I've got this nagging question in my head concernig our role as musicians to keep the Irish music tradition alive.
I've noticed over the years that more and more Irish music groups have been mixing more contemporary sounds with the good old traditional stuff. Think of Lunasa for example or Sharron Shannon. They're all extremely talented musicians yet more than once they depart from the "traditional" sound.
As musicians are we supposed to be preserving the Music as it was played by the "fathers" or is it OK for us to let it evolve into what might be considered "contemporary" Irish music? Just thougth it would inspire some retoric.
I agree completely with you fadah. This a complicated issue!! People are allowed to make changes to the music but they are restricted by these "Invisible and unwritten rules of Irish Traditional music". You now ask: What are these rules? Answer: Donno - there isn't any clear cut answer.
Concertina Player's reply is true.... very true.
Carrie*
As you might have guessed - and I can mention it before Zina does - this has been discussed a few times before here at theSession. And it's surely one of the questions that can stimulate ones retoric talents...
To sum up some of the earlier discussions (I really can't dig through the archives like Zina does) there are a few conclusions that I find valuable.
The first one is that what we today consider to be The Music or The Tradition is something that always have been in evolution. Much of how we think The Music "should" sound are rather recent additions. Listen to ITM before and after bands like Planxty and Bothy Band. So much of the stuff that guys like Donal Lunny did, was new and astonishing 30 years ago and are now totally integrated with "the tradition".
The second conclusion is that only time will show what can be absorbed into the tradition. For every "Donal Lunny" There are at least 30 jerks who makes experiments and additions which might sound cool for a while but get hopelessely tiresome after some time. So much of the nontrad additions will have a very short lifetime - thanks God!
And third: It seems like the tradition only can absorb a little bit at the time. If it changes too fast it loses its role of being tradition - and if it won't change at all, it will cease to be a tradition....
So, tradition need renewal, but not too much at the time. But I think that this ain't nothing that we must take responsibility for by acting like "jazz polices" (or ITM polices in our case). 'Cos tradition itself and its mecanisms will decide what survives and what doesn't.
This is not necessarily my opinion, but a very well respected Irish Musician (former session leader in Boston) once said that when Irish Traditional Music is played jazzy or with a contemporary feel, it sounds like cheezy lounge music. This person said he didn't mind musicians playing in a more contemporary style, just as long as there are still plenty of musicians adhering to the tradition.......
I personally prefer the Music as it was played by the "fathers". I love those old guys that are referred to as "flute geezers". I would much rather listen to Kevin Henry, Dan Healy, John McKenna, Billy Clifford, Mike Rafferty, or Paddy Carty than something like Flook or Michael McGoldrick's Fused.....but that's just me......I certainly hope there's enough young people out there who remain true to the tradition.
you can do anything you like. If it's any good, it might get absorbed. Even if it's a bit rubbish it might get in. The point is that no one can dictate what gets in. The music is a kind of cosmic ether that exists outside the individual. It has always resisted personal interference. We cite `Donnal lunny, but if it wasn't for a heck of a lot of people picking up bazookis it would never have got in. (Lunny wasn't even the first).
We talk of the spirit of the music, and of preserving it. This is a contradiction because the spirit is creative, and preservation is mere copying.
I like Micheal (or rather I agree with him). Since ITM hasn't been haround since the inception of life on this planet (or indeed since the inception of music on this planet), surely it must have evolved from somewhere. It should therefore (in my opinion) continue to evolve. If, at some point, it has changed to such an extent that the features of ITM that I find appealing are no longer present then I shall sigh sadly and no longer involve myself (and feel like an old man with it).
At the end of the day, who needs folk police? There's no accounting for taste and I think we'd all do well to remember that fact and respect others opinions (a la Jerry Springer).
Hi FMF - I just wanted to say that I do have Flook, Fused, and all kinds of funky stuff in my music collection. I enjoy Brian Finnegan's playing and think Michael McGoldrick's a brilliant flute player. But the more I learn about the Music and Irish flute, I find myself listening more to the older guys. I seem to be gravitating towards the more "old fashioned" sounding styles.
Here we go again. How many times can this topic be hashed about?! And yet...I never grow tired of pontificating on the subject. Especially if I'm at the pub.
I agree that the music has to evolve and has always evolved. The difference nowadays is that we have mass market, commercial recordings. On the one hand, it introduces people to the music. On the other hand, it introduces them to a new kind of music that's different from the tradition.
I live in the center of Old-time music. Going to Asheville for Old-time music is like going to Ennis or Galway for Irish trad. I played Old-time for years. An interesting thing happened with that music. You may have heard of it; it's called bluegrass. Bluegrass is essentially a commercial musical tradition that was inspired by the string band and jazz traditions. It was created to be performed, whereas old-time (which is a made up term) grew from European and African traditions in the pre-to-early commercial recording period. It pretty much died out and the revivalists raised it from the grave. It has a totally different feel and is commonly thought of as a different genre of music from Bluegrass. And yet, the two are very, very often confused, even by people who live around here.
I see similarities with what's happening to Irish trad. A new type of music, band music which is meant to be performed, is being created. It's not bad. It's not always good. But it is different.
A good thing is that most of the hot Irish Superband performers can also play really good straight trad. Bluegrass and Old-Time musicians often tend to play one or the other. There are exceptions but it's usually pretty easy to spot a bluegrass player trying to play Old-Time, no matter how good they are.
I wonder if it'll get to that point with Irish trad.
For me, the basic difference between Old-Time and Bluegrass as well as Irish Trad and Superband Music is that the older form is best appreciated on your feet, whereas the newer form is usually appreciated on your tush. So, it's feet music and butt music. (Now, I know that not everything in the tradition is dance music, but much of it is and I think overall the tradition is very interactive.) That's why we've really gotten into the set dancing around here. It's helped get a lot of the regular punters more into the scene and they appreciate straight trad more.
Anyway, I think the culprit is commercial recording. It can do two things. It can attempt to speed up evolution to where it forcibly introduces something that may not belong. And it can freeze evolution, where someone makes a recording and everyone tries to sound like that, rather than coming about their own sound through the tradition.
Basically, I don't think there's anything to be done for it. The superbands make it possible for us yobs to play weddings other gaelmitsvah type events. Just like most people wouldn't know the difference between Old-Time and Bluegrass, most people don't know there's really a difference between Seamus Horan and Eileen Ivers.
Don't begrudge the success of the superbands. They help keep the tradition alive. People get excited by anything that
That's my image at work here. I shop at the Gap, drive an SUV and drink fancy Microbrews (& Guinness!). My co-workers get baffled when they see Joe Ryan and Micho Russell CD's on my desk. Not exactly cutting edge but I love the stuff and can't get enough : )
Gaelmitsvah! Oh, I'm gonna use that one! Seems like if we came up with a separate name for Solas-like music, we could put this topic to rest. On the other-hand, in order for any player to pull off a Solas-like sound with any competence, they'd need to be able to play straight dance-music trad, so perhaps another title isn't needed at all.
Still, even in the 'straight-trad-genre' there is a big difference between the sound of a player prior to 1950 vs the modern day traditional stuff. Heck, Kevin Burke and Tommy Peoples are fantastic examples if you listen to them on the Bothy Band. Originally, very Old-Style, they have both since evolved to a very modern style of playing. I've seen people classify these styles as Old-Style and New-Style. Perhaps the Solas thing could be called World-Style. I don't know. Any suggestions?
I like both trad and Contemp. but do you all play just to preserve or because you just like tunes?
I think that there are very cool tunes that were just recently written that are sooooo cool. Are they considered Contemperary. I know for a fact that lots of these are in "The Sessions" tune selection.
Though i also like traditional tunes also. I liek it all!
I think it's a mistake to view things so black and white. What's happening here is a "trad boom" where new tunes are being composed and then adopted by the tradition. In 200 years time, people will look back on this era as a time when trad music blossomed and grew. I think it's a real shame that people have a tendency to be critical of stuff that pushes the barriers because it pushes the barriers, not because they simply don't like the tunes. Just be happy that you're part of this boom. If anyone thinks they can draw a line between "stuff that's trad" and "stuff that's contemp", then they've got blinkers on. I'd be interested to know what tunes get played at their session. If you look at tunes that used to get played regularly 200 years ago, the list bears no resemblance to what gets played now, and yet we tell ourselves we're trying to uphold some sort of ancient tradition. Well, the session phenomenon and a lot of the tunes, not to mention a lot of the instruments we play them on, just aren't. The whole structure of the music and how the tunes are put together - that's part of our inheritance, and so is the *spirit* that tunes are played in, which is the atmosphere we enjoy at sessions.
I'd say at any particular session here in Sydney, maybe half of the tunes played would be recent ones, by Tommy Peoples, Breandan McGlinchey, Vincent Broderick, Michael Gorman ("The Mountain Road", for pete's sake - how common is that? Do we throw up our hands in horror and shout "That's not trad!" if this gets played?), Martin Wynne, Tommy Coen, the list just goes on and on.
Here's something to try: next session make a note of what tunes get played and then the next day work out roughly how many of them were composed recently. You'll realise just how silly it sounds when people go on and on about the tradition they're defending from "modern pollution". So purists, pull your heads out of your behinds and just enjoy playing the tunes for what they are: Nice Tunes.
That's not to say there aren't some new tunes I dislike. The "Up Downey Reel" is one that I hear often which particularly comes to mind as one that I'd rather not bother learning. But I don't blame its "modernity" for that. I just happen to think that it's not particularly well written. There are bits that are too repetitive for my ear, and the two parts don't hang together nicely for me. Other people I know totally adore the tune. I dislike it, but then I dislike some old tunes for the same reasons.
If you can't remember what was played then you could always take a recording, as a lot of people do. Whenever I've recorded a session I've edited the disk in the next few days and looked up some of the tune names on Norbeck's index. All you need is the first few notes. Then when it's edited, you can burn it onto a CD, and hey presto! - you've got yourself a free audio CD.
Evolution or distortion
Evolution or distortion
I've got this nagging question in my head concernig our role as musicians to keep the Irish music tradition alive.
I've noticed over the years that more and more Irish music groups have been mixing more contemporary sounds with the good old traditional stuff. Think of Lunasa for example or Sharron Shannon. They're all extremely talented musicians yet more than once they depart from the "traditional" sound.
As musicians are we supposed to be preserving the Music as it was played by the "fathers" or is it OK for us to let it evolve into what might be considered "contemporary" Irish music? Just thougth it would inspire some retoric.
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by fadah
Re: Evolution or distortion
Today's contemporary becomes tomorrow's tradition and so the cycle continues....
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: Evolution or distortion
I agree completely with you fadah. This a complicated issue!! People are allowed to make changes to the music but they are restricted by these "Invisible and unwritten rules of Irish Traditional music". You now ask: What are these rules? Answer: Donno - there isn't any clear cut answer.
Concertina Player's reply is true.... very true.
Carrie*
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by carrie
Re: Evolution or distortion
As you might have guessed - and I can mention it before Zina does - this has been discussed a few times before here at theSession. And it's surely one of the questions that can stimulate ones retoric talents...
To sum up some of the earlier discussions (I really can't dig through the archives like Zina does) there are a few conclusions that I find valuable.
The first one is that what we today consider to be The Music or The Tradition is something that always have been in evolution. Much of how we think The Music "should" sound are rather recent additions. Listen to ITM before and after bands like Planxty and Bothy Band. So much of the stuff that guys like Donal Lunny did, was new and astonishing 30 years ago and are now totally integrated with "the tradition".
The second conclusion is that only time will show what can be absorbed into the tradition. For every "Donal Lunny" There are at least 30 jerks who makes experiments and additions which might sound cool for a while but get hopelessely tiresome after some time. So much of the nontrad additions will have a very short lifetime - thanks God!
And third: It seems like the tradition only can absorb a little bit at the time. If it changes too fast it loses its role of being tradition - and if it won't change at all, it will cease to be a tradition....
So, tradition need renewal, but not too much at the time. But I think that this ain't nothing that we must take responsibility for by acting like "jazz polices" (or ITM polices in our case). 'Cos tradition itself and its mecanisms will decide what survives and what doesn't.
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by lars
Re: Evolution or distortion
This is not necessarily my opinion, but a very well respected Irish Musician (former session leader in Boston) once said that when Irish Traditional Music is played jazzy or with a contemporary feel, it sounds like cheezy lounge music. This person said he didn't mind musicians playing in a more contemporary style, just as long as there are still plenty of musicians adhering to the tradition.......
I personally prefer the Music as it was played by the "fathers". I love those old guys that are referred to as "flute geezers". I would much rather listen to Kevin Henry, Dan Healy, John McKenna, Billy Clifford, Mike Rafferty, or Paddy Carty than something like Flook or Michael McGoldrick's Fused.....but that's just me......I certainly hope there's enough young people out there who remain true to the tradition.
Just my 1 cent : )
Joyce
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by JMH
Re: Evolution or distortion
you can do anything you like. If it's any good, it might get absorbed. Even if it's a bit rubbish it might get in. The point is that no one can dictate what gets in. The music is a kind of cosmic ether that exists outside the individual. It has always resisted personal interference. We cite `Donnal lunny, but if it wasn't for a heck of a lot of people picking up bazookis it would never have got in. (Lunny wasn't even the first).
We talk of the spirit of the music, and of preserving it. This is a contradiction because the spirit is creative, and preservation is mere copying.
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by ...
Re: Evolution or distortion
I like Micheal (or rather I agree with him). Since ITM hasn't been haround since the inception of life on this planet (or indeed since the inception of music on this planet), surely it must have evolved from somewhere. It should therefore (in my opinion) continue to evolve. If, at some point, it has changed to such an extent that the features of ITM that I find appealing are no longer present then I shall sigh sadly and no longer involve myself (and feel like an old man with it).
At the end of the day, who needs folk police? There's no accounting for taste and I think we'd all do well to remember that fact and respect others opinions (a la Jerry Springer).
FMF
# Posted on May 27th 2003 by folkmasterflex
Re: Evolution or distortion
Hi FMF - I just wanted to say that I do have Flook, Fused, and all kinds of funky stuff in my music collection. I enjoy Brian Finnegan's playing and think Michael McGoldrick's a brilliant flute player. But the more I learn about the Music and Irish flute, I find myself listening more to the older guys. I seem to be gravitating towards the more "old fashioned" sounding styles.
But it's all good stuff.....
Joyce
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by JMH
Re: Evolution or distortion - Parallels
Here we go again. How many times can this topic be hashed about?! And yet...I never grow tired of pontificating on the subject. Especially if I'm at the pub.
I agree that the music has to evolve and has always evolved. The difference nowadays is that we have mass market, commercial recordings. On the one hand, it introduces people to the music. On the other hand, it introduces them to a new kind of music that's different from the tradition.
I live in the center of Old-time music. Going to Asheville for Old-time music is like going to Ennis or Galway for Irish trad. I played Old-time for years. An interesting thing happened with that music. You may have heard of it; it's called bluegrass. Bluegrass is essentially a commercial musical tradition that was inspired by the string band and jazz traditions. It was created to be performed, whereas old-time (which is a made up term) grew from European and African traditions in the pre-to-early commercial recording period. It pretty much died out and the revivalists raised it from the grave. It has a totally different feel and is commonly thought of as a different genre of music from Bluegrass. And yet, the two are very, very often confused, even by people who live around here.
I see similarities with what's happening to Irish trad. A new type of music, band music which is meant to be performed, is being created. It's not bad. It's not always good. But it is different.
A good thing is that most of the hot Irish Superband performers can also play really good straight trad. Bluegrass and Old-Time musicians often tend to play one or the other. There are exceptions but it's usually pretty easy to spot a bluegrass player trying to play Old-Time, no matter how good they are.
I wonder if it'll get to that point with Irish trad.
For me, the basic difference between Old-Time and Bluegrass as well as Irish Trad and Superband Music is that the older form is best appreciated on your feet, whereas the newer form is usually appreciated on your tush. So, it's feet music and butt music. (Now, I know that not everything in the tradition is dance music, but much of it is and I think overall the tradition is very interactive.) That's why we've really gotten into the set dancing around here. It's helped get a lot of the regular punters more into the scene and they appreciate straight trad more.
Anyway, I think the culprit is commercial recording. It can do two things. It can attempt to speed up evolution to where it forcibly introduces something that may not belong. And it can freeze evolution, where someone makes a recording and everyone tries to sound like that, rather than coming about their own sound through the tradition.
Basically, I don't think there's anything to be done for it. The superbands make it possible for us yobs to play weddings other gaelmitsvah type events. Just like most people wouldn't know the difference between Old-Time and Bluegrass, most people don't know there's really a difference between Seamus Horan and Eileen Ivers.
Don't begrudge the success of the superbands. They help keep the tradition alive. People get excited by anything that
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by jerball
Re: Evolution or distortion
Great insight jerbal. I couldn't agree more.
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by fadah
Re: Evolution or distortion
Material girls....LOL...good one!
That's my image at work here. I shop at the Gap, drive an SUV and drink fancy Microbrews (& Guinness!). My co-workers get baffled when they see Joe Ryan and Micho Russell CD's on my desk. Not exactly cutting edge but I love the stuff and can't get enough : )
Joyce
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by JMH
Re: Evolution or distortion
Gaelmitsvah! Oh, I'm gonna use that one! Seems like if we came up with a separate name for Solas-like music, we could put this topic to rest. On the other-hand, in order for any player to pull off a Solas-like sound with any competence, they'd need to be able to play straight dance-music trad, so perhaps another title isn't needed at all.
Still, even in the 'straight-trad-genre' there is a big difference between the sound of a player prior to 1950 vs the modern day traditional stuff. Heck, Kevin Burke and Tommy Peoples are fantastic examples if you listen to them on the Bothy Band. Originally, very Old-Style, they have both since evolved to a very modern style of playing. I've seen people classify these styles as Old-Style and New-Style. Perhaps the Solas thing could be called World-Style. I don't know. Any suggestions?
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by Caoimghgin
Re: Evolution or distortion
I like both trad and Contemp. but do you all play just to preserve or because you just like tunes?
I think that there are very cool tunes that were just recently written that are sooooo cool. Are they considered Contemperary. I know for a fact that lots of these are in "The Sessions" tune selection.
Though i also like traditional tunes also. I liek it all!
AJ
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by berserker
Re: Evolution or distortion
I think it's a mistake to view things so black and white. What's happening here is a "trad boom" where new tunes are being composed and then adopted by the tradition. In 200 years time, people will look back on this era as a time when trad music blossomed and grew. I think it's a real shame that people have a tendency to be critical of stuff that pushes the barriers because it pushes the barriers, not because they simply don't like the tunes. Just be happy that you're part of this boom. If anyone thinks they can draw a line between "stuff that's trad" and "stuff that's contemp", then they've got blinkers on. I'd be interested to know what tunes get played at their session. If you look at tunes that used to get played regularly 200 years ago, the list bears no resemblance to what gets played now, and yet we tell ourselves we're trying to uphold some sort of ancient tradition. Well, the session phenomenon and a lot of the tunes, not to mention a lot of the instruments we play them on, just aren't. The whole structure of the music and how the tunes are put together - that's part of our inheritance, and so is the *spirit* that tunes are played in, which is the atmosphere we enjoy at sessions.
I'd say at any particular session here in Sydney, maybe half of the tunes played would be recent ones, by Tommy Peoples, Breandan McGlinchey, Vincent Broderick, Michael Gorman ("The Mountain Road", for pete's sake - how common is that? Do we throw up our hands in horror and shout "That's not trad!" if this gets played?), Martin Wynne, Tommy Coen, the list just goes on and on.
Here's something to try: next session make a note of what tunes get played and then the next day work out roughly how many of them were composed recently. You'll realise just how silly it sounds when people go on and on about the tradition they're defending from "modern pollution". So purists, pull your heads out of your behinds and just enjoy playing the tunes for what they are: Nice Tunes.
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by Dr. Dow
Re: Evolution or distortion
That's not to say there aren't some new tunes I dislike. The "Up Downey Reel" is one that I hear often which particularly comes to mind as one that I'd rather not bother learning. But I don't blame its "modernity" for that. I just happen to think that it's not particularly well written. There are bits that are too repetitive for my ear, and the two parts don't hang together nicely for me. Other people I know totally adore the tune. I dislike it, but then I dislike some old tunes for the same reasons.
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by Dr. Dow
Re: Evolution or distortion
I totally agree with Dow, both sides of the "arguement" are good!
AJ
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by berserker
Re: Evolution or distortion
"make a note of what tunes get played" ........... crikey, nothing better to do?
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by ...
Re: Evolution or distortion
LOL Nice one, Michael.
Dow, I agree with everything you say but just can
# Posted on May 28th 2003 by murfbox
Re: Evolution or distortion
If you can't remember what was played then you could always take a recording, as a lot of people do. Whenever I've recorded a session I've edited the disk in the next few days and looked up some of the tune names on Norbeck's index. All you need is the first few notes. Then when it's edited, you can burn it onto a CD, and hey presto! - you've got yourself a free audio CD.
# Posted on May 29th 2003 by Dr. Dow