Session style Irish Trad offers an interesting paradox for the musician.
Whilst the melodies are generally rigid and well established, the accompaniment is almost completely extemporized. This leads to two sorts of musicians inhabiting the genre who are diametrically opposed in their approach and expectations; the melody players who know exactly what notes are coming up (interpretation and ornaments/ variations withstanding) and the strummers, plunkers and bashers who (more or less) improvise, busk, jam or wing it.
Since improvisation is not encouraged by the tradition for melody players it leads to backers and percussionists being considered unreliable chancers who are eroding the tradition. Especially as most backers are six string devil twanglers with a bit of a rock’n’roll background who think they can play anything as long as they know or someone tells them “the chords”!
How do you reconcile this within the tradition? Some would say it’s easy; backing is not part of the tradition. But some would say, "It is now!" So should melody players start improvising? But already and presumably box players busk a left hand part, pipes regulators choice, double stopping on the fiddle, piano/ harmonium accompaniment et cetera are all done on the hop and are not part of the melody. Maybe this is where one could find this improvisational aspect fully embraced by the tradition.
What are your views?
I’m completely neutral by the way! A backer, yes, but sometimes I think I may have had a (South Circular Road) Road to Damascus type conversion to a more conservative/ purist approach to the music! Troublesome for a baritone ukulele player!!! http://www.classicbanjo.com/images/slideshowH/banjoH%20(7).JPG
I acknowledge that many guitar"owners" are a pain in the ass, but it highly depends on the individual... As a guitar player myself I know the look you get when walking in to a session when nobody knows you. Once the guitar is out though (in my case, fortunauately) the suspicion disappears But a good guitar player (or any any other backer) is a gift to traditional music. If you know the tunes and work with then instead of against them it's one of the reasons why traditional music is evolving and becoming popular (in a healthy and not-mainstream kind of way). It would be funny to have a parallel world where backing in traditional music had not been around, my guess is that it wouldn't be as fun to play - or listen to for that matter!
But this discussion is up in here every three or four months - the universal answer for all eternity must be:
Know the tune, play along with the tune and not against it and don't judge a book by the cover (or a backer by the size of his/her gig bag
Exactly kilfarboy [and thanks for your youtube clips of kitty and peter] Constant variation IS the lifeblood of the tradition. The misunderstanding arises because of a lack of understanding as to where and how improvisation, occurs within traditional boundaries. Ornamentation, melodic variation, rhythmic variation, 'style'.etc
The assumption appears to be that improvisation requires flights of fancy more prevalent within jazz and rock , this is not the case. A competent player of trad will be varying and improvising within traditional boundaries [and in some cases far beyond them!]
Backing IS traditional. the pipes drone and regulate, what is more trad than the Uilleann pipes?!
'Strummers' can get a bad reputation because they cant play trad! not for any other reason. A guitarist conversant with the tradition will be accepted and welcomed just about anywhere.IMO
Yhaalhouse,you say that the chords are not part of the melody, ok, but the melody IS part of the chords, or they are the 'wrong' chords! this is just my view of things of course.
Where improvisation *does* come out among melody as well as accompanist players is when someone sings a song - assuming the singer is (or is thought to be) agreeable to this. A song, preferably some way into a reasonably well-oiled, "going" session, can sprout some really great music while it lasts.
I personally view the genre in two sub genre: pure trad and contemporary trad. Pure trad cannot really be accompanied because it is/ was played using temperaments outside 12 tone equal temperament.
Contemporary trad, which is what 99% of us play is now in 12-TET and therefore can be accompanied without dissonance. My asthetic opinion on accompaniment is to keep the chords simple where they follow the melody or use counterpoint. I think that the appropriate area for the accompanist to improvise and be creative with is that of rhythm. There is huge scope there.
Sessions in my opinion are for the most part, social events and I generally never expect anything musically great to come out of them unless they are organised and controlled in some way. That takes care of the bashing style! The old house session approach really is the most conducive to good music I think.
On the subject of chords etc... I sometimes enjoy the approach of having an accompanist start a vibe and a progression and I choose or improvise the tune around it. It depends on what one considers the function of tunes to be. I never see the tune as the end result, I see the emotions and art which it creates as the end result so sometimes I'm happy to play on a vibe set up by a bouzouki etc...
That's my rant over with! Fair play on an interesting post!
good melody players don't need accompaniment and a solo player should be able to play music that can easily be danced to.
that said, there are many good accompanists who can add texture, but IMHO their value in a band context (though not their personal worth) can be inversely poportionate to the ability of the melody players they support
strummers are often the best players in dance bands.
If you are an accompanist/sideman/backup musician, I think how you choose to accompany this music depends on whatever your background, training, and experiences were or are before you start playing this music on a regular basis.
Using myself as an example, I grew up in a musically literate home with two parents who encouraged and allowed me to listen to and play a wide and eclectic variety of music. My mother was a music teacher who taught me how to play piano.
When I was a teenager, I discovered ragtime piano music and I still enjoy playing it.
In my twenties, I went to college and got a standard, traditional music education while I earned a bachelor's degree in music. After I graduated from college, I began sitting in at local jam sessions where we played by ear with no sheet music (or "dots") at all.
So by the time some other local musicians started an Irish Jam Session here in 1995, I had a wide variety of experience to draw on when I played piano at the local session. I quickly learned that using the simplest chords and simple, fairly straightforward rhythms was almost always the best way to accompany this music.
After playing both ragtime and jazz, I have learned that one of the differences between them is in how much you improvise. If you can still recognize the original tune under the improvisations, then you are probably listening to ragtime.
However, if you can no longer recognize the original tune, then you are probably listening to jazz.
Do any of you have comparable or similar background and/or experiences or training?
In retrospect, 99% was probably a bit extreme of me... (bloody accordion players... ) What I was trying to say is that I don't think the temperaments are nearly as popular as they were... Of course there are no statistics on it...
I have a problem with the word "backer" . It sets a precedent
for people not to be familiarised with the tune, as if its not necessary. I don't like the word accompanist either. I try to learn the tunes that I play with other people, other wise how can you come up with something really good that lifts. I like
players that hug tight the melody like Steve Cooney. He to me was the major innovator for guitar participation in trad, hardly a "backer" or "improviser" but an orchestrator.
That gets right to the heart of the problem. If you're a gigging band, no worries, orchestrate away. Done well, it can sound terrific and be great fun.
But if you're just trying to have a session, particularly a trad (i.e., non-contemporary) session, an orchestrator would be the worst thing to add to the mix. But that's just my opinion.
I like "pummelator" or "thwacker" or possibly "groton" (that's what it says on the back of my banjo)
yhaalhouse I forgot to tell you I saw your band play at Music Millennium - I had hoped you'd take a break while I was there, but we were late for a dance we were supposed to play for so I couldn't stick around. You sounded great though!
I'm guessing Sinnott's right-hand work would be lovely. Slim, isn't flat-picking tunes on guitar about the most difficult way for a guitar player to participate in a session. I'm given to understand that it's tough work. The guitar players here who go in for flat picking, often make the session sound as if w've momentarily re-located to Nashville
Fair enough on the temperaments thing, martin. But, and I really think it is a big 'but', surely it's not impossible to use accompaniment when people are playing using the old temperaments. I know it's dissonant, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. You used to hear it quite a lot - even players 'varying' the tune, whilst playing alongside others, by playing certain notes a quarter tone or less *differently* from what others were playing.
I used to like the old dissonance. Personally I'd bring it back.
benhall, how dissonant was this old dissonance for which you long. You should come here. Dissonance is our by-word here in San Jose. Some among us seem to take a perverse pride in their dissonance. Now you're saying there's historical presidence for it too?
One of those Foinn Seisiún CDs has some guitar backing that approaches dissonance (to my ear) but then my background's been American pop music and death metal, so maybe I'm just used to different dissonance.
I may have got the name wrong, but it *was* Portsmouth, anyway. Cult listening in the 70s. They were amateur Classical musicians whose speciality was giving concerts of ambitious Classical pieces without doing any rehearsals. (I don't know if they knew beforehand what they were going to play, or opened their scores "cold"...)
Not rehearsing isn't of course the same as not tuning up. But along with soggy timing, I think there was quite a respectable amount of dissonance in their sound...
Portsmouth Sinfonia. They weren't amateur musicians. the entrance requirements were that they were non-musicians or, if they were musicians, they couldn't play their own instrument - they had to play siomething with which they were completely unfamiliar.
So, you're saying dissonance all evening long can have its charm? It used to, once upon a time. It can still make me laugh out loud for the first few tunes; even when I knew all along what the evening would be like, intonation-wise.
Oh dear. I'm obviously not explaining myself well enough. I don't like it when people play out of tune. But, once upon a time, good musicians used to play in temperaments that weren't Equal Temperament. They also - good musicians, that is - used to know how to 'inflect' the melodies at certain notes. This used to produce a delicious dissonance (because, sometimes, not everybody would be doing the same thing at the same time). It was not, however, the same as playing out of tune. Now, *that* sort of dissonance I could listen to all night. But you don't get it any more.
There have been papers written about this stuff. Not that I know where to find them ...
I was actually aware of the difference all along. Sorry for the subterfuge. Any decent piper knows there is no such thing as equal-temperment with pipes. Seldom though, has there ever been a dissonance problem between my pipe set and a guitar.
Benhall.1 - I haven't found a whole lot of papers on the subject but one notable auther is the Rev. Dr. Richard Henebry. The Irish Music Archive has one of his books and you can find some info on the net... Worth a look.
Airport ~ What were you getting at with your reference: "hole-hearted-ally", back on another, completely un-related thread? (The ticker's solid; it's the mind that's a bit moth-holed.)
Airport, "a girl mad as birds." Now, back to guitar playing. Have guitarists attempted to fit Spanish styles into trad? You might have to leave DADGAD to do it.
Yes, thanks for that, Martin. I'm aware of the Henebry text. I thought there were others ... Someone - a Dub - once told me about a paper dealing almost exclusively with sharpened c's, and differing degrees of sharpness. I suspect that counts as a different topic in itself though.
But hey, if there are so few treatises on this stuff, when are we getting one or two from you, Martin?
llig called the original post a pile of toss. I disagree, it is a pile of something alright, but I was thinking something more pungent. Yet another attempt to stir up the 'melody versus accompaniment' debate.
The choice is not between the melody and chaos--while there is more freedom in backing, there still are accepted conventions, rhythms, chord structures, etc. yaalhouse seems to be trying to make the point, since it is not melody, odd approaches and even odd instruments such as ukeleles are acceptable in accompaniment, Not the case at all.
Six string devil twanglers! Now I see the problem clearly: there are too many strings on a guitar for trad. The tunes have unique rhythms built in to them, which gets buried if there is too much extraneous harmonic activity going on. I am especially thinking about lower thirds in folk style guitar chords. This is really a problem area for those who learned guitar in the folk traditions, where the guitar is often the sole accompanying instrument to songs. So my advice to those who play guitar: forget everything you know, and keep it as simple as possible. Learn to mute the lower thirds on all chords. Learn the tune first, then stick to the root notes until you discover the underlying rhythm.
~learn the tune first, then stick to the root notes until you discover the underlying rhythm.
Agree entirely! Backing in trad should have more of a percussive/rhythmic element rather than a harmonic sense.
A guitarist/backer should also be able to change his/her way of playing to suit each session situation as well. There are a lot who have only one way of backing tunes.
It may have originally been intended as an inflamatory topic. It doesn't have to be anything other than a discussion of guitar playing in Trad. No smoke; no flame; only light, if we choose. Good guitar playing adds so much to Trad, IMHO. Bad guitar playing isn't worse than bad piping.
Two quick points:
1.) There are as many different interpretations of these tunes as there are musicians. Just listen to the difference between say a French vs. an Irish style of the same tune or even N. Irish vs. South. While someones way playing may not be to your taste, unless it is god-awful, then it has a right to be.
2.) In my own experience (yes, I am a guitarist with a "rock" background), I initially played as I was comfortable...as I learned a bit more I noticed my style changing more to fit the tunes. Please don't dimiss the novice player...aren't we supposed to hand down this tradition ? Guide them and help them learn...I was terrified at my first session but the people I played with (some members here) were understanding and patient, although I know it must have rankled them sometimes !!! Although I am still new to this I know that as I progress I will get better. That "basher" who you roll your eyes at initially may well turn out to be a great player - and it will happen faster with the help of others !!
Nothing's inflammatory on this board at the moment. I can't be the only one to have noticed how civilised we all are these days?
Meanwhile, on the topic, personally I'd prefer a good session without 'backing'. All the melody players have to be really good for this to work.
And, pile of whatsit that it may be, I do agree that there is, in fact, more improvisation from backers, guitarists in particular. This ain't necessarily a good thing. A *really* good guitarist will slot in so slickly into what the melody players are doing that they're not really improvising, any more than the melody players are.
Atahualpa. There is a profound risk of it sounding Nashville,
which is the last thing you want. Thats where the Spanish Guitar comes in. Then at least you can sound like Willy Nelson has joined the session. I suppose I concur with Will that it is more a band approach to orchestrate (as I believe Mr
Cooney does) rather than mindlessly strum basic chords, even if they are regarded as whats safe and correct.,which a lot of the time does more damage to a set of tunes than other approaches. It is very difficult to play tunes at session speed on the guitar. I know about 200 tunes to play but can only play about one quarter of them at a session. The other 150 I play at the speed of say, Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill at a Valium Party. However, knowing them, however slowly, gives you more of an opportunity to do more appropriate, decorative stuff , probably
in crotchets rather than quavers, and again it's more a band
thing. Give me a band anyday. Too many people with expectations at sessions.
I think Martin's correct, the key to backing is knowing the tunes as a melody player would, keep it simple and give the tune some space. Alec Finn does this to perfection and he has (to my mind) led the way for proper accompaniment for trad.
I would also suggest the guitar is not the best instrument for backing Irish music, but a bouzouki or OM is, as it sits easier with the traditional lead instruments.
"I would also suggest the guitar is not the best instrument for backing Irish music, but a bouzouki or OM is, as it sits easier with the traditional lead instruments."
I think it depends on the player and the musicians he/she is accompanying. The guitar, perhaps, requires more left´hand technique to create a sound that is sympathetic to the melody instruments. But that just means that a bad guitarist stands out more than a bad bouzouki player.
Sugerfoot Jack, I totally agree with you regarding the bouzouki and OM. Personally I prefer to play tunes with one strummer playing starved chords, preferably an OM. I love the playing of John Doyle and the likes but they are few and far between. The vast majority of guitar players in trad don't do anything for the music IMO.
Regarding which is worse a bad guitar player or tune player - sorry but it's got to be the guitar. It is a pretty easy instrument to play until you get to an advanced level. Too many people seem to learn a bunch of chords and think that's it, I'm off to clatter away at a session.
I've quoted this one before - but worth a 'repeat showing'?
From Breandán Breathnach in his preface in "Ceol Rince na hÉireann Vol. 1"
"The two notes C and F are also exceptional in another way: they are somewhat sharper than the corresponding notes on the piano. It's said that DIRECTLY HALFWAY between B and D on that instrument lies the C natural of traditional music, i.e., pipers and fiddlers would play C a quarter note higher than on the piano"
I took Martin's comment on 'contemporary trad' to mean to modern tuning (not necessarily in the style of Mike McGoldrck etc!), and 'pure trad' as more the style of Bobby Casey, Paddy Canny etc - with all those 'bluesy' intermediate notes. In which case - I think his original comment on 99% of us playing are playing 'contemporary' style is correct.
There are a few current players in 'old style / pure trad' : Breda Keville, Pat O'Conner, Kevin Crehan come to mind -- but how often do you here this style in a typical session?
Blues and jazz players have no problem playing 'bent' notes against 'concert pitch' accompanying chords -part of the character of the style - I think same can be true for 'pure trad' style -and as Ben says - nothing to do with simply playing 'out of tune'.
I think Ben had a good point somewhere back there. To my ears, untempered melody against equal-tempered accompaniment can work quite well (of course, it can also be quite horrible). There are several American vocal traditions that originated without accompaniment but have now been sung with guitars or banjos for a century or so. The singing is, at its best, approximately in just intonation and somehow sounds just fine with the instruments. Unless you don’t like it.
Backing or accompanying is vry challenging because to do it well, you ned to not only know the tunes in your head as well as the melody players, but you are also expected to back on the fly to tunes you never heard before, so you need to have a real sense of the structure of the music, know the repeating patterns that often come up, be able to pick up a new tune fast, as many good fiddlers can, where they just hear it and start picking it up as they go.
The other big hurdle, Davydd is so right, you need to be able to change what you do according to which melody player you are playing with, They will all add their own stress notes in different spots, their own emotion to it, you really need to adapt. That is the fun of it for me though, not treating all tunes and melody players with the same accompaniment. it's so little about what key is it in, that needs to be right of course, but there are many other variables.
You really can't learn backing/accompaniment in isolation for that reason or get it solely off chord charts and then jump into session playing and do it well, you need the experience of playing with many people with many different styles and different kinds of phrasing. However if you go out and try to practice and get that experience in a session you may get run off! It's not the place to "experiment". So going to sessions, play on what you know, and recording the rest to practice at home is a great solution. To study the different styles and phrasing of many musicians, to practice to recordings, can really be lots of fun, especially where no one can hear you goof up!!
Iprefer accompanists who listen,and who play on the beat,and who help to make the music,sound like dance music.
there has been a trend in latter years for accompanists,[particularly bouzoukis] just to fill in the sound,without giving any lift.
they often seem to be there because the accordion player doesnt know how to play his basses.
I wish they would go away.
Good backers know their instrument, improvise capably, and as such, are most unlikely (or unable) to repeat an improvised backup line verbatim. So said, they are an asset to the scene. As with anybody, including melody players, ability is relative to welcome.
Oooo, I have to my bit for failte here drone, no offense intended.
I wish that welcome would be relative to the common sense and decency of the newcomer, regardless of skill level. If they are a newbie, and have the good sense to be humble and play only what they know, I'd welcome them.
Conversly, if some big shot came in and acted like a jerk, I may implant my bow in his eye.
<<Iprefer accompanists who listen,and who play on the beat,and who help to make the music,sound like dance music.
there has been a trend in latter years for accompanists,[particularly bouzoukis] just to fill in the sound,without giving any lift.>.
.A man after my own heart dickens!
But I find a backer a great help when playing solo, as long as they know their stuff.
Taking out the thirds!! oh dear me no, where would we be without thirds? wishy washy land, thats where.IMO. just make sure its the right third!
Since the local session started here in 1995, I have learned that playing through the tunes slowly at home by myself has helped improve my accompanying at the sessions. I understand the tunes better and am better acquainted with them if I play through slowly by myself at home.
Yes, the "shrub" says the most interesting things when he doesn't think before opening his mouth or when he escapes from his handlers. Then there are those people who suspect that the Shrub may actually be a robot in disguise.
Fair play to yeh, SWFL Although I personally subscribe to "all are welcome", I've seen the heartiest welcomes given those who play better, and a bit of cold shoulder given the strugglers. Pity, really.
Look at it this way; if you were wanting to dance a set, youd want to dance with people who,1 can dance, 2 can dance a set .3 the particular set.
Its nothing personal, but if you cant dance or hardly, you dont know the set, then sure your not really in the right place. we dont want to be tripping over someone whos swinging when they should be going round the house! It ruins it for everyone else.
Same as any team effort. the weakest link is where the chain breaks.If you want to be part of a team , any team, you need to roughly bring your level up to that of the team, or find a team where you fit in comfortably.
Honestly, Its nothing personal. if you ask any of these players who might give you the 'cold shoulder' what you can do to up your game, I bet they will help you out. In time , if you work hard, and up your game, you will be welcome [ Im talking to a hypothetical person here, who might have encountered this and not understood what is happening and why .]
Playing music is no different. Its a group effort.
IMO
Good points about the group effort Ionannas, and I also like SWFL Fiddler's point about the attitude of the person wanting to join in. It is not just about participating, it is about participating well, and when we give encouragement to newcomers, that encouragement should include pointing them in the right direction, which may be toward lessons, or toward continued listening at the session and practice at home. One piece of advice given around here is find people near your current level of playing, and play with them in a kitchen, you will all have fun, and you will all get better.
And there is more flexibility in melody than many might think, and less flexibility in accompaniment--both have challenges, and both have interesting diversity involved.
The interesting thing about backing is that there are so many different opinions about what constitutes good backing and really very little consensus in theory or in real life. Of course there are those who just don't want it or only some of the time or only in concerts.
No matter how good you are on your choice of guitar/bouzouki/OM and how well you know the tunes there will be people who would rather not have you there in their session because it is not to their taste. This does make it rather difficult especially when you are on the steep part of the learning curve.
As to the original title of this thread most good accompaniment is full of improvisation and is responding to the melody as it goes/changes/evolves. But this must remain rooted to the tune in the same way that a good tune player can play the tune differently several times or may never fully repeat exact settings ever.
There are times at a session when the guitars drop out, and the music reverts back to its older, not-so-cosmopolitan-sounding self. This is beautiful too.
Yes, Atahualpa Quigley, sometimes I use a pre-piano sound such as harpsichord when I am at a session.
Seriously, though, there are some tunes which I do think sound better without piano or any accompaniment at all.
It doesn't bother me and I don't have a problem with the idea of just sitting and listening occasionally when I am at a session. If someone wants to play a solo with no accompaniment, all they need to do is ask me nicely not to play. I will gladly sit there quietly and just listen.
If they try to glare angrily at me with a so-called "look that could kill" or try to order me not to play, I will ignore them.
Many of us take the Sunday issue of the local news paper with us to our session; the thought being to dump them into the open top of the upright piano, while the piano player is in the jacks. No luck so far. That one has the bladder of an elephant.
Do you play with the back of your piano facing the session? Lots of piano players play as if they were situated that way. Don't lets get started on clueless pipers. Now there's a subject...
Since none of the places where the local sessions are held have a piano of any type whatsoever, I have to bring my Roland EP-90 Digital Piano with me when I go to a session. I always try to set up my Digital Piano so I am facing the other musicians and/or am part of the circle so I can see any visual cues from the other musicians.
Clueless pipers? What clueless pipers? I guess I haven't worked with pipers often enough to have had the dubious pleasure of making music with a clueless piper.
However, I have had to endure making music with other musicians (using the term very loosely) who were clueless.
Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Session style Irish Trad offers an interesting paradox for the musician.
Whilst the melodies are generally rigid and well established, the accompaniment is almost completely extemporized. This leads to two sorts of musicians inhabiting the genre who are diametrically opposed in their approach and expectations; the melody players who know exactly what notes are coming up (interpretation and ornaments/ variations withstanding) and the strummers, plunkers and bashers who (more or less) improvise, busk, jam or wing it.
Since improvisation is not encouraged by the tradition for melody players it leads to backers and percussionists being considered unreliable chancers who are eroding the tradition. Especially as most backers are six string devil twanglers with a bit of a rock’n’roll background who think they can play anything as long as they know or someone tells them “the chords”!
How do you reconcile this within the tradition? Some would say it’s easy; backing is not part of the tradition. But some would say, "It is now!" So should melody players start improvising? But already and presumably box players busk a left hand part, pipes regulators choice, double stopping on the fiddle, piano/ harmonium accompaniment et cetera are all done on the hop and are not part of the melody. Maybe this is where one could find this improvisational aspect fully embraced by the tradition.
What are your views?
I’m completely neutral by the way! A backer, yes, but sometimes I think I may have had a (South Circular Road) Road to Damascus type conversion to a more conservative/ purist approach to the music! Troublesome for a baritone ukulele player!!!
http://www.classicbanjo.com/images/slideshowH/banjoH%20(7).JPG
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
And here we were thinking constant variation of the tune is the lifeblood of the tradition. Ah well..
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by kilfarboy
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Kilfarboy, yes it is but not to the point that strummers can (and get it so wrong)! And as I say "interpretation, ornaments/ variations withstanding).
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I acknowledge that many guitar"owners" are a pain in the ass, but it highly depends on the individual... As a guitar player myself I know the look you get when walking in to a session when nobody knows you. Once the guitar is out though (in my case, fortunauately) the suspicion disappears
But a good guitar player (or any any other backer) is a gift to traditional music. If you know the tunes and work with then instead of against them it's one of the reasons why traditional music is evolving and becoming popular (in a healthy and not-mainstream kind of way). It would be funny to have a parallel world where backing in traditional music had not been around, my guess is that it wouldn't be as fun to play - or listen to for that matter!
But this discussion is up in here every three or four months - the universal answer for all eternity must be:
Know the tune, play along with the tune and not against it and don't judge a book by the cover (or a backer by the size of his/her gig bag
Over and out!
Søren Gyllström
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by DADdyGADdy
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Exactly kilfarboy [and thanks for your youtube clips of kitty and peter] Constant variation IS the lifeblood of the tradition. The misunderstanding arises because of a lack of understanding as to where and how improvisation, occurs within traditional boundaries. Ornamentation, melodic variation, rhythmic variation, 'style'.etc
The assumption appears to be that improvisation requires flights of fancy more prevalent within jazz and rock , this is not the case. A competent player of trad will be varying and improvising within traditional boundaries [and in some cases far beyond them!]
Backing IS traditional. the pipes drone and regulate, what is more trad than the Uilleann pipes?!
'Strummers' can get a bad reputation because they cant play trad! not for any other reason. A guitarist conversant with the tradition will be accepted and welcomed just about anywhere.IMO
Yhaalhouse,you say that the chords are not part of the melody, ok, but the melody IS part of the chords, or they are the 'wrong' chords! this is just my view of things of course.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Ionannas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Where improvisation *does* come out among melody as well as accompanist players is when someone sings a song - assuming the singer is (or is thought to be) agreeable to this. A song, preferably some way into a reasonably well-oiled, "going" session, can sprout some really great music while it lasts.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by nicholas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I personally view the genre in two sub genre: pure trad and contemporary trad. Pure trad cannot really be accompanied because it is/ was played using temperaments outside 12 tone equal temperament.
Contemporary trad, which is what 99% of us play is now in 12-TET and therefore can be accompanied without dissonance. My asthetic opinion on accompaniment is to keep the chords simple where they follow the melody or use counterpoint. I think that the appropriate area for the accompanist to improvise and be creative with is that of rhythm. There is huge scope there.
Sessions in my opinion are for the most part, social events and I generally never expect anything musically great to come out of them unless they are organised and controlled in some way. That takes care of the bashing style! The old house session approach really is the most conducive to good music I think.
On the subject of chords etc... I sometimes enjoy the approach of having an accompanist start a vibe and a progression and I choose or improvise the tune around it. It depends on what one considers the function of tunes to be. I never see the tune as the end result, I see the emotions and art which it creates as the end result so sometimes I'm happy to play on a vibe set up by a bouzouki etc...
That's my rant over with! Fair play on an interesting post!
Martin.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by martin t
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
'Contemporary trad, which is what 99% of us play is now in 12-TET'
I don't believe that to be true at all. Not around here anyway.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by kilfarboy
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
good melody players don't need accompaniment and a solo player should be able to play music that can easily be danced to.
that said, there are many good accompanists who can add texture, but IMHO their value in a band context (though not their personal worth) can be inversely poportionate to the ability of the melody players they support
strummers are often the best players in dance bands.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by millionyears_bc
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
If you are an accompanist/sideman/backup musician, I think how you choose to accompany this music depends on whatever your background, training, and experiences were or are before you start playing this music on a regular basis.
Using myself as an example, I grew up in a musically literate home with two parents who encouraged and allowed me to listen to and play a wide and eclectic variety of music. My mother was a music teacher who taught me how to play piano.
When I was a teenager, I discovered ragtime piano music and I still enjoy playing it.
In my twenties, I went to college and got a standard, traditional music education while I earned a bachelor's degree in music. After I graduated from college, I began sitting in at local jam sessions where we played by ear with no sheet music (or "dots") at all.
So by the time some other local musicians started an Irish Jam Session here in 1995, I had a wide variety of experience to draw on when I played piano at the local session. I quickly learned that using the simplest chords and simple, fairly straightforward rhythms was almost always the best way to accompany this music.
After playing both ragtime and jazz, I have learned that one of the differences between them is in how much you improvise. If you can still recognize the original tune under the improvisations, then you are probably listening to ragtime.
However, if you can no longer recognize the original tune, then you are probably listening to jazz.
Do any of you have comparable or similar background and/or experiences or training?
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by fauxcelt
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
In retrospect, 99% was probably a bit extreme of me... (bloody accordion players...
) What I was trying to say is that I don't think the temperaments are nearly as popular as they were... Of course there are no statistics on it...
M.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by martin t
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
The original three pars is a complete pile of toss
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Oh! Llig Leahcim has spoken. Well, that basically concludes it then, let's all shut up now.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Joe CSS
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
hey ... I never said the rest of the posts were toss, There's a lot of good stuff
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
yhaalhouse, what do you think of Declan Sinnott's playing? He's done some gorgeous back-up for songs. What does he sound like if he plays trad?
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I have a problem with the word "backer" . It sets a precedent
for people not to be familiarised with the tune, as if its not necessary. I don't like the word accompanist either. I try to learn the tunes that I play with other people, other wise how can you come up with something really good that lifts. I like
players that hug tight the melody like Steve Cooney. He to me was the major innovator for guitar participation in trad, hardly a "backer" or "improviser" but an orchestrator.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by chuneboi slim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I'm guessing his right hand work would be lovely.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
"Orchestrator"
That gets right to the heart of the problem. If you're a gigging band, no worries, orchestrate away. Done well, it can sound terrific and be great fun.
But if you're just trying to have a session, particularly a trad (i.e., non-contemporary) session, an orchestrator would be the worst thing to add to the mix. But that's just my opinion.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I like "pummelator" or "thwacker" or possibly "groton" (that's what it says on the back of my banjo)
yhaalhouse I forgot to tell you I saw your band play at Music Millennium - I had hoped you'd take a break while I was there, but we were late for a dance we were supposed to play for so I couldn't stick around. You sounded great though!
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by airport
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I'm guessing Sinnott's right-hand work would be lovely. Slim, isn't flat-picking tunes on guitar about the most difficult way for a guitar player to participate in a session. I'm given to understand that it's tough work. The guitar players here who go in for flat picking, often make the session sound as if w've momentarily re-located to Nashville
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Fair enough on the temperaments thing, martin. But, and I really think it is a big 'but', surely it's not impossible to use accompaniment when people are playing using the old temperaments. I know it's dissonant, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. You used to hear it quite a lot - even players 'varying' the tune, whilst playing alongside others, by playing certain notes a quarter tone or less *differently* from what others were playing.
I used to like the old dissonance. Personally I'd bring it back.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Good grief! 7 posts in the time it took me to type out mine!
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Declan Sinnott is no 'pummelator'; nor a 'thwacker' neither.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
really? I like the sound of your truckly-hoedown
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by airport
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
sorry benhall - I thought you said "dissidence"
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by airport
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
benhall, how dissonant was this old dissonance for which you long. You should come here. Dissonance is our by-word here in San Jose. Some among us seem to take a perverse pride in their dissonance. Now you're saying there's historical presidence for it too?
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
There a President of Dissonance??!?
Anyway, it wasn't just being out of tune, you know ...
... honestly, you try and make a serious point ...
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
One of those Foinn Seisiún CDs has some guitar backing that approaches dissonance (to my ear) but then my background's been American pop music and death metal, so maybe I'm just used to different dissonance.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by airport
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Ever hear The Portsmouth Symphony Orchestra?
I may have got the name wrong, but it *was* Portsmouth, anyway. Cult listening in the 70s. They were amateur Classical musicians whose speciality was giving concerts of ambitious Classical pieces without doing any rehearsals. (I don't know if they knew beforehand what they were going to play, or opened their scores "cold"...)
Not rehearsing isn't of course the same as not tuning up. But along with soggy timing, I think there was quite a respectable amount of dissonance in their sound...
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by nicholas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Portsmouth Sinfonia. They weren't amateur musicians. the entrance requirements were that they were non-musicians or, if they were musicians, they couldn't play their own instrument - they had to play siomething with which they were completely unfamiliar.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
... and that *wasn't* dissonance - that was playing out of tune. Out of time too ...
In fact, let's face it ... they were session musicians.
[Good grief, my proof-reading was apalling above!]
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
So, you're saying dissonance all evening long can have its charm? It used to, once upon a time. It can still make me laugh out loud for the first few tunes; even when I knew all along what the evening would be like, intonation-wise.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Oh dear. I'm obviously not explaining myself well enough. I don't like it when people play out of tune. But, once upon a time, good musicians used to play in temperaments that weren't Equal Temperament. They also - good musicians, that is - used to know how to 'inflect' the melodies at certain notes. This used to produce a delicious dissonance (because, sometimes, not everybody would be doing the same thing at the same time). It was not, however, the same as playing out of tune. Now, *that* sort of dissonance I could listen to all night. But you don't get it any more.
There have been papers written about this stuff. Not that I know where to find them ...
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I was actually aware of the difference all along. Sorry for the subterfuge. Any decent piper knows there is no such thing as equal-temperment with pipes. Seldom though, has there ever been a dissonance problem between my pipe set and a guitar.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Benhall.1 - I haven't found a whole lot of papers on the subject but one notable auther is the Rev. Dr. Richard Henebry. The Irish Music Archive has one of his books and you can find some info on the net... Worth a look.
All the best,
Martin.
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by martin t
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Airport ~ What were you getting at with your reference: "hole-hearted-ally", back on another, completely un-related thread? (The ticker's solid; it's the mind that's a bit moth-holed.)
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
oops - sorry for the lame rap attempt. and I missed the "w" - I have the moth-wholes myself!
# Posted on September 22nd 2008 by airport
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Airport, "a girl mad as birds." Now, back to guitar playing. Have guitarists attempted to fit Spanish styles into trad? You might have to leave DADGAD to do it.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
It could be Gawd-awful; it could be gorgeous.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Yes, thanks for that, Martin. I'm aware of the Henebry text. I thought there were others ... Someone - a Dub - once told me about a paper dealing almost exclusively with sharpened c's, and differing degrees of sharpness. I suspect that counts as a different topic in itself though.
But hey, if there are so few treatises on this stuff, when are we getting one or two from you, Martin?
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Give me 3.5 years and then ask me! I haven't really even started looking into it but will soon so if I find anything cool, I'll let you know....
Martin.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by martin t
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
llig called the original post a pile of toss. I disagree, it is a pile of something alright, but I was thinking something more pungent. Yet another attempt to stir up the 'melody versus accompaniment' debate.
The choice is not between the melody and chaos--while there is more freedom in backing, there still are accepted conventions, rhythms, chord structures, etc. yaalhouse seems to be trying to make the point, since it is not melody, odd approaches and even odd instruments such as ukeleles are acceptable in accompaniment, Not the case at all.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by AlBrown
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Six string devil twanglers! Now I see the problem clearly: there are too many strings on a guitar for trad. The tunes have unique rhythms built in to them, which gets buried if there is too much extraneous harmonic activity going on. I am especially thinking about lower thirds in folk style guitar chords. This is really a problem area for those who learned guitar in the folk traditions, where the guitar is often the sole accompanying instrument to songs. So my advice to those who play guitar: forget everything you know, and keep it as simple as possible. Learn to mute the lower thirds on all chords. Learn the tune first, then stick to the root notes until you discover the underlying rhythm.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Dave McGrath
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
What about Michael Coleman and his awful piano player? Isn't both dissonance and horrible backing completely within the tradition?
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by sbhikes
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
~learn the tune first, then stick to the root notes until you discover the underlying rhythm.
Agree entirely! Backing in trad should have more of a percussive/rhythmic element rather than a harmonic sense.
A guitarist/backer should also be able to change his/her way of playing to suit each session situation as well. There are a lot who have only one way of backing tunes.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by davydd
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
It may have originally been intended as an inflamatory topic. It doesn't have to be anything other than a discussion of guitar playing in Trad. No smoke; no flame; only light, if we choose. Good guitar playing adds so much to Trad, IMHO. Bad guitar playing isn't worse than bad piping.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Ditto bad piano playing.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Two quick points:
1.) There are as many different interpretations of these tunes as there are musicians. Just listen to the difference between say a French vs. an Irish style of the same tune or even N. Irish vs. South. While someones way playing may not be to your taste, unless it is god-awful, then it has a right to be.
2.) In my own experience (yes, I am a guitarist with a "rock" background), I initially played as I was comfortable...as I learned a bit more I noticed my style changing more to fit the tunes. Please don't dimiss the novice player...aren't we supposed to hand down this tradition ? Guide them and help them learn...I was terrified at my first session but the people I played with (some members here) were understanding and patient, although I know it must have rankled them sometimes !!! Although I am still new to this I know that as I progress I will get better. That "basher" who you roll your eyes at initially may well turn out to be a great player - and it will happen faster with the help of others !!
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by standrewscross
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Nothing's inflammatory on this board at the moment. I can't be the only one to have noticed how civilised we all are these days?
Meanwhile, on the topic, personally I'd prefer a good session without 'backing'. All the melody players have to be really good for this to work.
And, pile of whatsit that it may be, I do agree that there is, in fact, more improvisation from backers, guitarists in particular. This ain't necessarily a good thing. A *really* good guitarist will slot in so slickly into what the melody players are doing that they're not really improvising, any more than the melody players are.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Atahualpa. There is a profound risk of it sounding Nashville,
which is the last thing you want. Thats where the Spanish Guitar comes in. Then at least you can sound like Willy Nelson has joined the session. I suppose I concur with Will that it is more a band approach to orchestrate (as I believe Mr
Cooney does) rather than mindlessly strum basic chords, even if they are regarded as whats safe and correct.,which a lot of the time does more damage to a set of tunes than other approaches. It is very difficult to play tunes at session speed on the guitar. I know about 200 tunes to play but can only play about one quarter of them at a session. The other 150 I play at the speed of say, Martin Hayes and Dennis Cahill at a Valium Party. However, knowing them, however slowly, gives you more of an opportunity to do more appropriate, decorative stuff , probably
in crotchets rather than quavers, and again it's more a band
thing. Give me a band anyday. Too many people with expectations at sessions.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by chuneboi slim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I think Martin's correct, the key to backing is knowing the tunes as a melody player would, keep it simple and give the tune some space. Alec Finn does this to perfection and he has (to my mind) led the way for proper accompaniment for trad.
I would also suggest the guitar is not the best instrument for backing Irish music, but a bouzouki or OM is, as it sits easier with the traditional lead instruments.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Sugarfoot Jack
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
"I would also suggest the guitar is not the best instrument for backing Irish music, but a bouzouki or OM is, as it sits easier with the traditional lead instruments."
I think it depends on the player and the musicians he/she is accompanying. The guitar, perhaps, requires more left´hand technique to create a sound that is sympathetic to the melody instruments. But that just means that a bad guitarist stands out more than a bad bouzouki player.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by ragaman
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
as an irish, bazouki-playing friend once said, the key to playing chords behind tuens is "eliminatin' de t'irds"!!heh...
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by pipewatcher
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Sugerfoot Jack, I totally agree with you regarding the bouzouki and OM. Personally I prefer to play tunes with one strummer playing starved chords, preferably an OM. I love the playing of John Doyle and the likes but they are few and far between. The vast majority of guitar players in trad don't do anything for the music IMO.
Regarding which is worse a bad guitar player or tune player - sorry but it's got to be the guitar. It is a pretty easy instrument to play until you get to an advanced level. Too many people seem to learn a bunch of chords and think that's it, I'm off to clatter away at a session.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Bogman
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Awaiting guitarist missiles...........
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Bogman
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I've quoted this one before - but worth a 'repeat showing'?
From Breandán Breathnach in his preface in "Ceol Rince na hÉireann Vol. 1"
"The two notes C and F are also exceptional in another way: they are somewhat sharper than the corresponding notes on the piano. It's said that DIRECTLY HALFWAY between B and D on that instrument lies the C natural of traditional music, i.e., pipers and fiddlers would play C a quarter note higher than on the piano"
I took Martin's comment on 'contemporary trad' to mean to modern tuning (not necessarily in the style of Mike McGoldrck etc!), and 'pure trad' as more the style of Bobby Casey, Paddy Canny etc - with all those 'bluesy' intermediate notes. In which case - I think his original comment on 99% of us playing are playing 'contemporary' style is correct.
There are a few current players in 'old style / pure trad' : Breda Keville, Pat O'Conner, Kevin Crehan come to mind -- but how often do you here this style in a typical session?
Blues and jazz players have no problem playing 'bent' notes against 'concert pitch' accompanying chords -part of the character of the style - I think same can be true for 'pure trad' style -and as Ben says - nothing to do with simply playing 'out of tune'.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Col Arco
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I think Ben had a good point somewhere back there. To my ears, untempered melody against equal-tempered accompaniment can work quite well (of course, it can also be quite horrible). There are several American vocal traditions that originated without accompaniment but have now been sung with guitars or banjos for a century or so. The singing is, at its best, approximately in just intonation and somehow sounds just fine with the instruments. Unless you don’t like it.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Bob himself
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Backing or accompanying is vry challenging because to do it well, you ned to not only know the tunes in your head as well as the melody players, but you are also expected to back on the fly to tunes you never heard before, so you need to have a real sense of the structure of the music, know the repeating patterns that often come up, be able to pick up a new tune fast, as many good fiddlers can, where they just hear it and start picking it up as they go.
The other big hurdle, Davydd is so right, you need to be able to change what you do according to which melody player you are playing with, They will all add their own stress notes in different spots, their own emotion to it, you really need to adapt. That is the fun of it for me though, not treating all tunes and melody players with the same accompaniment. it's so little about what key is it in, that needs to be right of course, but there are many other variables.
You really can't learn backing/accompaniment in isolation for that reason or get it solely off chord charts and then jump into session playing and do it well, you need the experience of playing with many people with many different styles and different kinds of phrasing. However if you go out and try to practice and get that experience in a session you may get run off! It's not the place to "experiment". So going to sessions, play on what you know, and recording the rest to practice at home is a great solution. To study the different styles and phrasing of many musicians, to practice to recordings, can really be lots of fun, especially where no one can hear you goof up!!
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by irisnevins
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Iprefer accompanists who listen,and who play on the beat,and who help to make the music,sound like dance music.
there has been a trend in latter years for accompanists,[particularly bouzoukis] just to fill in the sound,without giving any lift.
they often seem to be there because the accordion player doesnt know how to play his basses.
I wish they would go away.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Rufus Jameson
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Good backers know their instrument, improvise capably, and as such, are most unlikely (or unable) to repeat an improvised backup line verbatim. So said, they are an asset to the scene. As with anybody, including melody players, ability is relative to welcome.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by drone
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Oooo, I have to my bit for failte here drone, no offense intended.
I wish that welcome would be relative to the common sense and decency of the newcomer, regardless of skill level. If they are a newbie, and have the good sense to be humble and play only what they know, I'd welcome them.
Conversly, if some big shot came in and acted like a jerk, I may implant my bow in his eye.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
'...have to DO..." that is.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
<<Iprefer accompanists who listen,and who play on the beat,and who help to make the music,sound like dance music.
there has been a trend in latter years for accompanists,[particularly bouzoukis] just to fill in the sound,without giving any lift.>.
.A man after my own heart dickens!
But I find a backer a great help when playing solo, as long as they know their stuff.
Taking out the thirds!! oh dear me no, where would we be without thirds? wishy washy land, thats where.IMO. just make sure its the right third!
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Ionannas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Since the local session started here in 1995, I have learned that playing through the tunes slowly at home by myself has helped improve my accompanying at the sessions. I understand the tunes better and am better acquainted with them if I play through slowly by myself at home.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by fauxcelt
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
"I find a backer a great help when playing solo" ??
Sounds Like something George W would come out with
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
A 'Bush'ism!
oh dear, I hope not!...
Im sure you know a solo, is where a melody player plays 'a solo' this doesn't mean unaccompanied. .
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Ionannas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Yes, the "shrub" says the most interesting things when he doesn't think before opening his mouth or when he escapes from his handlers. Then there are those people who suspect that the Shrub may actually be a robot in disguise.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by fauxcelt
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Fair play to yeh, SWFL Although I personally subscribe to "all are welcome", I've seen the heartiest welcomes given those who play better, and a bit of cold shoulder given the strugglers. Pity, really.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by drone
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Look at it this way; if you were wanting to dance a set, youd want to dance with people who,1 can dance, 2 can dance a set .3 the particular set.
Its nothing personal, but if you cant dance or hardly, you dont know the set, then sure your not really in the right place. we dont want to be tripping over someone whos swinging when they should be going round the house! It ruins it for everyone else.
Same as any team effort. the weakest link is where the chain breaks.If you want to be part of a team , any team, you need to roughly bring your level up to that of the team, or find a team where you fit in comfortably.
Honestly, Its nothing personal. if you ask any of these players who might give you the 'cold shoulder' what you can do to up your game, I bet they will help you out. In time , if you work hard, and up your game, you will be welcome [ Im talking to a hypothetical person here, who might have encountered this and not understood what is happening and why .]
Playing music is no different. Its a group effort.
IMO
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by Ionannas
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Good points about the group effort Ionannas, and I also like SWFL Fiddler's point about the attitude of the person wanting to join in. It is not just about participating, it is about participating well, and when we give encouragement to newcomers, that encouragement should include pointing them in the right direction, which may be toward lessons, or toward continued listening at the session and practice at home. One piece of advice given around here is find people near your current level of playing, and play with them in a kitchen, you will all have fun, and you will all get better.
And there is more flexibility in melody than many might think, and less flexibility in accompaniment--both have challenges, and both have interesting diversity involved.
# Posted on September 23rd 2008 by AlBrown
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
The interesting thing about backing is that there are so many different opinions about what constitutes good backing and really very little consensus in theory or in real life. Of course there are those who just don't want it or only some of the time or only in concerts.
No matter how good you are on your choice of guitar/bouzouki/OM and how well you know the tunes there will be people who would rather not have you there in their session because it is not to their taste. This does make it rather difficult especially when you are on the steep part of the learning curve.
As to the original title of this thread most good accompaniment is full of improvisation and is responding to the melody as it goes/changes/evolves. But this must remain rooted to the tune in the same way that a good tune player can play the tune differently several times or may never fully repeat exact settings ever.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Donough
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
All good playing, whether strumming or tune playing is full of improvisational inventivness. To single out one as being less inventive is pure toss.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Llig Leachim...
Everytime I see your name I think you must be part Welsh and part Hebrew!
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Krick Stahlschwanz
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
or just a tad backwrds
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Data Tsujro?!
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Krick Stahlschwanz
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
There are times at a session when the guitars drop out, and the music reverts back to its older, not-so-cosmopolitan-sounding self. This is beautiful too.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
I wish guitarist could be more alert to that stark beauty of pre-guitar Trad. Do piano players ever spare a thought for the beauty of pre-piano Trad?
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Yes, Atahualpa Quigley, sometimes I use a pre-piano sound such as harpsichord when I am at a session.
Seriously, though, there are some tunes which I do think sound better without piano or any accompaniment at all.
It doesn't bother me and I don't have a problem with the idea of just sitting and listening occasionally when I am at a session. If someone wants to play a solo with no accompaniment, all they need to do is ask me nicely not to play. I will gladly sit there quietly and just listen.
If they try to glare angrily at me with a so-called "look that could kill" or try to order me not to play, I will ignore them.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by fauxcelt
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Many of us take the Sunday issue of the local news paper with us to our session; the thought being to dump them into the open top of the upright piano, while the piano player is in the jacks. No luck so far. That one has the bladder of an elephant.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Do you play with the back of your piano facing the session? Lots of piano players play as if they were situated that way. Don't lets get started on clueless pipers. Now there's a subject...
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Backing/ improvisation/ tradition
Since none of the places where the local sessions are held have a piano of any type whatsoever, I have to bring my Roland EP-90 Digital Piano with me when I go to a session. I always try to set up my Digital Piano so I am facing the other musicians and/or am part of the circle so I can see any visual cues from the other musicians.
Clueless pipers? What clueless pipers? I guess I haven't worked with pipers often enough to have had the dubious pleasure of making music with a clueless piper.
However, I have had to endure making music with other musicians (using the term very loosely) who were clueless.
# Posted on September 24th 2008 by fauxcelt