yeah, you could just drone on a single low G or something for the whole thing, but you might just as well be playing bodhran. Boring! The whole point about backing on guitar is enhancing the rhythm through playing in different textures and making it exciting to listen to. I think this guitar-bashing thing is all about melody players wanting to feel superior and "more trad than trad", and really, it's so tiresome. I mean, are you gonna tell the likes of Donal Lunny and Alec Finn they're doing the wrong thing? You could I suppose, but I can guess what their reply would be.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And this one:
X: 1
T: Haunted House, The
C: Vincent Broderick
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Gmaj
~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd egd | egd edB |
~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd ege | dBA G2 D :|
|:GBd e2 d | egd edB | GAB d2 B | ded dBA |
[1 GBd e2 d | egd edB | GBd ege | dBA G3 :|
[2 ~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd ege | dBA G2 D ||
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
(Sorry I didn't speak to you before, Dow [he whispers]. I'm supposed to be working ever so hard, and also my young assistant needs to work ever so hard, or we'll never get this piece of work done. I've got a horrible feeling he might find it demotivating if he knew I was doing this every so often as a break.)
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Actually, it's harder than I thought to think of pentatonic tunes. I'm starting to struggle now. Oh hang on, I think I've got another one, I just have to check it...
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I always play this one pentatonic:
X: 1
T: Flowers Of Spring, The
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Ador
ABA ABd | edB G2B | dBA GBA | GBd edg |
ABA ABd | edB G2B | dBB gBB |1 ABA A2G :|2 ABA A2d||
|: eaa aga | bab age | ege GBd | ede ged |
eaa aga |bab age |ege dBG |1 ABA A2d:|2 ABA A2G||
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill gave a concert here last month, and on a bunch of tunes, Dennis held one chord, in one position, *not moving a finger* on his left hand for the entire tune.
Several of us came away thinking, "well, that wasn't the most exciting backing I've ever heard." But the point was clear--he was providing a rhythmic base for Martin to play around, very much like a bodhran (not that Martin needs a beat, what with his leg pumping away like a steam piston the whole time). Perhaps with a skooch more harmonic color than a bodhran could muster, but never straying from the tonic.
So, just to toss some kindling on the embers here, not all backers fill in the gaps. And some of us don't mind that, perhaps even prefer it. If Martin wanted to fill in the gaps, he could, but it wasn't dictated to him by the accompaniment.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
"Perhaps with a skooch more harmonic color than a bodhran could muster, but never straying from the tonic."
This is my whole point, Will. Yes, that minimalist, sparse style of backing is fine if that's what you're into, but it's that tiny bit of harmonic colour that makes it good trad, not bad trad. If you watch what Dennis Cahill does, he's often making very subtle chord voicings up the neck so that the harmonies move with the tune, whilst keeping that tonic drone going in the bass. He doesn't stick to a rule of "no notes other than those in the scale".
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Ok, here's what Ben's saying.
You know how the Bothy Band did the Kesh? That tune has no Cs in. Ben's saying you shouldn't be allowed to use C chords. The Bothy Band used a C in the bass in bar 2 of the B-part, and in some of the zouk harmonies in the A-part. So Ben's saying that's crap and wrong. I just don't get it.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So, of the tunes you posted, Dow, 2 were reels, both in D; 1 a polka that's *so* pentatonic you can't really ascribe any other feature to it; and 8 were jigs, 5 of which were in G.
Again, no particular point. Just interested.
Now what we need is Alex to work some of his statistical majig on the tunes on this site, and discover *just* how common, as a proportion, pentatonic tunes are.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
My point being that that still isn't the point.
If an accompanist wants to ride roughshod over a tune's natural characteristics, then fine. It's not for me, but fine.
I'm also not saying that anyone wanting to put together an album with the obvious intention of making it a commercial success shouldn't use whatever techniques, styles or whatever will achieve that end.
AND, I have said several times that I'm not attacking accompaniment per se. I also said that some people seem to be able to get away with playing accompaniment that, if you took my arguments in this thread to extremes, would not fit. Sometimes, they not only get away with it, it even sounds good. But the people who can get away with it are few and far between.
But when you get an accompaniment that's sparse, in the right mode, and *only* there to point up the beauty of the melody, you *will* get a result which is more melodic - stands to reason.
The other approach (a possible other approach) of using unusual chords, 'interesting' textures and rhythms and so on, will inevitably lead to music which gives proportionately more weight to the accompaniment that if that accompaniment were sparse and less 'novel'.
I'm just saying the choice to me is: melody ... or mush.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm not coming down on one side or the other here--just sharing a recent observation of Cahill and Hayes dancing around the points of discussion, with instruments in hand.
Yes, it's obviosu when Dennis adds a note to color, but there were several tunes that he didn't evne do that. And "interesting" or not, I found myself wanting to hear just the fiddle.
I may not be as singular in my musical tastes as Ben, but I do lean toward his end of the spectrum--less is more. I often don't like it when a tune's modal ambiguity is abruptly decided by a backer's choice of chord. It's the ambiguity itself that's so alluring.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
given that tunes are usually played several times over, there's no reason why a backer can't exploit that ambiguity - one way, the other way, leave it open
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I see Bren's point too, but what Ben and I are suggesting is that we prefer that no one "exploits" the music we play. At least within earshot when we're playing it. In fact, that's precisely what's so annoying about how some backers approach a tune--a melody to be exploited for their harmonic innovations.
Again, I'm not entirely a purist. I know what I'm gonna hear when I listen to Lunasa or the Bothy Band or Hayes and Cahill. So I enjoy it for what it is. But I'm more often moved by a solo melody instrument or a simple duo with the gaps unfilled. That's a big part of what sets this music apart from rock, blues, etc.--all those popular genres that feature harmonic accompaniment and very unambiguous modes. I get plenty of that from tv, radio, and concerts. So it's nice to play something different one night a week, or at least sometime during that night.
Bren, the problem with a backer filling in the gaps even just once as a tune goes by three or more times is that we hear the ambiguity resolved, as though the "open" run throughs were just a set up for the "aha" moment. It changes how we hear and understand the tune, and gapped tunes tend to lose their searching, yearning qualities when a mode is imposed on them.
The fact that many tunes in this tradition aren't so ambiguous argues, to me, for preserving (at least occasionally) the ambiguity of the ones that are.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Will, I think you've misunderstood what the whole premise of this discussion is, which is a bit disappointing. Nobody is arguing that there's anything wrong with the sparse style of backing. I also love that style. The problem with this thread is that Ben is saying that if you fill in the gaps, then you're displaying your "ignorance of the tradition". That means that all the backers you've ever heard on recordings, INCLUDING DENNIS CAHILL, are ignorant of the tradition.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I could go through some Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill recordings and find you many, many specific examples down to exactly what chord DC is playing in which bar and exactly what gap he's filling, if you like, just to make my point more clearly (that DC is also "ignorant of the tradition", according to Ben's view), but I really can't face listening to a whole CD of MH & DC at the moment
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
OK, here's one. I whacked a CD on - first one I came to - Under The Moon - first track. It took me about 5 seconds to find an example. Bill Malley's Barndance http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/162, posted by your good self, Will. It's a lovely, simple, elegant little tune, and I think very sensitively backed by DC. Now, when you get to bar 4, it goes B2A2 A2, but even though there are no F#s in that bar, DC fills in the harmony for us, and harmonises it with a D chord. He puts that F# in, which according to your philosophy shouldn't be there because it fills a gap. I think it sounds nice. Well, looks like DC is "ignorant of the tradition too", just as I thought.
Sorry lads. I love this music, and if I felt I could agree with you, I'd be the first to jump right in there and agree, but seriously, youse are talking out of your @rses, and I just can't let your misguided views stand unchallenged, because a lot of people read this site, and are going to lap up all the misguided crap and then spout it to someone else, maybe online, maybe at their session. You're gonna get complete beginners who don't know anything about Irish music trying to tell people that backers shouldn't be using notes that aren't in the scale of the melody, and that to do so is "ignorant". I just want people reading this thread to know that it's wrong to say that.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So basically what I'm saying is that that sparse style of backing is great. It's lovely. But going back to the melody scale as a reference ain't the way to attain that style. Backing in the style of the likes of DC is actually much more complex than that. It's bloody difficult to pare everything back until you've got the "bare bones" of an accompaniment line. The way to do it is *much* more abstract than you make out, and it requires a good grounding in harmony, and an understanding of backing Irish music. Ben, you need to go back to the drawing board.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
As Ben himself says above, he overstated his case a smidge. You've made your point many times over that "ignorance of the tradition" isn't the only or best explanation for why backers fill in the gaps. Ben's confessed that he was a tad aggressive there. Let's move on, eh?
And I'm certainly not questioning Mr. Cahill's abilities or the depth of his harmonic understanding of music.
And no one ever said that someone is arguing that sparse backing isn't good.
So who's arse is doing the talking?
But it really isn't that difficult to ping a tonic and octave drone on a guitar for a whole tune. Even I could manage that. I'm just not sure why anyone would want to, or why they'd think it "adds" something to the tune.
My favorite form of accompaniment is a dancer's feet....
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Um, yeah, I like Bill Malley's unaccompanied. Sounds cluttered on Under the Moon. But that's just to my ear.
Er, it's not as though Hayes and Cahill claim to be holding to the tradition. They're both quite open about how they bring other influences to the music, based largely on their own personal forays and (backgrounds, in Cahill's case) in other genres--classical, rock, and jazz among them, all of which typically leave no interval unfilled.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
In fact, maybe you should write to him, and tell him that he should just sit there on stage and not play at all, and let Martin Hayes have all the limelight for himself
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Oh we had that conversation right after the concert. In fact, Martin himself suggested it *during* the concert while Dennis went on a 15-minute tuning binge. Seems he was getting a little too much harmonic color out of that geetar.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And there you have it.
One of the highlights (for me, and others in the audience have said the same) of the Hayes Cahill concert was when Dennis put the guitar down and picked up a mandolin and played lead.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'd say the music's a bit more robust than you allow Will. A gap filled once will not sully the tune in your mind forever - or will it? If so, too bad, since you can't possibly hope to avoid it .
I'm sorry now I used the word "exploit" since it seems to have triggered a thought train about "exploiting" in a destructive way which is not the sense I meant at all.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Erm, I didn't say "forever." But certainly in that hearing of the tune. It goes from being unresolved to "oh, so that's what mode it's in." Until the next backer chooses a different chord.
The music is what it is. It's our interpretation of it that is more or less robust. As I said above, sometimes less is more.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Well, there I was ... hard at work ... as predicted ... slightly seething at some of the posts ...
So.
There is *still* a valid point in what I said. I'm a bit sad it's come down to questions of 'how many pentatonic tunes can I name?', or 'how many people like Dennis Cahill use notes that aren't in the mode? - sometimes ...'
Anyway, I have to defend myself on one point, even though I have, as Will said, admitted that it might have been a bit strong. But what I actually said at the beginning of this thread was:
"So, when those gaps are, as they mostly are, 'filled in' by crass guitar thrashers ... well, all that stark beauty is kind of 'levelled out' in my view. As if one were to fill in the gaps in the Cliffs of Moher (not the tune - the cliffs).
Now, I can't help feeling that this filling in of gaps is created by ignorance of the tradition ... but ...
Does it matter?"
True there was no emphasis on the word "this", as perhaps would have made my intended meaning clearer. But let me emphasise *again* (because I have done so several times already in different ways) - I'm not saying there aren't people who can subtly augment the mode and get away with it, even to the point where I enjoy it. But the vast majority of guitarists or other accompanists can't, and shouldn't try.
Yep. The sort of filling in of gaps that I was talking about *is* something that I can't help feeling is born of ignorance of the tradition. And I wasn't, as Dow has implied, trying to make a hard and fast rule that could never be broken.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So gaps filled in by good guitarists are ok, but gaps filled in by crass guitarists aren't? Erm, ... duh?! Doesn't that go without saying? Isn't that more about the guitarist being crass (or not) than about what notes they're using from the scale?
So there we go, that's proof as far as I'm concerned that this was simply yet another guitar-bashing thread. What a shame. And here was I thinking it was an interesting thread about harmony
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I think the thing that annoys me most about this thread is the fact that your complaint is about guitarists that perhaps aren't as good as the likes of Dennis Cahill or someone who can make those harmonies work for you. You know what? We can't all be brilliant musicians, Ben. If you want to play with brilliant musicians all the time, find yourself some professional musos to play with in Ireland and avoid playing with beginners who aren't at your level. Or take up some other type of music that's not about the craic and drinking and having fun, like say classical or whatever.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm too tired to seethe. I'll repeat - it isn't about guitar bashing. It *is* about accompaniment. "Harmony" is the word that winds me up (so feel free to repeat it over and over ad nauseam ).
Accompaniment is fine, but, even with lesser quality players, surely there has to be *some* sensitivity. "Harmony" is fine, provided all you mean by that is the odd chord or two that doesn't cheapen the melody. But when you *harmonise* the music, including those chords that, in your view of it, you *have* to put in because of the rules of harmony ... well ... it stands to reason, what you're doing is making the music *harmonic* (at any rate in part) and that can only detract from the *melody*.
(The above was my best attempt at a smile this morning. And here it is again.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I disagree. All backers (of instruments like guitars) harmonise at some point in their playing, whatever their style. Harmony doesn't have to detract from the melody. Fiddlers do it with double stops. Pipers do it with regulators. Accordion and concertina players do it with chords. So you see, this idea that the music is all about one single, plaintive, pure line of monophonic melody is a MYTH. It's a myth promulgated by guitar bashers to try and justify their cause. Irish music is as much about rhythm as melody, and chords (or harmonies) can showcase that rhythm and accent the tunes so that the melody makes you want to dance, not necessarily "detract" from it.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So go on, tell me that all the concertina and accordion players who use chords, and all the fiddlers who use double stops are also "ignorant of the tradition"...
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Now, I think you know you're just being difficult now. You know that what I was reacting to in your posts was the suggestion that you *have* to use certain chords because of some sort of set of rules relating to chord *progression*. Pipers' use of regulators and fiddlers' double stops are great devices - in my own playing I happen to use a hell of a lot of double stopping, though I tend to use it less in a session context, because it may well clash with some piper's use of regulators, or some guitarist's chords.
I also rather implied, right from the beginning, that the use of chords was fine; it's just the use of either outre chords for the sake of it, or 'filled in' chords where they're just not necessary, that I find ... well, not so much *jarring*; more of a pity, really. (Not my best grammar there, sorry.)
But, I'm sorry, it's just not true to say, as you implied some while ago, that you *have* to use certain chords or chord progressions because of the rules of harmony. Follow my suggestion of leaving out the gapped degrees of whatever mode the tunes is in, and it will work just fine. *And* it will preserve that "ambiguity" that Will referred to.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm sorry to have to break this to you, Ben, but when you double stop, you're more than likely following the rules of harmony.
Ok, here's a challenge for you so I can follow this up, and you can educate me. Find me a trad recording (make it one I'm likely to have!!) in which the accompanist doesn't follow the rules of harmony and yet makes it work. Also find me a recording of a well-accompanied tune in which the accompanist does not fill in gaps in the scale. Seriously, you've got me interested now. Because if all these backers who have been accompanying music since the Bothy Band have been doing it wrong, and they're all ignorant of the tradition, I'd like to know what *is* traditional in your opinion.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
What rules would those be then, Dow? Is there only one set? Or can I pick one off-the-shelf?
Half seriously, I have to admit, you have me at a bit of a disadvantage, because I hardly ever listen to CDs, and own very few. So, I'm going to struggle if it's commercial recordings you want.
But then, they're probably irrelevant to what I'm talking about anyway. Because they're commercial.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Bottom line is, Dow, I had a serious point to make. I think I made that point. All that I can see that you have done is to quote bits out of context, repeat phrases ad nasueam, and keep telling me I'm saying something I'm not. And other types of browbeating.
But I guess that's what you do.
Hi David. Nice to meet you and actually know who you are this time.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
We get on just fine here! I was enjoying our argument. It's a great displacement activity from what I should be doing
I'd just like to reiterate that you're wrong Ben. Wrong, wrong wrong
David, you're probably right about the double stops thing. I'm a bit like Ben in that I don't really own that many CDs. I don't have those recordings you speak of, but I know the sort of style you're talking about.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And David - I love the "old-fashioned stuff" too, but you have to admit, the Bothy Band were innovative in their approach to accompaniment, and have influenced newer generations of bands like Dervish/Lunasa etc.
And do bear in mind also that to me, the Bothy Band is "old-fashioned". We can't all be old men of the hills like you
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I agree what the Bothy Band used to do *is* old-fashioned (innovative though it undoubtedly was at the time). A more modern approach is to make things much simpler ...
... with lighter texture and *much* simpler - and sparser - harmonies.
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I've got bad news for both of you. Next time I go to the UK I'm hitting Gloucestershire and SW England for some sessions. I'm thinking 2009. See you then. Ben, prepare to be harangued for filling gaps with your double stops and other innovative harmonies. And you, David
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I have to agree more with Dow than benhall on this one, although I see benhall's point about some of us "filling in the gaps" with our accompaniment. The problem is, if we hewed hard and fast to benhall's rules, everything would be shades of beige, and a bit boring I am afraid. There is room in the world for lots of approaches, and the variety adds to the beauty of the music.
Up until now, you have been discussing chords. Is there anyone out there besides me that thinks that a lot of accompanists are getting a bit too busy rhythmically in recent years?
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Have you considered that I may *like* beige?
Don't agree, though, Al. I'm not really advocating rules, as such, but a bit of respect from backers for the indivuality of each tune, including respect for its mode, whether gapped or not, wouldn't go amiss.
This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Firstly, I hope I've done this link right (I'm a bit crap with them):
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/7304/comments#comment288102
So, there we were, discussing a beautiful tune just submitted called Soft Mild Morning. Wonderful tune that it is ...
Anyway, then I noticed that the key was wrong ... I've moved past that now ...
What I 'couldn't' move past was a discussion that ensued about the chords that were marked for the tune.
The tune itself is in a 'gapped' mode. There are lots of those in the tradition and, in my mind, and if it's a good tune, the gap lends an added poignancy and beauty to the tune. It's just lovely to hear. There's a sort of bleakness created by the gap - the missing note - that is heartbreaking given the right tune and the right musician.
So, when those gaps are, as they mostly are, 'filled in' by crass guitar thrashers ... well, all that stark beauty is kind of 'levelled out' in my view. As if one were to fill in the gaps in the Cliffs of Moher (not the tune - the cliffs).
Now, I can't help feeling that this filling in of gaps is created by ignorance of the tradition ... but ...
Does it matter?
Or ...
Am I just a sad, pedantic old git?
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
not at all ben. i agree with you. what also ticks me off about accompaniment is when the guitar is louder than the melody and drowns it out. it drives me up a blinking wall! don't get me wrong, i think accompaniment is a vital part of all music, but it should be interesting in a subtle, unnoticed way.
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry, I should maybe have posted my reply here. I didn't realise you'd started a discussion thread. Hmm, I think you're a sad, pedantic old git
No seriously, I think it's a bit arrogant to suggest that it has to do with ignorance of the tradition. Of course you get accompanists who are ignorant of the tradition, but that's cause they can't play. But just because someone has a different idea of what the music should sound like from you doesn't necessarily mean that they are ignorant and you are all-knowing. You get into dangerous territory if you start thinking like that. Like I said, it all boils down to personal taste. If you're offended by the crashing chords a particular person is playing, or if you don't agree with the harmonies they're using and that irritates you and stresses you out, then just don't play with them. It really is as simple as that. If you think that their harmonies are wrong because they are beginners and lack experience, just help them. Give them pointers on what chords you think would work. Be constructive about it. Don't just dismiss them as "ignorant".
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yes it matters, and yes you are a sad, pedantic old git. So am I....
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
No sh1t
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm too ignorant to be pedantic. Is it all right if I'm just a sad old git?
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by mickray
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm just a git. I know. I just asked my wife.
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Steve Shaw
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Heh, trouble is, Dow, that only a sad, pedantic young git would respond that way. Think how much sadder, more pedantic, and gittier you'll be when you reach my age....
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Now here at last is a club I'm qualified to join (my wife says so too, on all counts).
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Rhod
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
The SPOG club! Here in the UK we have a TV series called "Grumpy Old Men" and when I watch it (to the amusement of my wife and daughter) I keep jumping up and agreeing with these guys who are SPOGs to a man and enjoying a good old whinge. BTW this is not a sexist thing - there is also a program called "Grumpy Old Women".
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Rhod
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry Rhod, if you're still capable of jumping up to agree with a show on the telly, you're clearly not old enough to be a SPOG....
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Absolutely, puddy tat. There's a line you cross at a certain point, where you can't get up from a chair without at least a slight "oof" or other sort of moan or grunt. I crossed it a while ago, myself. And yet I still aspire to pedantry...
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by mickray
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
They're all sat next door watching Big Brother as I type. More and better drama on here.
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Alf Tupper
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Nice to know I'm amongst those of like mind (well, what's left of it)! Ehh? Big Brother? Don't get me started...
# Posted on June 4th 2007 by Rhod
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm p*ssed now. But thanks so far, guys.
"SPOG" - love it.
Dow - you're wrong. I think you're just arrogant accusing me of being arrogant for accusing other people of being ignorant ... 'cos they're wrong too, so there!
Ah well, maybe there'll be some serious replies in the morning.
Still ... nice to know I'm not alone ...
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry, benhall.1, I actually agree with you. I just don't have the knowledge to help support your case--had not heard the term "gapped mode" before. Yet another thing to put on my depressingly long "Things I Must Learn More About" list.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by mickray
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I love how ambiguous gapped tunes can be but are you just saying that any accompaniment is wrong or have you some specific ideas that you feel work well with gapped mode tunes?
Crass guitar thrashers are as much of a worry to other guitarists as they are to melody players. But I guess I was wondering if this was really just a subtly disguised guitar-bashing thread.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Donough
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
No. I really didn't mean it to be a guitar-bashing thread. And I do have ideas as to how to accompany 'gapped' modes.
Simple, really. Just don't play the note that's missing from the mode. An effective way of doing this is to use those chords which I believe are nowadays referred to as 'power chords', by which I mean chords without a third, like DAd, or AEa, or something - very effective on mandolin, btw.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Nah, that's crap Ben. Look at it this way, if you have a pentatonic tune in G, with a scale G-A-B-d-e, going by your rules, you're going to be too limited with the chords you can use. You can't even use your basic G-C-D 3-chord trick which you really need for any G tune to make sense. You wouldn't be able to have Am, Bm, C, D... in fact the only chords out of your normal G repertoire you'd be able to use would be G and Em. That'd make for a very boring accompaniment. With all the chords at your disposal, you could make a beautiful accompaniment line for a pentatonic tune, and yes, lo and behold, all the trad backers do, even the likes of Alec Finn who goes for picking very basic power chords on 3 courses - even he needs his chord IV.
I see what you're trying to say. It's just very poorly thought out. I'm also beginning to wonder now whether this is just another guitar bashing thread for grumpy tunes players.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I think I see what you're saying, though. You'd prefer backers to stick to the "obvious" chord instead of trying to be too flash, and you'd like them to concentrate on power chords that omit the 5th. It's just that your "scale as reference for chords" rule isn't the way to attain that style. To achieve that "sparse", "minimalist" style of backing, you have to do as any other backer does: learn your chords and use your ear and learn the tunes. The rest is down to personal taste.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the whole idea of harmonising Irish music is based around using chords that contain notes that aren't in the scale of the melody. That's how it has to be for most of the time, because a lot of the tunes use gapped scales, but the rules of resolution in harmonic chord progressions mean that you *have* to use certain chords, otherwise you don't get an accompaniment line that moves anywhere, and that goes for the sparser styles that use drones and countermelodies too. So if you don't like that, that's fine, but the logical conclusion is that if you're not happy using those notes absent in the scale of the melody, then you're not happy with backing full stop.
Which brings us in a full circle to guitar bashing.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Aha, as I suspected accomp-bashing
I'll leave this one to Dow
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Donough
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
ben,
I would agree with you, this tune is in A or an A mode dispite absence of Gs or G# s, and using chords which leave out the third often seem to work well with these sort of slightly ambiguous tunes.
(by the way I didn't see Dublin Moran yet, but I havn't forgotten about passing on your regards)
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by cathycook
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I feel sorry for backers who provide sparse and subtle backing.
Some other guit ... er, backer, ... inevitably sees the gaps as a place to jump in and fill so you end up with ... mud
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Bren
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm going to have to reply to your posts one by one, Dow.
Firstly, I don't think it's "very poorly thought out". It may be a different opinion from yours, but it's something that I've been thinking about for 40 years or so, so, either my brain is peculiarly slow and stupid, or you'll have to accept that I may have something in there.
Now, for instance, your point about pentatonic tunes. There are, of course, well nigh no pentatonic tunes - please correct me on this one if you know a whole rake of such tunes, cos I don't come across them. There are, however, loads and loads of hexatonic tunes. If I was faced with a pentatonic tune and was considering backing, I actually *would* prefer it not to destroy the beauty of the extremely sparse mode, but to stick to just the five notes of that scale.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
You picked up something in one of those posts, Dow, that you attributed to me, and yet I can't remember saying ... It's totally OK, though, 'cos I agree absolutely - it's just you must be psychic or something. The point is: yes I definitely *would* rather guitarists stuck to the 'obvious' chords, because other chords too often sound crass, twee, or terribly 'pan-Celtic' and mushy. I hasten to add that there are a VERY few, exceptional guitarists who seem to be able to get away with extraordinary chords that I couldn't possbly 'approve of', but find myself liking nonetheless ...
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yeh, it's a bit like jazz guitarists who play too many passing or transitional chords and so flatten out the peaks and troughs too much. Sometimes a simple 2 or three chords with the odd bass note is just what's needed
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Bren
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Now, here we come to one of the - in my opinion - more dangerous (? - too strong a word, but something along those lines ...) points in your musical ITM world-view, Dow:
"the rules of resolution in harmonic chord progressions mean that you *have* to use certain chords, otherwise you don't get an accompaniment line that moves anywhere"
One of my strong arguments in all this, is that you don't *need* and shouldn't *expect* the harmony to 'resolve' or 'follow harmonic rules' or do any of the 'normal' things that harmony does in other idioms. *All* that accompaniment should do in ITM is point up the melody.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I still insist I am NOT attacking backing, per se. Just crass backing that over-rides, or tries to alter the nature of the melodies being backed.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
"There are, of course, well nigh no pentatonic tunes - please correct me on this one if you know a whole rake of such tunes, cos I don't come across them."
No, there are. I correct you.
"Now, here we come to one of the - in my opinion - more dangerous (? - too strong a word, but something along those lines ...) points in your musical ITM world-view, Dow... blah blah blah"
Whether you like it or not, Ben, *all* the backers on *any* CD you have, whether it be Alec Finn, Donal Lunny out of the Bothy Band and Planxty, any of the younger generation backers, they're all following the rules of diatonic modal harmony. If you don't like what they do, that's fine. I'm just telling you that that's a fact that that's what they're doing. I happen to like it, and don't think it's particularly "dangerous".
I'm afraid that's all I have to say on this thread. I'm afraid this isn't about a difference of opinion anymore. You're just wrong.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Fine. Please let me know a few of the pentatonic tunes you know in the Irish idiom.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
OK just one more thing before I stomp off in a huff
X: 1
T: Roaring Barmaid, The
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Gmaj
~G3 EGD|~G3 EGD|DEG BGG|dGG BAB|
~G3 EGD|~G3 EGD|GAB deg|deg edB:|
|:deg ~b3|bab deg|~b3 bag|edB deg|
~b3 bab|agg bgg|agg deg|deg edB:|
Don't see any F#s or Cs in there. Must be one of those oh-so-rare pentatonic tunes. Of course you could put some F#s or Cs in if you liked, for variation - (which is sort of my point - often tune players will fill the gaps themselves in a gapped scale tunes, horror of horrors)... But let's say we don't.
My point is, most backers putting chords to this would use more than just G and Em.
Yeah, you could just drone on a single low G or something for the whole thing, but you might just as well be playing bodhran. Boring! The whole point about backing on guitar is enhancing the rhythm through playing in different textures and making it exciting to listen to. I think this guitar-bashing thing is all about melody players wanting to feel superior and "more trad than trad", and really, it's so tiresome. I mean, are you gonna tell the likes of Donal Lunny and Alec Finn they're doing the wrong thing? You could I suppose, but I can guess what their reply would be.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Here's another pentatonic one http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/280.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
The 1st part of this is pentatonic http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/865.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Pentatonic http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/3226
These are just the ones off the top of my head.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Pentatonic http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/3119
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
My setting of this one's pentatonic:
X: 1
T: Have A Drink With Me
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Emin
BAG EGD|EGD EGA|BAB GED|EAA AGA|
BAG EGD|EGD EGA|BAB GED|EGG G3:|
|:GBd e2d|dgg B2A|GBd e2d|eaa aga|
bag age|gdB AGA|BAB GED|EGG G3:|
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And this one:
X: 1
T: Haunted House, The
C: Vincent Broderick
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Gmaj
~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd egd | egd edB |
~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd ege | dBA G2 D :|
|:GBd e2 d | egd edB | GAB d2 B | ded dBA |
[1 GBd e2 d | egd edB | GBd ege | dBA G3 :|
[2 ~G3 AGA | BGE EDE | GBd ege | dBA G2 D ||
Want any more?
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Pentatonic http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/1880
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Speak to me, Ben, do you believe me yet?
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Ain't it interesting they're almost all jigs? Not making a point ... just interested ...
... and I STILL wouldn't put extra notes/chords in. Roaring Barmaid, for instance, has one chord. And a very nice chord too.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Why go out of one's way to 'make a tune interesting' when they're really interesting already.
Or aren't you really interested in the tunes?
Hmm?
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
(Sorry I didn't speak to you before, Dow [he whispers]. I'm supposed to be working ever so hard, and also my young assistant needs to work ever so hard, or we'll never get this piece of work done. I've got a horrible feeling he might find it demotivating if he knew I was doing this every so often as a break.)
(So could you answer quietly, please?)
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
PENTATONIC!!!! http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/1075
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Actually, it's harder than I thought to think of pentatonic tunes. I'm starting to struggle now. Oh hang on, I think I've got another one, I just have to check it...
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Dammit, if I hadn't transcribed that B this one woulda been as well http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/1644
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I always play this one pentatonic:
X: 1
T: Flowers Of Spring, The
M: 6/8
L: 1/8
R: jig
K: Ador
ABA ABd | edB G2B | dBA GBA | GBd edg |
ABA ABd | edB G2B | dBB gBB |1 ABA A2G :|2 ABA A2d||
|: eaa aga | bab age | ege GBd | ede ged |
eaa aga |bab age |ege dBG |1 ABA A2d:|2 ABA A2G||
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And this one, although admittedly other people often play it hex:
X: 1
T: Anderson's
M: 4/4
L: 1/8
R: reel
K: Dmaj
ABdf e2dB|AF~F2 EFDB|ABdf e2df|1 afef dedB:|2 afef d3f||
a2fa bafb|a2fd edBd|a2fa bafb|afef d3f|
a2fa bafb|a2fd edBd|A2FB ABdf|afef d3B||
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
*jury drowns under weight of evidence*
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Bren
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill gave a concert here last month, and on a bunch of tunes, Dennis held one chord, in one position, *not moving a finger* on his left hand for the entire tune.
Several of us came away thinking, "well, that wasn't the most exciting backing I've ever heard." But the point was clear--he was providing a rhythmic base for Martin to play around, very much like a bodhran (not that Martin needs a beat, what with his leg pumping away like a steam piston the whole time). Perhaps with a skooch more harmonic color than a bodhran could muster, but never straying from the tonic.
So, just to toss some kindling on the embers here, not all backers fill in the gaps. And some of us don't mind that, perhaps even prefer it. If Martin wanted to fill in the gaps, he could, but it wasn't dictated to him by the accompaniment.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yeah, but Dennis Cahill doesn't do that *all* the time, right?
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
"Perhaps with a skooch more harmonic color than a bodhran could muster, but never straying from the tonic."
This is my whole point, Will. Yes, that minimalist, sparse style of backing is fine if that's what you're into, but it's that tiny bit of harmonic colour that makes it good trad, not bad trad. If you watch what Dennis Cahill does, he's often making very subtle chord voicings up the neck so that the harmonies move with the tune, whilst keeping that tonic drone going in the bass. He doesn't stick to a rule of "no notes other than those in the scale".
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Ok, here's what Ben's saying.
You know how the Bothy Band did the Kesh? That tune has no Cs in. Ben's saying you shouldn't be allowed to use C chords. The Bothy Band used a C in the bass in bar 2 of the B-part, and in some of the zouk harmonies in the A-part. So Ben's saying that's crap and wrong. I just don't get it.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Sorry, no I should quote him more precisely. He said "I can't help feeling that this filling in of gaps is created by ignorance of the tradition"
So people like Donal Lunny are ignorant of the tradition. Yeah whatever.
OK I'm off to bed now, this is silly.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So, of the tunes you posted, Dow, 2 were reels, both in D; 1 a polka that's *so* pentatonic you can't really ascribe any other feature to it; and 8 were jigs, 5 of which were in G.
Again, no particular point. Just interested.
Now what we need is Alex to work some of his statistical majig on the tunes on this site, and discover *just* how common, as a proportion, pentatonic tunes are.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
My point being that that still isn't the point.
If an accompanist wants to ride roughshod over a tune's natural characteristics, then fine. It's not for me, but fine.
I'm also not saying that anyone wanting to put together an album with the obvious intention of making it a commercial success shouldn't use whatever techniques, styles or whatever will achieve that end.
AND, I have said several times that I'm not attacking accompaniment per se. I also said that some people seem to be able to get away with playing accompaniment that, if you took my arguments in this thread to extremes, would not fit. Sometimes, they not only get away with it, it even sounds good. But the people who can get away with it are few and far between.
But when you get an accompaniment that's sparse, in the right mode, and *only* there to point up the beauty of the melody, you *will* get a result which is more melodic - stands to reason.
The other approach (a possible other approach) of using unusual chords, 'interesting' textures and rhythms and so on, will inevitably lead to music which gives proportionately more weight to the accompaniment that if that accompaniment were sparse and less 'novel'.
I'm just saying the choice to me is: melody ... or mush.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
(Damn. I'll be working in the morning when Dow's up and posting.)
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm not coming down on one side or the other here--just sharing a recent observation of Cahill and Hayes dancing around the points of discussion, with instruments in hand.
Yes, it's obviosu when Dennis adds a note to color, but there were several tunes that he didn't evne do that. And "interesting" or not, I found myself wanting to hear just the fiddle.
I may not be as singular in my musical tastes as Ben, but I do lean toward his end of the spectrum--less is more. I often don't like it when a tune's modal ambiguity is abruptly decided by a backer's choice of chord. It's the ambiguity itself that's so alluring.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
hmmm...my typing fingers seem to have a bad case of dselxyai today....
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
given that tunes are usually played several times over, there's no reason why a backer can't exploit that ambiguity - one way, the other way, leave it open
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Bren
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yep, Will. That's basically what I've been saying - OK, I *may* have said it just a smidgen stronger, but that's the gist.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I see Bren's point too, but what Ben and I are suggesting is that we prefer that no one "exploits" the music we play. At least within earshot when we're playing it. In fact, that's precisely what's so annoying about how some backers approach a tune--a melody to be exploited for their harmonic innovations.
Again, I'm not entirely a purist. I know what I'm gonna hear when I listen to Lunasa or the Bothy Band or Hayes and Cahill. So I enjoy it for what it is. But I'm more often moved by a solo melody instrument or a simple duo with the gaps unfilled. That's a big part of what sets this music apart from rock, blues, etc.--all those popular genres that feature harmonic accompaniment and very unambiguous modes. I get plenty of that from tv, radio, and concerts. So it's nice to play something different one night a week, or at least sometime during that night.
Bren, the problem with a backer filling in the gaps even just once as a tune goes by three or more times is that we hear the ambiguity resolved, as though the "open" run throughs were just a set up for the "aha" moment. It changes how we hear and understand the tune, and gapped tunes tend to lose their searching, yearning qualities when a mode is imposed on them.
The fact that many tunes in this tradition aren't so ambiguous argues, to me, for preserving (at least occasionally) the ambiguity of the ones that are.
# Posted on June 5th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Will, I think you've misunderstood what the whole premise of this discussion is, which is a bit disappointing. Nobody is arguing that there's anything wrong with the sparse style of backing. I also love that style. The problem with this thread is that Ben is saying that if you fill in the gaps, then you're displaying your "ignorance of the tradition". That means that all the backers you've ever heard on recordings, INCLUDING DENNIS CAHILL, are ignorant of the tradition.
And now for some more pentatonic tunes:
Rathlin Island http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/874
Lucy Farr's http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/3896
Jerry O'Sullivan's http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/2635 (those F#s are just a rhythmic passing note - I don't play them myself)
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I could go through some Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill recordings and find you many, many specific examples down to exactly what chord DC is playing in which bar and exactly what gap he's filling, if you like, just to make my point more clearly (that DC is also "ignorant of the tradition", according to Ben's view), but I really can't face listening to a whole CD of MH & DC at the moment
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
OK, here's one. I whacked a CD on - first one I came to - Under The Moon - first track. It took me about 5 seconds to find an example. Bill Malley's Barndance http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/162, posted by your good self, Will. It's a lovely, simple, elegant little tune, and I think very sensitively backed by DC. Now, when you get to bar 4, it goes B2A2 A2, but even though there are no F#s in that bar, DC fills in the harmony for us, and harmonises it with a D chord. He puts that F# in, which according to your philosophy shouldn't be there because it fills a gap. I think it sounds nice. Well, looks like DC is "ignorant of the tradition too", just as I thought.
Sorry lads. I love this music, and if I felt I could agree with you, I'd be the first to jump right in there and agree, but seriously, youse are talking out of your @rses, and I just can't let your misguided views stand unchallenged, because a lot of people read this site, and are going to lap up all the misguided crap and then spout it to someone else, maybe online, maybe at their session. You're gonna get complete beginners who don't know anything about Irish music trying to tell people that backers shouldn't be using notes that aren't in the scale of the melody, and that to do so is "ignorant". I just want people reading this thread to know that it's wrong to say that.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So basically what I'm saying is that that sparse style of backing is great. It's lovely. But going back to the melody scale as a reference ain't the way to attain that style. Backing in the style of the likes of DC is actually much more complex than that. It's bloody difficult to pare everything back until you've got the "bare bones" of an accompaniment line. The way to do it is *much* more abstract than you make out, and it requires a good grounding in harmony, and an understanding of backing Irish music. Ben, you need to go back to the drawing board.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
As Ben himself says above, he overstated his case a smidge. You've made your point many times over that "ignorance of the tradition" isn't the only or best explanation for why backers fill in the gaps. Ben's confessed that he was a tad aggressive there. Let's move on, eh?
And I'm certainly not questioning Mr. Cahill's abilities or the depth of his harmonic understanding of music.
And no one ever said that someone is arguing that sparse backing isn't good.
So who's arse is doing the talking?
But it really isn't that difficult to ping a tonic and octave drone on a guitar for a whole tune. Even I could manage that. I'm just not sure why anyone would want to, or why they'd think it "adds" something to the tune.
My favorite form of accompaniment is a dancer's feet....
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Um, yeah, I like Bill Malley's unaccompanied. Sounds cluttered on Under the Moon. But that's just to my ear.
Er, it's not as though Hayes and Cahill claim to be holding to the tradition. They're both quite open about how they bring other influences to the music, based largely on their own personal forays and (backgrounds, in Cahill's case) in other genres--classical, rock, and jazz among them, all of which typically leave no interval unfilled.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Yes, me too Will. I totally agree with you
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Totally? Like, dude, that is *so* totally awesome!
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
"I like Bill Malley's unaccompanied. Sounds cluttered on Under the Moon."
Well, apparently Dennis Cahill *is* ignorant of the tradition, so maybe you should cut him a bit of slack
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Hah, watch now. Dow will prolly try to claim we were cross posting....
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
In fact, maybe you should write to him, and tell him that he should just sit there on stage and not play at all, and let Martin Hayes have all the limelight for himself
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm just happy that no one was around to clutter up Ceol an Clair....
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Oh we had that conversation right after the concert. In fact, Martin himself suggested it *during* the concert while Dennis went on a 15-minute tuning binge. Seems he was getting a little too much harmonic color out of that geetar.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Oo, is that you namedropping again, Will?
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Only if it makes you feel small and insignificant....
:-|
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I don't feel small and insignificant anymore, not since I took up concertina and stopped backing in sessions
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And there you have it.
One of the highlights (for me, and others in the audience have said the same) of the Hayes Cahill concert was when Dennis put the guitar down and picked up a mandolin and played lead.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Maybe he should have filled in more of those gaps and made his playing more interesting, and you might have wanted him to pick up his guitar again.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Pentatonic tunes are like Lauren Hutton's smile....
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'd say the music's a bit more robust than you allow Will. A gap filled once will not sully the tune in your mind forever - or will it? If so, too bad, since you can't possibly hope to avoid it .
I'm sorry now I used the word "exploit" since it seems to have triggered a thought train about "exploiting" in a destructive way which is not the sense I meant at all.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Bren
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Erm, I didn't say "forever." But certainly in that hearing of the tune. It goes from being unresolved to "oh, so that's what mode it's in." Until the next backer chooses a different chord.
The music is what it is. It's our interpretation of it that is more or less robust. As I said above, sometimes less is more.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Well, there I was ... hard at work ... as predicted ... slightly seething at some of the posts ...
So.
There is *still* a valid point in what I said. I'm a bit sad it's come down to questions of 'how many pentatonic tunes can I name?', or 'how many people like Dennis Cahill use notes that aren't in the mode? - sometimes ...'
Anyway, I have to defend myself on one point, even though I have, as Will said, admitted that it might have been a bit strong. But what I actually said at the beginning of this thread was:
"So, when those gaps are, as they mostly are, 'filled in' by crass guitar thrashers ... well, all that stark beauty is kind of 'levelled out' in my view. As if one were to fill in the gaps in the Cliffs of Moher (not the tune - the cliffs).
Now, I can't help feeling that this filling in of gaps is created by ignorance of the tradition ... but ...
Does it matter?"
True there was no emphasis on the word "this", as perhaps would have made my intended meaning clearer. But let me emphasise *again* (because I have done so several times already in different ways) - I'm not saying there aren't people who can subtly augment the mode and get away with it, even to the point where I enjoy it. But the vast majority of guitarists or other accompanists can't, and shouldn't try.
Yep. The sort of filling in of gaps that I was talking about *is* something that I can't help feeling is born of ignorance of the tradition. And I wasn't, as Dow has implied, trying to make a hard and fast rule that could never be broken.
I stick to every single word in my original post.
And I am, definitely, a SPOG.
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Off to see Tommy Peoples now.
tee hee
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
... who was great. And I could have been playing in a session with him right now ...
... but I came home instead!
What's the MATTER with me??!?!!!
# Posted on June 6th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So gaps filled in by good guitarists are ok, but gaps filled in by crass guitarists aren't? Erm, ... duh?! Doesn't that go without saying? Isn't that more about the guitarist being crass (or not) than about what notes they're using from the scale?
So there we go, that's proof as far as I'm concerned that this was simply yet another guitar-bashing thread. What a shame. And here was I thinking it was an interesting thread about harmony
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I think the thing that annoys me most about this thread is the fact that your complaint is about guitarists that perhaps aren't as good as the likes of Dennis Cahill or someone who can make those harmonies work for you. You know what? We can't all be brilliant musicians, Ben. If you want to play with brilliant musicians all the time, find yourself some professional musos to play with in Ireland and avoid playing with beginners who aren't at your level. Or take up some other type of music that's not about the craic and drinking and having fun, like say classical or whatever.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Are you seething enough yet?
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm too tired to seethe. I'll repeat - it isn't about guitar bashing. It *is* about accompaniment. "Harmony" is the word that winds me up (so feel free to repeat it over and over ad nauseam
).
Accompaniment is fine, but, even with lesser quality players, surely there has to be *some* sensitivity. "Harmony" is fine, provided all you mean by that is the odd chord or two that doesn't cheapen the melody. But when you *harmonise* the music, including those chords that, in your view of it, you *have* to put in because of the rules of harmony ... well ... it stands to reason, what you're doing is making the music *harmonic* (at any rate in part) and that can only detract from the *melody*.
(The above was my best attempt at a smile this morning. And here it is again.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I disagree. All backers (of instruments like guitars) harmonise at some point in their playing, whatever their style. Harmony doesn't have to detract from the melody. Fiddlers do it with double stops. Pipers do it with regulators. Accordion and concertina players do it with chords. So you see, this idea that the music is all about one single, plaintive, pure line of monophonic melody is a MYTH. It's a myth promulgated by guitar bashers to try and justify their cause. Irish music is as much about rhythm as melody, and chords (or harmonies) can showcase that rhythm and accent the tunes so that the melody makes you want to dance, not necessarily "detract" from it.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
So go on, tell me that all the concertina and accordion players who use chords, and all the fiddlers who use double stops are also "ignorant of the tradition"...
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Now, I think you know you're just being difficult now. You know that what I was reacting to in your posts was the suggestion that you *have* to use certain chords because of some sort of set of rules relating to chord *progression*. Pipers' use of regulators and fiddlers' double stops are great devices - in my own playing I happen to use a hell of a lot of double stopping, though I tend to use it less in a session context, because it may well clash with some piper's use of regulators, or some guitarist's chords.
I also rather implied, right from the beginning, that the use of chords was fine; it's just the use of either outre chords for the sake of it, or 'filled in' chords where they're just not necessary, that I find ... well, not so much *jarring*; more of a pity, really. (Not my best grammar there, sorry.)
But, I'm sorry, it's just not true to say, as you implied some while ago, that you *have* to use certain chords or chord progressions because of the rules of harmony. Follow my suggestion of leaving out the gapped degrees of whatever mode the tunes is in, and it will work just fine. *And* it will preserve that "ambiguity" that Will referred to.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I'm sorry to have to break this to you, Ben, but when you double stop, you're more than likely following the rules of harmony.
Ok, here's a challenge for you so I can follow this up, and you can educate me. Find me a trad recording (make it one I'm likely to have!!) in which the accompanist doesn't follow the rules of harmony and yet makes it work. Also find me a recording of a well-accompanied tune in which the accompanist does not fill in gaps in the scale. Seriously, you've got me interested now. Because if all these backers who have been accompanying music since the Bothy Band have been doing it wrong, and they're all ignorant of the tradition, I'd like to know what *is* traditional in your opinion.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
What rules would those be then, Dow? Is there only one set? Or can I pick one off-the-shelf?
Half seriously, I have to admit, you have me at a bit of a disadvantage, because I hardly ever listen to CDs, and own very few. So, I'm going to struggle if it's commercial recordings you want.
But then, they're probably irrelevant to what I'm talking about anyway. Because they're commercial.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Bottom line is, Dow, I had a serious point to make. I think I made that point. All that I can see that you have done is to quote bits out of context, repeat phrases ad nasueam, and keep telling me I'm saying something I'm not. And other types of browbeating.
But I guess that's what you do.
Hi David. Nice to meet you and actually know who you are this time.
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Last post but one should have read: " Half seriously ... [new sentence] I have to admit, etc etc "
... as if that made any more sense than the previous version ...
# Posted on June 7th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
We get on just fine here! I was enjoying our argument. It's a great displacement activity from what I should be doing
I'd just like to reiterate that you're wrong Ben. Wrong, wrong wrong
David, you're probably right about the double stops thing. I'm a bit like Ben in that I don't really own that many CDs. I don't have those recordings you speak of, but I know the sort of style you're talking about.
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Doesn't mean the accompanist has to follow their harmonic mistakes though, hehe.
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
And David - I love the "old-fashioned stuff" too, but you have to admit, the Bothy Band were innovative in their approach to accompaniment, and have influenced newer generations of bands like Dervish/Lunasa etc.
And do bear in mind also that to me, the Bothy Band is "old-fashioned". We can't all be old men of the hills like you
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I agree what the Bothy Band used to do *is* old-fashioned (innovative though it undoubtedly was at the time). A more modern approach is to make things much simpler ...
... with lighter texture and *much* simpler - and sparser - harmonies.
Ha!
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
btw I suppose it was a great session, was it David?
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I've got bad news for both of you. Next time I go to the UK I'm hitting Gloucestershire and SW England for some sessions. I'm thinking 2009. See you then. Ben, prepare to be harangued for filling gaps with your double stops and other innovative harmonies. And you, David
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Dow
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Thus bypassing SE London?
Phew!!
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Alf Tupper
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
crap! I'm moving.
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
That 'crap' shoul have read b*llocks, btw
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
I have to agree more with Dow than benhall on this one, although I see benhall's point about some of us "filling in the gaps" with our accompaniment. The problem is, if we hewed hard and fast to benhall's rules, everything would be shades of beige, and a bit boring I am afraid. There is room in the world for lots of approaches, and the variety adds to the beauty of the music.
Up until now, you have been discussing chords. Is there anyone out there besides me that thinks that a lot of accompanists are getting a bit too busy rhythmically in recent years?
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Have you considered that I may *like* beige?
Don't agree, though, Al. I'm not really advocating rules, as such, but a bit of respect from backers for the indivuality of each tune, including respect for its mode, whether gapped or not, wouldn't go amiss.
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by benhall.1
Re: This is of vital interest to me ... anyone else? Or I am just sad ... ?
Thanks, Al. It's heartening to find that *someone* on this website sees sense
# Posted on June 8th 2007 by Dow