The Session >> Discussions >> Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Comments
Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So, I took the advice, bought a Liz Carroll recording and have so far given it several careful listens. For the sake of those who know, it’s ‘Lake Effect’. Admittedly it’s only one of her recordings, and those who know better will be able to advise on how representative it is; from the clips I listened to before buying, they all seemed similar in style, give or take different amounts of supporting musicians. Will I be buying more to find out? Well, unless Llig suddenly emerges from the clouds and smites me with his Liz Carroll Appreciation Charm, then probably not.
I can hear her technical excellence perfectly well; the more so as I continue to work at the fiddle myself, but the music simply does not reach out and grab me. That’s not the same thing as questioning her musicianship, simply saying that it does not resonate with this listener - which was pretty much my first reaction. And I don’t actually think that is necessarily an admission of ignorance – simply different preferences; give me Hayes/Cahill any day. I had some interesting discussions with some musically-savvy friends at the weekend. They were also of the opinion that it is perfectly legitimate to conclude that certain, even gifted, musicians simply aren’t to your taste, even that it’s daft to claim otherwise.
My wife listened, ‘un-primed’; she’s not musically illiterate. Her immediate reaction was that Liz Carroll has an excellent depth of tone compared with many fiddle players she has heard, and is clearly technically excellent, but that collection sometimes sounds like the work of a wannabe classical musician. The string quartet only reinforces that impression!
What’s more, perhaps understandably for such an able musician, she seems more interested in composing her own tunes than rendering the established cannon. Well fair enough, but to my ear, for all their obvious stylistic roots, many don’t really work as trad. tunes, and are more like slightly avant-guard classical compositions. I find this to be true of many modern tunes and I know this has been discussed here before. At a certain level, genres, I guess, cease to be so important...
I can see why Llig talks about Liz putting 'herself' into the music, but my feeling is that there is *too much* of her in it, and it comes close to the self-indulgent - but curiously, the effect is remarkably monotonous – unless you are listening with the ear of a technician looking for supreme technical display. She’s more interested in the internal structures of the tunes than creating an interesting ‘bigger picture’ for the listener. But IIRC, this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression, for all the greatness of the masters. I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz. Again understandable when you reach a high level, but surely not essential, and perhaps not even desirable?
One of my friends also observed that technically-amazing music can sometimes become so ‘involved’ that it is almost unlistenable-to in a more general sense. I wouldn’t go nearly that far with L.C., but I think he has a point. I wouldn’t recommend her to a newcomer as representative of the tradition, for all her reputation.
In model-making circles, we have the term ‘rivet counter’ for those who obsess about the technicalities of their craft, right down to hundredths of a millimetre of accuracy. They claim that without technical accuracy, it is not possible to render anything convincingly; they also love the technical challenge. The term is often used pejoratively (albeit with a degree of grudging respect for the skill involved) though I think this is unfair. But for all their amazing accuracy, some such models simply fail to capture the essential character of their subject-matter, and people are beginning to realise that technical supremacy sometimes only produces a clinical kind of excellence. I think this is rivet-counter music.
I’ve also been listening to a young, upcoming outfit called Full Set. Anyone know anything more about them? I would like to hear others’ views.
While technically good, I don’t think they touch Liz Carroll in that respect, but IMHO they are far more interesting to listen to – a combination of modern-ish interpretation with respect for their roots. For me, they have some lovely tunes and are excellent at creating sets and arrangements that provide contrast and dynamics which bring out the implicit character of the music. That, to me, is more important, and equally valid, as superlative technical displays.
Apologies for rambling, but that long thread did get me thinking, and I did what I was bid. Here’s a hopefully-considered response. No attempt to criticise others or say they are wrong – but I still think there is more than one way to skin the cat.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
As one standing outside both "genres", Liz Carroll sounds very American Irish to me. That's fine. Sounds good. Different to Irish style music though. Great stuff though - calls for different drinks. (Does that make it clearer?) Southern Comfort for Liz's stuff, the black stuff for the Irish. Yeah, that'll do.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
She came to a place I was playing in fourteen years or so ago/ We still had some of the old guys, Junior Crehan, Michael Downes, Paddy Galvin, who had played there nearly forever. They played in the same house with Paddy Killoran forty years earlier.
At some point Junior asked her, as he would, to play some of her own. Just for a while it was like she was from a different planet altogether.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I would totally dance to Liz Carroll. Amazingly expressive and danceable music. Wouldn't listen to it all the time, because I do agree with your impression that it tends to be a bit samy.
I would also disagree that Liz' music is anything about "technical display". You have to ignore the amazing technique. It's irrelevant. You don't hear a wider picture... I do. It's awesome. It has nothing to do with "classical" music or "jazz". It's all about using the ressources of irish music: dance rhythm, modality over harmony, precise articulation, precise timbral control. (by precise, I mean that nothing comes out that isn't "intended")
I her album with Daithi Sproule in particular, she sounds very much from the same "school" as Martin Hayes to me. Playing music first and foremost, without any bol locks of trying to be "traditional".
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are two lines in your novel that really jump out at me Ian - Firstly - "technical supremacy sometimes only produces a clinical kind of excellence." This is a great observation, and strangely not one I would equate with Carroll's playing. Granted I have not heard the album you are referring to, but when I listen to the track she cut with John Whelan a few years ago "Fresh Takes" and the set that includes the Red Haired Lass and The Scholar, I hear a very expressive musician deeply steeped in the tradition.
The second line refers to the apparent multiple ways to remove the skin from a cat. That is one of my very favorite odd-ball gross-out analogies in the English lexicon of expressions. I love to know what sick bugger came up with that one.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
One thing I think I still need to hear is her playing some of the great 'proper' trad tunes. I don't doubt it would be awesome. Unfortunately, there are almost none on the album I bought.
Tirno, I wasn't implying that it was unnecessary showing off - of course the technicality is there for a reason, and I can certainly appreciate that everything she does is fully considered. I am as awestruck by virtuosity of any sort as the next person, but I listen on an emotional level too.This just doesn't speak to me on that level, like much of this music does.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I have listened to snippets of three Liz Carroll albums and I found it all nice but a bit monotonous. But it needs to be more than nice.
I also listened to Full Set on their My Space page. To me they sounded like most of the current crop of new traditional bands but I liked the tunes.
I also thought that the guitar playing (which I disliked), especially on the reels, was the usual galloping racehorse style, typical of most itm guitarists. It was very similar to John Doyle on the Liz Carroll albums.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Have you seen Liz live? Trying to judge her by recordings is much like trying to judge Martin Hayes by recordings. You don't get the whole picture.
Lake Effect is produced by Liz and John Doyle. I enjoy the recording, but keep in mind that John Doyle was an active collaborator. To me between tune choice and arrangements that album sounds like Liz and John were looking for a bit of an avant-garde sound rather than strictly trad.
As others mentioned, you might have a listen to some of the clips on Trian's first album (Liz, Daithi Sproule, and Billy McComisky), through iTunes or Amazon. It's a little more straight-up traditional to my ear.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Further thought, Tirno: I think you are unwittingly agreeing with me
>>It's all about using the ressources of irish music: dance rhythm, modality over harmony, precise articulation, precise timbral control.
Yes, I can see all of that, but you can "use the resources" of the music to produce something that acutally *isn't* Irish traditional music at all. That is precisely what she is doing, to my mind. So did the likes of Flook. Great band in many ways, but somehow many of their tunes were sterile. Actually, many of those qualities are really just the marks of general good musicianship.
>>Playing music first and foremost, without any bol locks of trying to be "traditional".
...and again - precisely my point that music in general is more important to her than mere genres. And why not? I still wonder whether there isn't a bit of her that longs to play something else altogether. Maybe some Pagannini? Handel? Grappelli?
Meanwhile, I carry on enjoying 'traditional' music, whether people are *trying* to be that or simply being it. I never thought I would hear the word Trad abused on this board!!!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Elaine T - yes, entirely fair points. Will try to correct when I can. Recordings are never good enough on their own, but it's all I've got to go on at present. Hence the caveats. And thanks for the recommendations.
Overbeyond. Comments about Full Set agreed with. Undecided about guitar as you say, but for me this band just touched something that some of their peers haven't. Choice of tunes and good contrasts, I think. They have a rather odd choice of songs, though.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
'Lake Effect' Near and dear to us Chicagoans.
Ian
I would offer that drawing any conclusions about Liz Carroll's work from "Lake Effect" without putting its vintage and timing in her career does not do justice to her play.
It is an older CD. Also, it seems to be from a period when she was starting to write her own tunes. After listening to the CD which we bought after watching her and John Doyle at the World Music Company (RIP) in the South Side Kingdom of Beverly, Herself commented on the extreme consistency (somewhat repetive to be less generous) of the selections.
Having heard her play at everything from benefits at Gaelic Park to the pub at Blackthorne in East Durham, that collection is not representative of her work. It is a very good collection, which I think should in fact be taken as a developmental work. At Catskills last yearm they were selling a notated collection of her original works which has some very nice stuff in it.
Her newer original tunes have some of the characteristic riffs that were heavily relied on in Lake Effect, but are much more varied.
I have tremendous respect for her. She is an awesome player and has written some nice original music as well.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Zippydw, points taken - not surprised to be told that that album is not the whole story, though I did listen quite extensively to clips before buying. I can hear the earlier albums are different (when younger, she was still playing straighter trad?) but decided that something more recent might be more representative of what people were recommending. I know that album is still not exactly new. Maybe I just chose unluckily.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
good for you for actually buying it and giving it a try--that is more than i did a few years back! i operated under the mindset that if it didn't immediately appeal to me, to not listen to it and give it a shot, like you have.
i remember telling a friend of mine that "martin haye's plays too slow" and being nonplussed by the snippets of liz's album that my friend played for me. granted, this was more than 4 or 5 years ago, and my ear was much less developed, but still i never gave either of them a chance. i was always a james kelly fan, and i just never strayed from what i knew i liked.
i had the chance not too long ago to play with liz carroll for about 3 hours at my local session. she was filling in for the session leader, who was at home recovering from surgery. let me tell you--after those 3 hours, i felt like a fool! i went back to look at those grainy videos on youtube, and all of a sudden they "made sense." i could hear what she was going for, and it's fantastic. it was also very helpful to play with her for so long... just listening to my own playing on top of hers made me realize i never blend and trample all over tunes.
soon after, i finally got martin haye's first album. on the first listen through, i couldn't believe anyone could play the fiddle like that. to think--a chicago-man like myself, and had never given martin hayes or liz carroll a chance!
so, if you don't like it now, you don't. she's a great fiddler, and sometimes you just gotta put something on the shelf to appreciate it later. heck, i didn't even like james kelly's "capel street" album the first time i heard it, when compared to his "melodic journeys" album. now capel street is probably my favorite album of all time. if i had to get on a space ship while the earth was exploding, and i could only take two cd's to show the rest of humanity what irish music was all about, capel street would definitely be on the short list.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Not unlucky. It's a good album- don't get me wrong.
Living in Chicago, we're lucky to have her playing regularly around here, and being a bit older than her and having started following her from the time she was playing in school gyms, there is the luxury of perspective.
Lake Effect is a nice CD, somewhat developmental. A work in progress. I wish my 'finished projects' could be anywhere near as good as her works in progress
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Reading Ian's first post, I'm struck that if I didn't know he was talking about Liz Carroll, I'd never guess. That description of her music is so far wide of what it is. I'd laugh about it and shrug it off if it wasn't for that fact that Ian is so serious about it.
The only conclusion one can come up with is that Ian really doesn't know what he's listening to. His constant insistence of bigging up her technique backs up this conclusion. The very first thing you have to do is realise that the technique is utterly irrelevant (and it's not even that good).
I think Daiv's post hit's the nail on the head with her music: "all of a sudden it made sense. i could hear what she was going for, and it's fantastic."
I've had moments like that with music, Tom Waits, for example. For years it was just a bloody racket, then eureka, I got it, and it was fantastic.
I think there are musics that are easier to get, straight away. Martin Hayes is easier to get partly because he's a great performer. But also, because he dumbs it down a bit.
But Liz Carroll doesn't play that way. She's an extraordinarily playful character with absolutely no veneer. She plays what pleases her, what moves her, what makes her giggle. Her performance is almost non-existent. One of the critiques that was reiterated a few times above that astonished me the most was that her tunes are too samey? I'm astounded at such ignorance. Her tunes, while obviously Liz Carroll tunes, are astonishingly diverse, and to not hear this is merely an admission that you are not hearing it.
But why defend it? Mostly, I think, because I get so much enjoyment out of it I'd like to share it.
But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. And some other numpties who don't know what they're on about back up the slagging and someone else can say they are wrong. But anyone looking for a bit of enlightenment is only able to read each point of view as equally valid.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<Martin Hayes is easier to get partly because he's a great performer. But also, because he dumbs it down a bit.>>
>>But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. <<
Martin ' dumbs it down?!?' LOL
Did llig really make that post with a straight face? Surely not even the arch-troll him self could curse this site and people who slagoff musicians while slagging off a different musician in the process?! Not actually realising what he himself is doing.!!! Classic.
A proverb about eyes and planks comes to mind there.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm sure this is easier than you are all making out, and Mr Stock, fancy, your almost making an apology for not liking something "as much as you should".
OK, so I don't play fiddle and don't therefore listen to too much fiddle playing, but I could draw comparisons between pipers who (to me) are Gods and those that are not.
The long and short of it is that we all admire different qualities and our individual idea of "perfect" will almost certainly not agree with anyone elses.
I make no apology for saying that there are certain players I don't like as much as others, and I am most certainly not going to go into detailed self analysis about why I may be wrong. Suffice to say, my opinions are my own and were not given to me by somebody else.
Ian - go with what you LIKE - stop trying to do missionary work on yourself - life is too short. Think of all the time your wasting by listening to stuff that you don't enjoy.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I wasn't slagging off Martin Hayes there at all, I said he is a great performer, one of the best I've seen, certainly the best diddley performer I've seen. And this great learned and honed ability to communicate with his audience makes him easier to "get". The "dumbs it down a bit" (a bit, not a lot) is about playing to the audiences level, playing on their level, playing to audience expectation. His phrasing is repetative so the listener finds it easier to not get lost. He's great.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I thinks that's fair enough, if you don't like it, don't listen to it. It's just that a problem could occur when you end up not liking something because you don't understand it.
I don't like opera, but I fully appreciate that I don't know anything about it. So I'm happy not to listen to it because I'm not interested in it. So no problem.
However, Ian Stock is a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm so chuffed that llig said exactly the same as one of my sentences that I'm going to go ahead and retract the samey bit (I put all my liz carrol on random and it isn't all that samey at all). On the other hand, when I'm not in the mood for certain kinds of music, some musicians I just need to change the song. When I'm not in the mood for Liz Carrol's music I have to change the whole CD.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think that Lizz Carroll's music does require a certain kind of attention ... a certain kind of close attention. And yes, if you're not prepared to give it what it asks, it's impossible to listen to it at all.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
nah-i don't think it requires any certain attention. the first time I listened to her I liked it. here was the bold simplicity I crave. He doesn't need to like it and I don't know why he's hung up on it.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, take a workshop from her, if you're lucky enough to find one. She's as good a teacher as she is a musician---she loves the music, sharing it, watching and helping others learn---she's a joy to learn from.
At one point she asked us if any of us had ever written a tune. Only 7 year old Haley raised her hand! She told us that we should all try to write tunes. I still haven't given that a go, but it changed my attitude, for sure, and I plan to try it one day. I think it would expand how I experience music. And who knows, I might end up with a nice tune!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. And some other numpties who don't know what they're on about back up the slagging and someone else can say they are wrong. But anyone looking for a bit of enlightenment is only able to read each point of view as equally valid. "
You know, as a free speech absolutist, I've often had to say to people that the only cure for bad speech is more speech - and that's the only response I can make to this.
If you disagree with what Ian had to say, maybe you should try to put together your thoughts on what you think Ian's not hearing, and give them a full-length exposition.
I would be fascinated to read it, and I think I'd probably learn something very useful from it. It would be interesting to get a chance to hear through your ears.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
@zippydw: born in Chicago, experienced most of my early music as a child there. i seem to keep moving further and further out, though. as soon as i move out of st. charles to dekalb, maurice lennon starts playing in mcnally's, lol (but i still make the visit almost every week) and in Geneva on Fridays. lately when i can i pop in at nevin's or molly malone's, but gas just costs so much. what are your usual haunts?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon, I hear what you are saying, and I'd say I'm a free speech absolutist also, I disagree with any form of censorship (except for censoring what children have access to, of course - with a sliding scale dependent on their age and maturity)
I might try to put into words exactly what I love about her playing, but it would take a while, and I'm busy today. Also, it's not something I really care to do, to analyse in great detail. I'm not against it per say, and I don't think it should necessarily get in the way of the enjoyment of the visceral (though I've seen that happen, often), it's just that it wouyld bore me to death. Also, someone else would just chime in and say they disagree, spouting some nonsence that merely comes from not understanding what I was on about. Happens all the time here and its a waste of time. But I agree that's defeatest, so maybe I will have a go. Though there is satisfaction to be gained from discovering things one's self.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Kennedy, that's a great post, it captures her well. One of the defining things about Liz Carroll, and Liz Carroll's music (same thing really) is that it's all give, every bit of it. It/she is stuffed to the gunnels with generosity.
And yes, writing your own tunes is one of the best ways to explore what makes a good tune. Each time you try it, it gets better, because your understanding gets better.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Martin Hayes - a Chicago man?!!!!! I would have thought he's about as rooted in the hilly landscape of Co.Clare as anyone could possibly be.
Re Liz Carroll - personally I tend to agree with Ian's sentiments of her recordings but each to their own. Obviously my ear is not well enough developed yet - I'm also a bit iffy about Joe Burke and some of Matt Molloy!! I'm quite sure Liz is a fantastic person and a great musician but we are allowed to have personal preferences and make purchasing choices based on those, are we not?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
As I said, most peoples' person preferences are based are based on ignorance, hence the global preponderance of terrible pop music. Of course it's fine to not like Liz Carroll, but don't do so out of ignorance and pass it off as mere preference. Every single reason Ian gave for his "preference" of not liking Liz Carroll was ignorance.
Examples:
Her tunes "all seemed similar in style"
• "a wannabe classical musician"
• "she seems more interested in composing her own tunes than rendering the established cannon"
• "many [tunes] don’t really work as trad. tunes, and are more like slightly avant-guard classical compositions."
• "it comes close to the self-indulgent"
• "the effect is remarkably monotonous – unless you are listening with the ear of a technician looking for supreme technical display."
• "you can "use the resources" of the music to produce something that acutally *isn't* Irish traditional music at all. That is precisely what she is doing"
Every single one of these critiques is simply not true.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I suppose we'll just have to carry on in ignorance so. Looking at my prejudices, what I see in common perhaps, are three musicians on three different instruments, all fitting a lot of notes into the tunes - is that fair comment? Maybe it's too much for the present.
What I do agree on, is that you can't possibly base a sound judgement on recordings - particularly the way everything is often carefully manipulated in studios and software nowadays. But then, maybe that is all what one has available - still not fair though. Mind you, dis anyone here ever hear Michael Coleman in the flesh - hardly and the recordings are all the evidence.
But once you understand the purpose of all those notes, once you appreciate their subtleties and purposes, you realise that there are "just as many note as are required, neither more nor less"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I saw Liz and John Doyle in Manchester a couple of weeks ago; it was a truly inspirational gig. For starters llig's right in that Liz is a lovely, warm approachable person who was happy to chat to anyone who went to say hello. This warmth and integrity shone through in the music she and John made that night and the atmosphere in the club was one of real joy in the music. I sat listening and counted myself one of the luckiest people in the world that night to be able to experience music of such quality in a world going to sh*te.
This music comes over best live and I'd reserve judgement until you've taken the trouble to go and see Liz live.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of course that's silly. Because not very many people are interested in Irish diddley music. But Ian is. I'm happy to be ignorant of opera because I'm not interested in it
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
My pals and I love Liz and love learning her tunes-current fave is a great Gminor tune-Annie Lacey's.
Defending personal preferences is a waste of time-you love what you love (at any given moment).
Enthusiasm can be contagious.
I dislike dissing.
That's it then isn't it? Sessions! Enough with always listening to recordings & sitting in concerts. Find the tunes with the people who play the tunes. There's no need for anyone to force someone else's enjoyment on themselves. Keep searching, but don't deny your own pleasure. We're each different. Hallelujah; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrLk4vdY28Q
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Last session we played "Air Tune". I don't play fiddle so I'm not sure what to make of our fiddler's comment, "It's hard for me to believe the tune was written by a fiddler, because the fingers don't fall where you'd expect them."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"At some point Junior asked her, as he would, to play some of her own. Just for a while it was like she was from a different planet altogether."
Peter, do you recall which of her tunes Liz played?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Anyone who is interested in where Liz is coming from might like to read this transcript of an interview from 2000 (Same year that Lake Effect was released):
Lake Effect is one of my favorite CDs. You can hear her playfulness coming through. To me, it just sounds like she's having a great time playing her tunes.
Yeah, it doesn't sound like what an old Irish guy would have played in 1950 in a pub in London -- But um, she's not any of those things...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I wouldn’t recommend her to a newcomer as representative of the tradition." Fair play. The best way to introduce someone to Irish tunes is to play them. If Liz Carroll sat down with a newcomer it would be the same. She wouldn't say, "Listen to one of my CDs, ."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I thinks that's fair enough, if you don't like it, don't listen to it. It's just that a problem could occur when you end up not liking something because you don't understand it."
You don't have to understand it to like it. The process works the other way around - your drawn to something because you like it and then you learn about it. Unless, of course, somebody else is forcing their tastes and preferences upon you - and you are let them get away with it !
"I don't like opera, but I fully appreciate that I don't know anything about it. So I'm happy not to listen to it because I'm not interested in it. So no problem."
That is EXACTLY the point
"However, Ian Stock is a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music."
So as a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music you have to LIKE all the other exponents? - where does Celtic Women fit into that ? - I know so many people on here rail against them. Are there any trad fiddle players that you don't like? - and do you force yourself to listen to them? - what makes your taste any better than Ian's ?
The answer of course is that your taste is not better than Ian's, just different. There must be room for all of us with all of our personal preferences, The trad as a whole is in severe danger of stagnating if we don't allow that, but non of us have to listen to stuff we don't like, doing that is just pointless.
Surely the next logical steps would be to spend hours learning tunes that we don't like and playing them in a style we do'nt like either - anyone for The Kesh on regge bodhran ?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, I’m not going to say this time that I didn’t know what might flow forth on this thread! What is truly amazing, however, it the degree of misapprehension that has still ensued.
I am certainly *not* apologising for my tastes, but neither am I so egotistical as to think I have nothing to learn from people who hear differently.
We of course face the usual internet issue of having no context for the people speaking. For example, Llig, yes I am serious about my music but don’t think I’m sitting here permanently wracked with angst over it. You will just have to take my word for that.
I am puzzled by the degree to which my comments seem to have been taken as an *attack* on Liz Carroll, which they are most certainly not, least of all in any personal sense. What possible grounds could I have for doubting that she is a lovely person? But what on earth has that got to do with the quality of her music?
Let’s be clear, LC is simply a handy vehicle for a bigger point – which is what people (can) get out of this music, and (in the eyes of some), who is ‘right’ and who is the idiot. I’m generally cast in the latter role, and I’m perfectly comfortable about it, it bothers me not one jot – but I am still waiting for someone to demonstrate just *why* their musical experiences are so much better than mine. I can assure you, this music moves me deeply, too, just not in the ways YOU seem to see. Who's 'right'?
But so far, this ‘fiddle beginner’ (come on, Llig, you know darned well there’s more to me than that) has at least made some attempt to define that which he, personally gets from the music, which is more than can be said for my critics. The fact that at present I get more satisfaction from Full Set than Liz Carroll and some others don’t, is of course only down to the fact that I am downright ignorant. Yes of course, silly me. But at least I have identified what I like (and dislike) about my preferences.
If this is the great music that I believe it to be, it should surely be able to stand up to rigorous critique. If you can’t have an intelligent, tolerant discussion about the merits or otherwise of an art form, the most plausible conclusion is that there actually isn’t very much to discuss. Which of course, I don’t believe. Anyone who claims 100% authority, especially in something like the arts, comes very close to torpedoing their own credibility, yet that’s what’s happening here. And people seem to think *I’m* naive in my understanding!
Ironinic, really. The deifying of Liz Carroll bears more than a passing resemblance to the idolatry that also follows all those ‘terrible pop’ musicians around. Just depends on which gods you choose, I suppose. I bet Lady Gaga’s fans think she is ‘one of the best musicians in the world too’. And I thought we were above such uncritical idol-worship in these musically-erudite halls. Llig, that claim is probably the greatest insult you could pay to your Idol, and she, being a modest soul, would probably agree.
At the end of the day, we have got no further than people arguing for that which they personally feel. It's just that some dress it up as outsized, objective authority and use it to beat others with, and it does our shared passion no artistic credit at all.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
MacC, would you say why not, please? I suspect you're going to find a few dissenters there. Music is art in most other places; it meets most attempts to define art.
There are such things as 'folk arts'. Some would argue they even gain something over more formal arts these days, by virtue of lacking self-consciousness about what they are.
I did not say that it is 'high art' - and that is part of its appeal, at least for me.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well isn't it that sometimes musicians put so much of themselves in their music that you have to "know" them to appreciate it?
Or be a very experienced listener to "get" the personality from their playing?
Reminds me of the Johnny Doran recording I have - I didn't like it at all. Until I saw a documentary about I him. It made sense after that.!
I met - and heard - Brian McNamara and like his music very much. A friend of mine thinks "it is nice". Whereas he met - and heard - Eliot Grasso - and loves the recording much more than I do. On CDs of musicians neither of us met we have a similar taste...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I read it as meaning that it's roots (agh horrid word, sorry!) were cultural rather than artistic.
I prefer to think of it as soul music myself - because it touches my soul. It reverberates through my very core - no other music does that so consistently. You don't just hear this stuff, you experience it with all of your senses. When you come to play it, it does'nt live through you, it lives inside of you.
Then again, I've always been strange !
But that takes me right back into personal preferences. My soul is unique to me (thank God for that I hear you all say).
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You know, when we have "spats" on here, I always feel obligedto say that there is more that binds us than comes between us. These are mere differences between brothers and sisters. And yes, I am 100% sincere in that belief.
It's just that I think any casual readers of this forum would think we were probably the most disperate bunch of human beings on the planet.
I bet we would all have one hell of a grand session if we were ever to all meet up - they would be talking about it for generations !
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ormepipes, I never said that as a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music one has to LIKE all the other exponents, I said one should be careful and make the effort to understand it before deciding one doesn't like it.
Ian:
"my comments seem to have been taken as an *attack* on Liz Carroll, which they are most certainly not."
You listed - which I quoted - a whole lot of stuff that is simply not true. You only percieve those things to be true because of your ignorance. (ps, I'm not dissing ignorance, we are all born ignorant. I'm not saying you are and idiot, I wouldn't engage with you if I thought you were).
"What possible grounds could I have for doubting that she is a lovely person? But what on earth has that got to do with the quality of her music?"
Becuase the person is the music, the music is the person. Inventive, open, joyful, and most importantly - as many people here have coroborated - stuffed to the gunnels with generosity.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If someone said, "Liz Carroll's playing isn't for me -- I'm not into that fast, drivey style, I prefer more laid-back, Clare-type fiddling," I'd be like, "Fair enough."
But you suggested things such as she "sounds like the work of a wannabe classical musician," which made me think, "Eh??"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The irony to me is if I were to say the Mustard Board has deified any musician I wouldn't have considered Liz Carroll to be on the list. Is all of this because she has recently received some awards?
Ian, I have to confess when I told you, "perhaps Liz Carroll has become a god in my ears." I was playing off something you had said. I was trying to be facetious. My jaw dropped as you went on at length about the problems with my elevating a musicians' status too high. There seems to be a series of misunderstanding which is in danger of becoming self perpetuating.
sigh
Yes, Emily ~ eh? is the word of the day; once again.
"If this is the great music that I believe it to be,"
Yes!
"it should surely be able to stand up to rigorous critique."
Not really, if you consider taste varies; as do styles.
"If you can’t have an intelligent, tolerant discussion about the merits or otherwise of an art form, the most plausible conclusion is that there actually isn’t very much to discuss."
Hmmmm... yes, yes, what?, no
"Which of course, I don’t believe."
Yes! That's why we are here.
"Anyone who claims 100% authority, especially in something like the arts, comes very close to torpedoing their own credibility,
Fair play
"yet that’s what’s happening here."
One second please ... exactly who is claiming 100% authority?
"And people seem to think *I’m* naive in my understanding!"
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Same as most Mustardians.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Lost in the Loop was like the uncarved block for me. Perfection. A lot of tunes, most tunes perhaps, are perfect(esp the ones I like ) but Lost in the Loop jumps out at me as a perfect tune. Cup of Tea comes close but it's got that gooffy third part that doesn't quite seem to fit in. Sure it serves a purpose but it's lacking. Banish Misfortune is perfect, so are a lot of others but Lost in the Loop is so 'deliberate'. It's perfectly "woody".
And an excellent example of her masterful phrasing. I love the way she varies the swing on certain beats, listen to what she does with the swing the first time round the second bar compared to the next time round. And listen for how she bows the third bar compared to how she bows it's repeat in the seventh bar. And listen to her placements of he little bowed trebles, she never puts one in the same place twice, and listen for how some of them anticipate the down and up beats and how others fall languidly behind the beat. And listen to the amount of variation in the cuts and taps, they go from one extreme of minute little percussive flicks, hardly audible, to very even semiquavers, right through to slower even triplets - three across four. And listen for how she varies the attack and how she varies the way she slides up to some notes disguising the down beats, some times it's a languid joining of two quavers, sometimes she just whips it up. And listen to how she joins together all these different articulations to keep the phrasing interesting and fresh all the way through. Listen to how the variations subtly push and pull the overall shape of the melody. And this is just that one recording. Hear her play it live and it's completely different again. I could go on and on, but I hope I've said enough.
So learn it. It's not the easiest of tunes on the fiddle, there's some odd string crossings in the third part, but it's nowhere near being a difficult fiddle tune, especially at the pace she plays it there. And I've just had a shot of it on the mandolin and found it to be really easy on that, so learn it on your mandolin first if that would help you.
(p.s., You've got the recording, don't look at no dots, if you do that you'll miss the variations. And don't slow it down with your computer, you'll distort the timing of the articulations.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bloke unintentionally sets off a bit of a ruck on an e-list. Is given some advice, which he follows up, but decides that his original view was, *for him, for now*, largely correct. He ponders whether to follow up on list, and hesitantly decides he will, to acknowledge those who took the trouble to advise. Risks starting another ruck, despite doing his damnest to couch his comments as fairly as possible.
Perhaps the key thing here is, ALL I am doing is to make some personal observations about what I heard and what I thought about it. Such critique can only *ever* be a matter of opinion, mediated by experience; the latter is as varied as the former. I suspect that it is mis-read because some others here *do* see comments as absolutes. It is certainly not me claiming 100% authority, and if you instinctively see it that way, then perhaps that says more about you than me.
I was just attempting to stimulate debate about what LC’s great qualities may or may not actually be. But, with respect, if we can’t get past “I disagree so you’re wrong”, we really are rather immature. I would have expected better of experienced musicians. Perhaps my critique is actually the work of someone with a BETTER ear than yours, and I’m finding things YOU are missing? After all, I’m not an inexperienced listener – to many sorts of music, not just trad. – even if I play the dumbo on occasions. Who’s to say?
My ‘critique’ of LC is not the word of Law. It’s not even negative. Just one person’s reaction to what he has (so far) heard – in the absence of almost anyone else defining what is so outstanding about her in a way that goes beyond ‘mere’ individual subjective reaction. Calling her ‘wannabe classical’ is not in my book, an insult, just a reaction to some of the sounds on that one disc, from the ear of someone who has done a good bit of classical listening and participating over the years; in fact it may be a compliment. From the interview mentioned above, which I read in bed last night, it seems that LC does or did indeed want to break out of conventional genres. (And incidentally, I see she makes use of dots when she needs to! ‘faxing tunes to each other’).
I expected to receive more enlightenment that I did from it about why she plays the way she does – other than outside influences she mentioned. Maybe she doesn’t quite understand it herself? From what I have heard, her playing is just too ‘muscular’ for my liking, – and in that interview she almost accepts such a label herself. Since when was writing one’s own tunes a criticism? I used to do the same. I well understand why people do it, but most of hers that I have heard do not yet appeal to me. That’s all.
The ‘truth’ or otherwise of those other points is really a very poor argument – truth doesn’t come into it. Apart from her own utterances on the matter, it really comes down to your opinion and taste against mine. At least I tried to explain *why* I thought what I do. I will continue to do so until me inner reactions and understanding tell me different. That’s all any of us can do.
Llig, your comment about personality and music occurred to me, too, after I wrote that last piece. I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but I do disagree with your absolutist stance that that is all there is to it, and nothing else is valid. I gather that Kevin Burke, for instance, takes a very different view. Your latest bit is helpful – at last you are beginning to outline what makes her special in your eyes – I will read it better later, and look at that tune, but it is pretty much what I thought you would say, and that’s fine. It tells me I am looking for the right things.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you've listed some things there that are mere personal preference and that's fine. It's fine to not like "muscular" playing - what ever that means (watch her play close up, the first thing you notice is she hardly moves a muscle, she is the most economic player I've ever met).
However, truth certainly does come into it and many things you said about he playing are quite wrong. And all you seem to be doing about that is saying that you are entitled to your opinion.
For example:
"Her tunes all seem similar in style". This is so not true. Her tunes are extraordinarily distinctive.
"The effect is remarkably monotonous". This reminds me of someone with the window seat on a plain flying over clouds and not bothering to look out of the window. You define your own standards of monotony rather than actively look. I bet you get bored really quickly.
At times, it's like you are the aural equivalent of being colour blind. It's like you are saying the sky and the grass are the same colour and insisting that because they are the same colour to you, they actually are the same colour.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>muscular" playing - what ever that means
Llig, how do you describe the complexities of a glass of wine? You have to grope around for analogies that might have some traction. I don't mean 'muscular' literally; I just sense that she mostly goes into a tune in a very 'up-front', high-energy, very emphatic way - and indeed in that interview she virtually admits as much.
Personally, I prefer something a bit more restrained - not in the sense of lacking energy, but because I feel the energy and vitality inherent in a tune actually comes through all the more if it is understated. What's more, that's not the judgement of someone who has no listening experience, surely?
I think we will have to agree to differ on this. Many of my questions on this forum spring from the sense I gained when I joined, that even after many years I have still been missing something important. I have been trying to understand it, and I quite accept that others may have more refined listening skills than I. But the insistence that there is one truth, and only one truth, actually undermines many really helpful points, because it shows an ignorance of their limits.
I understand the point you are making, but I look for different things in this music, and if anything you have made more *more* confident that that is entirely valid. From what I can tell, the things that affect me about this music are relatively unimportant, or even lost, to you. I would start with your insistence that a tune has no existence independent of its performer.
I sense you are a person of deep conviction; me too. But I daily have to remind myself that what seems like fundamental truth to me may be anything but to most others.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wyogal, yes, it's simply not true by anyone's imagination.
Ian, yes, I understand now, 'up-front', high-energy, very emphatic. I'd agree with that and I love it. And if that's not your cup of tea then that's fair enough. Ironically though, she does it in a very laid back and restrained way while expending very little energy and in a manner that is more cheeky than emphatic - and these contradictions are marvellous.
I'd describe Martin Hayes as much more emphatic than Liz Carroll. He has his way of playing and he'll stick to it. He's much more repetitive than Liz Carroll.
Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?
It's a good question. Is a tune merely the sound, or is part of it stored in the collective consciousness and memories of those who play it? I'd say that definitely, something is stored in a collective consciousness, that's what makes us able to play together down the pub. But is that thing that's stored a tune? I'd say not, it's merely a memory of a tune, an imprint. I'd say, on balance, that a tune has to be made of vibrating molecules of air. Or at the very least, sung in the silent forefront of your mind's ear.
I was in Paris last year and a particular painting I saw had a profound effect on me and I remember it very clearly, in lots of fine detailed brush strokes and colour. And I imagine that many other people around the world have memories of it similar to mine. Do we have the painting, or even part of it in our collective consciousness? We certainly have something, a memory at the very least, possibly something more, but your couldn't say we actually had the painting itself on our heads.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I've only heard Lake Effect and Double Play and on the basis of that I would say that her style has become more influenced by American fiddle styles down the years. So maybe if you said 'wannabe bluegrass fiddler' then I could see where that was coming from. But no, not classical.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are some american isms in her playing but these are not specifically bluegrass. She is certainly no more a 'wannabe bluegrass fiddler' than a "wannabe classical musician". But that she has deliberately absorbed many different influences is surely not only to her credit, but consistent with all the best traditions in Irish music.
She is an Irish musician through and through, all be it with a chicago accent.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, is it fair to say you consider the following one of your fundamental *truths* about how you perceive this music ~
"this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression, for all the greatness of the masters. I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz."
Also, in that context how do you consider Martin Hayes playing?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Have you ever heard him play? If you have to explain the joke...
He has a very distinct sound and really pushed the boundaries, his, the tunes, the instrument, and he doesn't sound anything like your run of the mill trad player. You could imagine some critics grumbling about how his playing wasn't "traditional," except they didn't have the internet to grumble about it on.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To Ian, I would advise finding some of the really old stuff, like wax cylinder older stuff even, and listen for the wildness, creativity, and individuality they had in their playing. Maybe it will give you more context for Liz.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Spear,
Ian Stock doesn't seem to me to be grumbling about Liz Carroll, he is just commenting on how her music strikes him. The response he got is more revealing psychologically than musically.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Woah! We could get into some really involved stuff here if we’re not careful. Question is, do people have the patience for more long posts?
First of all, the ‘wannabe classical’ bit. Well, I don’t see that as an insult, though maybe it is my use of the word that is a problem. I am certainly not suggesting that LC wishes she were a classical musician, though I find myself wondering what would be the result if she gave it a try. Nor do I particularly mean that her music sounds classical, though it was during parts of The Ghost and Lake Effect that the thought first occurred; the instrumentation contributed, but I think there’s more to it than that. And actually, it was my wife who first raised it, who listens to more classical than I do.
IMHO it is the *tonal quality* she extracts from her instrument, admittedly in small parts, that seems to be moving away from that of a trad fiddle towards a classical violin - again only in the music I have to go on, of course. I have no idea whether it is deliberate or not, but I find it interesting, and it was enough for the impression to take root.
Personally, for all that I love the distinctive tonal characteristics of trad fiddle, I still think that, ceteris paribus, the well-played classical violin manages to extract more of the whole tonal potential of the instrument, so my comment is in no way a criticism of LC for achieving that. She has a fuller sound than most fiddlers. There is a whole other discussion waiting to happen on the greater or lesser subjectivity involved in the way we experience tone, pitch etc.
I try to avoid making ‘better than’ type comparisons between musicians, but I am always intrigued by the implications of getting a load of top-notch musicians from different genres together and seeing who had greatest ease or difficulty crossing styles. ‘fraid to say, my money would still ultimately be on the classical players. Zoe Conway is an interesting case, though she still sounds more classical to me in her trad playing than vice versa. But I think people are making more of this than it warranted. No different from describing a red wine as having ‘hints of vanilla’ .
>>I'd describe Martin Hayes as much more emphatic than Liz Carroll. He has his way of playing and he'll stick to it. He's much more repetitive than Liz Carroll.
Llig, I can see what you mean – I think. Hayes seems to be a more pensive player, and as such he emphasises notes and phrases of the tunes more obviously, but perhaps I meant 'assertive' – LC seems determined almost to impose her playing on the listener, big and rumbustious, whereas I prefer to be more subtly seduced!
>>Ian, what are the things about this music that we're missing?
Ben, recently I went to a fascinating public debate by two academic philosophers on the theism/atheism debate. The killer point came when the atheist demonstrated how all the theists’ arguments in favour of an infinitely benign God can equally be reversed to argue for an infinitely MALign god. I was simply using the same device to argue that the arguments being used at me are just as easily reversed.
I am not claiming any superior knowledge, but if the following helps (sorry, another classical analogy coming up): I think we are all talking about the role of dynamics. Llig et al quite legitimately seem to focus on the micro-dynamics of individual tunes, which I may not be skilled enough to appreciate. That is a common quality of most ‘serious’ music, and equally the concern of skilled classicists, jazz players etc. It is arguably primarily the concern of (advanced?) *players* rather than listeners. But micro-dynamicists sometimes neglect the bigger, more outward picture. Rivet-counters and all that.
My interest is, for the want of a better word, more symphonic, macro-dynamics. My deepest responses come from the inherent structures of the tunes, whereby the particular player is only the medium for their expression – though admittedly some realise it better than others.
I am also moved by the ways tunes modulate within themselves, between A and B parts, and indeed how people assemble sets so that tunes work sympathetically or in opposition to each other. I also love the ways in which different instrumentations produce different textural effects with the tunes and each other, and the ways in which different instruments can produce huge variety from the same tunes.
I love the sounds of the instruments just for themselves, and I love the instruments as artefacts in their own right. I am interested to some extent in the various versions of the same tune, and the effect that has. But all this is somewhat removed from the decisions of the player, in the sense I think Llig values.
That is why I’m instinctively a band musician, because that is where the scope I look for comes into its own. I was going to offer a YouTube clip with a few comments to illustrate, but it seems to have crashed on me. I’ll try later. Maybe you will all say “Yes of course we know about all that obvious stuff” – which is why I have tried to discover whether the deficiency really is mine.
>> is it fair to say you consider the following one of your fundamental *truths* about how you perceive this music ~
"this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression... those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz."
I’m not sure I would go so far as to call that a fundamental truth, though it does inform my understanding that this not music is perhaps not primarily about the performer. I am much more interested in the tune than who played it. I was simply musing whether those who look for deep personal expression in the music might find even more of it through a different discipline.
>>Also, in that context how do you consider Martin Hayes playing?
Well, from what I can tell, he has done the same as all the others and turned it into a performance medium, where personal interpretation is indeed (nearly?) all. I just happen to prefer his way of doing it. While I clearly can’t comment on his micro-dynamics, he seems to imbue his music with much greater outward expression than LC. The fact that may be more accessible may simply demonstrate a greater concern for reaching his audience. LC may be a lovely, social person, but I got the feeling from reading that interview that she is quite inward-looking in what she is doing musically.
>>Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?
Llig, interesting that you should use the painting analogy as it has been in my mind too. The difference is that an original painting is a tangible, unique object in its own right, whereas music, dance etc. need recreating from scratch each time, by means of a medium (the player). Many people still choose to own reproductions of their favourite paintings, of course. I was going to add that the most ‘meaningful’ paintings are not necessarily those with the finest micro-dynamics (i.e. technical realism). The Impressionists being the obvious example. I’m curious what the painting was.
>>I'd say that definitely, something is stored in a collective consciousness... it's merely a memory of a tune, an imprint.
I was thinking about one thing Ben linked to a few days ago, in an old thread: the inherent delight in manuscript. As you don’t rate dots, I guess you have less regard for manuscript, but he was dead right – part of the joy of dots is their tangible embodiment of a ‘potential tune’, no matter how crude. My books of tunes are my imprint of their autonomous being, in a way that maybe you don’t have. The more so when you look at the authoritative collections such as O’Neill’s or some of the Scott-Skinner books – especially in the original, with all the pencil marks and comments on them. In my take on the music, this is a significant part of the tunes’ personalities – that which makes them friends to me in my musical life, as well as a record of that life, each waiting to be brought to life and cherished. In some cases, it’s just a single triplet that makes all the difference.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ian, let me sum up what you said:
1. You admit you might have phrased it better,
2. But you still stand by what you said.
Now, instead of saying it yet again, go find something useful to do with your time, like playing music!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
A bit of common ground between llig & Ian, perhaps?
Ian, I noticed from the 1st post it was your wife who made the infamous *wanabee* reference. The good husband that you are, of course, you embraced it.
I hope you can see how it would strikes some of as a back-handed compliment, if not pejorative.
"First of all, the ‘wannabe classical’ bit. Well, I don’t see that as an insult."
But ultimately undesirable?
"I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical ... Again understandable when you reach a high level, but surely not essential, and perhaps not even desirable?"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Like i said, i don't know what ya'll are talking about, but i wanted to post that video.
Liz Carrol was one of the names frequently mentioned to me when i first started coming to this website. And i've heard some others mention her name as well.
fiddlelearner, sometimes we'all are just talking. Humans are curious about everything. I'm sure you can relate.
Speaking only for myself, thanks for the clip of Liz Carroll, Eileen Ivers, & Athena Tergis (John Doyle too).
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well I do apologise. That last post was excessive. Too much brain food.
But thanks for the constructive reply, Llig Just when I thought we were getting somewhere.
Ben, 'wannabe' was my word, not my wife's, though she has since corrected me - I didn't appreciate its negative connotations. I simply meant 'someone with a particular leaning' - maybe unconscious. Classical leanings are not bad in my book.
If nothing else, I hope I conveyed that it is possible to get a lot out of the music without needing to be preoccupied with minutiae.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of the three, I liked Athena Tergis' playing best, for all her silly faces. Not keen on Eileen Ivers. Haven't come across either of them before. Must investigate. Interesting video.
I've been having a proper look at Lost in the Loop, and Llig's comments about it. Have now listened four times, but obviously need to do a lot more. I won't pretend I can hear everything that Llig is talking about - yet, but I'll keep going.
I like LC's playing on that, and the video clip of the 3 fiddlers, more than the stuff on Lake Effect. I don't mind the tune and will give it a go, but it still doesn't 'feel' quite right to me.
Llig's comments are very helpful for appreciating what he is looking for, but I am still left wondering how important it all is, except to another advanced fiddler. I am pretty certain that you hear music differently when it is an instrument you play yourself. I'm not far enough on with the fiddle to know what might happen if/when I get to that stage, though I have certainly learned a lot about articulation in the last two months. But I have to say that not appreciating all those technicalities does not impair the deep pleasure of the music for me, in the least. I still think it's a rivet-counter's approach to put *so* much emphasis on that at the expense of other things.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Of the three, I liked Athena Tergis' playing best, for all her silly faces. Not keen on Eileen Ivers. Haven't come across either of them before. Must investigate"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Like! Apart from wondering what the Italians think of all these incomers. Like the wine, both sorts of music, the area (many holidays had there) and have friends in Basel, (who will be with us in Scotland this summer). What more could you ask?
I found this recently - know the town well - friends have a house there, where we spent our honeymoon and often go back. Seems we are in good company!
Note the Scottish connections in the comments. Several locals we know there have strong Glaswegian accents...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
What is there not to like about Eileen Ivers?! Some of you people kill me. I can see "not being keen on Ted Jones down the pub because he drinks too much and is never in tune" but for goodness sakes! Saying you don't like people like Eileen Ivers (or Liz Carroll) is almost like saying you don't like fiddle music. Init like saying "I like Irish piping but I 'm not keen on that guy Seamus Ennis, Leo Rawesome, Paddy Keenan, Paddy Maloney, Finbar Fury.....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well I for one was only commenting on that one clip. I did say I would need to look further...
...and in any case, no - it comes back to which end of the telescope you're looking through. I instinctively start with I do/don't like that TUNE, no matter who's playing it. That's what I see first.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> have been to the Sagra del Pesce e Patata, and the first time we rolled into town the whole place had flags out for the Queen Mum's birthday. My favourite Bargiani phrase is, "Och aye, si si si..."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh, and thanks fiddlelearner for posting that clip from the Absolutely Irish show, I have that CD, but had never seen the video of the show. That was the real deal, a group of wonderful musicians, at the top of their game, and having a great time playing together. Lots of fun!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think with someone like Eileen Ivers, her approach means that there is bound to be a bit of a dichotomy concerning opinions on her playing. To me, it seems as if she goes out of her way to be original, to push at any and every boundary. Now, without saying what I personally think of the result, it does mean that her playing ends up being very individual, and pretty much unique in fact. And this alone will mean that some people like it and some don't. I just think that's inevitable, given her artistic choices.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, etical blend that, I guess that is a very reasonable and concise response. I think you summed up Ian's point here in three short sentences. Now why do I hear so many people busting on Paddy Maloney?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>Saying you don't like people like Eileen Ivers (or Liz Carroll) is almost like saying you don't like fiddle music.
Almost, in the sense of "not at all"....
"Saying you don't like Raymond Carver (or Mark Twain) is almost (ie, not at all) like saying you don't like books."
"Saying you don't like Jackson Pollock (or Rembrandt) is almost (ie, in no way) like saying you don't like art."
"Saying you don't like e e cummings (or Robert Frost) is almost (ie, not even a little bit) like saying you don't like poetry."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon Kiparsky- That analogy would work had If we were talking about music in general but we are talking specifically about Irish fiddle music. So....Saying one does not like Cezanne, Seurat or Redon doesn't mean that one does not like ART but that one probably does not like the post impressionists.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, I'm not going to say anything more about Liz Carroll, it's pointless, you obviously haven't a scooby about her playing. So until you can come up with something even vaguely resembling an accurate description of what she does, I'm not gonna bother with your misconceptions. What does make me wonder though, is what makes you interested in a form of harmonically very basic music that is merely many thousands of very short and largely monophonic individual pieces composed within an extremely narrow pitch range when you say that what interests you is "for the want of a better word, more symphonic, macro-dynamics"?
However, I'm happy to carry on with the "Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?" thing.
Thinking about it, It maybe that there's a sliding scale that involves ... at one end:
• The complexity and precision of the composer's intentions coupled with, conversely, the constraints to the performers' freedom to mess about with it.
... and at the other end:
• The simplicity of the composer's "map" coupled with, conversely, the lack of constraints to - or even the traditional encouragement of - the performers' freedom to mess about with it.
So at one end, you get your symphonic macro-dynamics where more than a hundred obedient musicians follow one person's faithful interpretation of a detailed map handed down by the composer. Does this piece of music have an existence independent of its performer/performance? On a sliding scale of yes to no, I'd say it's more towards the yes.
And at the other end, you could get a very short "map" that needn't even exist as a physical entity, it can easily be just a mere memory. And not only is the performer's job to make it their own, it is also the tradition that they imbue it with such micro variation that it is never repeatable. Does this music have an existence independent of its performer/performance? On a sliding scale of yes to no, I'd say it's more towards the no.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
By the way, in the context of what we are talking about, there is no difference between a tangible and physical object that is a painting and a tangible and physical vibration of air molecules that is the performance of a tune. The fact that one is ephemeral is irrelevant.
And the painting I refer to which affected me so teams with the most fascinating and finest of micro-dynamics. Its strength is the brush strokes. The brush strokes are what it is. A collection of very very personal marks on a canvas. Not an impression of something, but beyond that, post that. It's an expression of something, an expression of the painter.
The link, of course, is not the painting, but merely a recording of it. Standing in front of the actual thing and being able to decode the brush strokes, to see the order in which they were laid, to see how these makes make up the whole is to really experience it. You can directly experience the state of mind of the painter by looking very closely at how it was created. Standing in front of it, the same distance the painter stood in front of it when he painted it. It's an extraordinary experience.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Saying one does not like Cezanne, Seurat or Redon doesn't mean that one does not like ART but that one probably does not like the post impressionists."
Okay, what about "I like post-bop jazz, but I don't really like Horace Silver"? Or "I like the Bach cello suites, but I don't really care for Yo-Yo Ma's recording of them"? Or "I'm a big fan of golden-age science fiction, although I don't really care for Asimov".
All you're saying in any of those sentences is that you're a person with preferences, not just branding. I can like Irish fiddle music without like everyone who plays it, and without liking everyone on the approved list of great players. I can even recognize that a player is a great player, and just not like what they do.
To take an example from another domain:
I think that calling Keith Jarrett anything but a master of the piano would be a statement of one's own ignorance. However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "I think he's a great player, but I just don't like what he chooses to play".
And it's no contradiction at all to say "I love jazz piano" or "I love free improvisational jazz music", or "I love the piano music of the latter part of the twentieth century" or woteffah, and in the next breath to say "...but I don't really like Keith Jarrett".
The only way your claim can be true, it seems to me, is if you believe that liking a genre entails liking every practitioner of that genre, and that seems a very high bar.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yeah, but while Ian is saying, I like Irish music, but I don't like Liz Carroll, He's proved that what he really should be saying is, I like Irish music, but I don't understand Liz Carroll.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The problem arose (IMHO) when the OP gave reasons for not liking LC's playing that made judgments on LC, not his personal preferences. There is a difference. He seemed to be putting thoughts into LC's head instead of just giving reasons for his personal preference.
Therein lies the problem. It was as if the reasons for not liking LC was because of LC's intentions, purpose, and/or issues with the whole "wannabe" crap.
Yes, take ownership of your own personal preferences, but it's just that YOUR personal preferences that come from your own mind, not the supposed intentions of a player, that of course, you really don't know anything about.
Folks say one thing, then are arguing a different point.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Nah jon I'm setting the bar very low. If you don't like the artist that, by general consensus, represent the finest that that art has to offer it's probably not your thing. If I don't like Johnny Cash Patsy Cline or Loretta Lynn chances are I don't like classic American country western music. Not like I'm gonna rally dig Marty Robbins or Waylon Jennings but not like Johnny Cash.
I Also believe this to be true for people with a limited knowledge of said genre. If I listen to AC/DC, Motorhead and Slayer and I don't like them....chances are when I here Megadeath I'm not going to say "yeah, now that's the sh*t I was looking for!" Probably tya don't like hard rock.....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Yeah, but while Ian is saying, I like Irish music, but I don't like Liz Carroll, He's proved that what he really should be saying is, I like Irish music, but I don't understand Liz Carroll."
It's odd, isn't it, that we worry about whether someone understands a piece of music only when they say they don't like it? I won't say I understand Thelonious Monk's music in any great depth - I can work out some of his changes and I can figure out some of what he's doing, but there are great depths there.
But since I like it, nobody worries about that. If I were to say "I don't like Monk", along comes someone to say "but you don't understand it" - as if understanding it had anything to do with liking it!
This makes me wonder what it means to say that another person doesn't understand a player, or a composer, or a piece of music. Does it actually mean anything other than "you don't like it and I think you should"? If so, what's involved in understanding Liz Carroll - or any fiddler?
(would you say the same about Frankie Gavin? What would it mean to understand Frankie Gavin?)
(what would you say to someone who insisted that you just don't understand some piece of music that you just don't like? would there be a reasonable response?)
(is it possible to go a bit easy on the guy and accept that maybe he just doesn't like something that you like, and maybe that's okay?)
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If he doesn't like it, doesn't understand it, whatever... just don't try to get into the head of the player/performer for the reasons. It's in the head of the listener.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon, I'm not saying to Ian, "you don't like it & I think you could." I'm saying,"Ian, you're trying to hard." I agree with Ian when he typed the following in the OP, "I had some interesting discussions with some musically-savvy friends at the weekend. They were also of the opinion that it is perfectly legitimate to conclude that certain, even gifted, musicians simply aren’t to your taste, even that it’s daft to claim otherwise. "
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes, interesting Jon, and I have thought about that.
I was not keen on Monk for ages. My brother (a jazzer) kept bigging him up and I was was like, feck off it's just a din. But we sat down one night and he educated me. The rhythm is so precise in its subdivisions. I'd thought it was sloppy and I was wrong. I thought that what he did on the piano was just bash the thing in a kind of random way, that's what it sounded like to me. I was wrong. And thanks to an insistent brother and an open mind, I got it. And the revelation was glorious.
But I disagree that we worry about whether someone understands a piece of music only when they say they don't like it? Ian Stock says he like diddley music, but that doesn't stop me worrying about whether he understands it.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
same with me and bebop, not until I was in graduate school and took some jazz history and improvisation classes that I came to fully appreciate/understand what was going on. It may not be my favorite genre, but I like it better than before I was educated about the genre.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
yep, I hear ya. Then defends it as his personal preference, while ignoring that his original reasons for not liking it had everything to do with LC (and her supposed intentions) and not himself and what he himself likes and doesn't like.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Michael, here is the last bit of some specifics you gave for 'Lost in the Loop'; wonderful tune ~
"And listen to how she joins together all these different articulations to keep the phrasing interesting and fresh all the way through. Listen to how the variations subtly push and pull the overall shape of the melody. And this is just that one recording. Hear her play it live and it's completely different again. I could go on and on, but I hope I've said enough."
I'll go out on a limb here & say that you gave away tons of insight for listening, & then summed up in the quote I copied.
Ian, you certainly didn't reject Michael's information at the time. You apparently went straight into listening, & then listened again. Is there anything llig said in that post which peaks your interest?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You guys seem to be doing that 'deconstructionist' thing now, where the critique goes on longer than the thing that is being examined.
I think the horse is dead, and continued beating will do no good.
Nighty night...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"And the revelation was glorious."
Yeah, I can understand that. If you want some glorious, there's a recording that came out a few years ago, Monk in Paris. The first piano solo on there feels to me like what I'd expect Bach would do, if he rose from the dead and spent a few weeks listening to stride piano, and realized what it means to have a bassist and a drummer. And talk about tricky rhythms - he turns the beat around even when he's not playing!
The whole record is full of good stuff - check out the way Monk picks up on the tail end of the sax solo in Bright Mississippi, and just completes the thought, then adds his own thing to it. It's a degree of simpatico in music that you don't often find...
(as for your worries about Ian, I can't help you there... seems like a big boy to me, able to take care of himself)
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Nah jon I'm setting the bar very low. If you don't like the artist that, by general consensus, represent the finest that that art has to offer it's probably not your thing. If I don't like Johnny Cash Patsy Cline or Loretta Lynn chances are I don't like classic American country western music. Not like I'm gonna rally dig Marty Robbins or Waylon Jennings but not like Johnny Cash"
Well, I guess if that makes sense to you, I can't really say much more about it. Seems insane to me - I don't see any problem with saying "I like a lot of coutnry music, but Johnny Cash I just don't dig" - but if it gets you through the night, it really doesn't bother me that much.
What seems really weird to me - crazy like a soup sandwich, really - is the idea of spending any time at all trying to decide whether someone "really" likes a sort of music, or if they're just pretending. I don't get that at all.
Why, do you think, is Ian pretending to like Irish music? Why is he going to such lengths to fool us all? Is this part of some devious plot? Is he just trying to get our trust so he can pull some scam? Is this a power play, is he going to take over the leadership of Irish Traditional Music and rule us all, issuing his edicts over the Mustard Board? What's the game, do you think? Why is Ian Stock deceptively feigning a keen interest in the repetitive catchy dance tunes of Ireland? And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Why, do you think, is Ian pretending to like Irish music? Why is he going to such lengths to fool us all? Is this part of some devious plot? Is he just trying to get our trust so he can pull some scam? Is this a power play, is he going to take over the leadership of Irish Traditional Music and rule us all, issuing his edicts over the Mustard Board? What's the game, do you think? Why is Ian Stock deceptively feigning a keen interest in the repetitive catchy dance tunes of Ireland? And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, not for the first time, yesterday I decided to be out of here . Then I see that the discussion got constructive again...
I will try (and probably fail) to keep this short.
I used to have a friend who seemed able to discuss the varying merits of about a dozen different recordings of any given symphony. I was in perpetual awe. But I wonder how many people really can hear like that. Maybe those who can, do get massive rewards, but is it really *necessary* in order to appreciate music, even deeply?
>>What does make me wonder though is what makes you interested ...
Llig, I respond to this music on a purely emotive basis. I love the tunes and the sounds. I like the infectious rhythms, the exuberance that it creates, even in its soulful moments, and I like all the peripherals. I love the tension between the simplicity of form and the diversity that still emerges. I can’t better put it into words.
That incredibly pompous phrase of mine was another poor attempt to explain how I hear ‘in the round’. That performance of The Sheep in the Boat posted yesterday, for me is a pure delight, even if I can’t dismantle it; I feel no need to.
I comprehend your approach, and accept that it is probably necessary if you want to be a top-flight player - but for me, deconstructing the music actually diminishes it - all the more so now I can’t listen without wondering what I’m missing. Is it really *necessary* to put in things that the vast majority of people may simply miss? But then, I am aware that you play only for yourself; I don’t.
Your approach to Van Gogh is consistent: analytical. Me, I would rather just soak up the holistic ‘feel’ that the painting conveys, no matter how it was achieved. I may never ‘read’ it in the way you are able to, but rest assured it still has an impact, and yes, I do try to articulate it. But I’m the guy gazing at the painting from 10 feet away, and you are the guy peering at it from 6 inches (and getting in my line of vision ).
I would like to know whether you have always done this, or whether it is a product of your own growing ability on the instrument - and whether you do the same with instruments other than the fiddle.
As for the rest of it, Jon is doing a great job as my interpreter:
>> I can like Irish fiddle music without like everyone who plays it... I can even recognize that a player is a great player, and just not like what they do.
>> as if understanding it had anything to do with liking it!
>> Does it actually mean anything other than "you don't like it and I think you should"?
Others:
>>just don't try to get into the head of the player/performer... It's in the head of the listener.
I never said otherwise – but do you ever read critical reviews? They’re written by the audience, not the performers.
>> But we sat down one night and he educated me.
Great! – What do you think I’m doing here? But if as I said, it is *diminishing* my appreciation of the music, wouldn’t it be best just to agree that there is more than one valid way to enjoy this music? I too have a decent ear, just for other things.
>>I try to educate Ian with some specifics, he just says he's not interested.
When did I ever say that? I thanked you for your comments and am still digesting them. But IMO deconstruction has no inherent greater worth than my approach just because it works for you (except, maybe, in very specific circumstances) – that’s all I’m saying . My ‘problem’ with Liz Carroll is simply that she seems to address your end of the spectrum but not mine.
>> Ian Stock says he like diddley music, but that doesn't stop me worrying about whether he understands it.
Don’t waste your worry, Llig. I ENJOY it!!! That's what matters. Your comments have been really helpful, but does that mean I am expected to accept them unconditionally? That really would be the mark of uncritical inexperience.
>> Is there anything llig said in that post which peaks your interest?
Ben, I am working through that tune again and again as time permits, with constant reference to Llig’s comments. Trying not to hurry it; I will eventually learn it. Though I would rather be learning Horse Keane’s Hornpipe (Full Set) or The Sheep in the Boat, which speak to me much more strongly.
>>And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?
Nothing – I already have you all under my control. Resistance is Futile.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>I said that the 'deconstructionist' thing was something I didn't care to do, but I was specifically asked
Before you blast my previous post, Llig, we cross-posted. So what *are* you doing? How do you find/make all those subtleties without some kind of analysis? Intuition? If so where did it come from? My guess is that you *do* deconstruct, just subliminally.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
For my part, I still remember my first encounter with a Liz album "Liz Carroll", and it blew my mind. Still a firm favorite all these years later, as are all the albums that have had a profound effect on me.
She was playing "in a boot" whilst I was away, so sorry I missed her.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
my point was a simple one... if you don't like it, fine. Just don't point fingers and make up crap that you only think is going on in someone else's mind.
This thread has gone off on a tangent, in my opinion.
I don't like (fill in the blank) music because they are such wannabe (fill in the blank) and they (fill in the blank) and blah blah blah.
You don't like it because YOU don't like it. period. It's not because LC has supposed pretensions.
Yes, I have read critical reviews, and yours wasn't one of them.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Out at a session till late last night so missed a lot of this.
Ian, you seem to be creating a bit of a Catch-22 for yourself. Many of your posts on this board, especially when you first joined, have been kvetching about feeling like you're missing something in your playing, that you don't have it quite right. You got a heap of advice to the effect of "listen to good players," and pointed out that you've been listening to Irish music for thirty years and wanted someone to tell you what you should be listening for. So finally, Michael gives you an answer, a technical description of what exactly Liz Carroll does on that tune to make it sounds the way it sounds. Then you say it's too technical, it's too much of a "rivet counting," analytical approach, and that's not how you want to experience the music.
We can't win.
Part of becoming a really good player of whatever instrument is learning how to hear exactly what other players are doing. It helps. A lot. I knew some people who would sit down and learn a tune, ornament for ornament, *exactly* how Willi Clancy played it. I always had too much of an attention span like a ferret on crack (to steal a simile from Jusa) to manage that, but I could just about get through an A part and in any case, I can hear someone play and know exactly the techniques they're using.
"Is it really *necessary* to put in things that the vast majority of people may simply miss?"
Those things are what make the music sound good, to anyone, and what make the difference between your weekend mediocre session player and a great player. Michael's description of Liz's playing should really be a lesson in *how* to listen, to anyone, be it Martin Hayes, Kevin Burke, those Full Set lads, whoever.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Just to clarify my point, learning how to listen won't miraculously make you into a great player (hasn't me thus far) but it's a good bit of the battle.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Spear, good comment, as always.
Except that I didn't say I "want" to hear it like that, just that I do. I don't make any great claims for it, it's probably the voice of inexperience - except that it is still possible to get a lot out of the music that way, as a listener. It's also what's driven me thus far.
No problem at all with the point that it takes more to be a good *player* - which is why I have not rejected any of the advice. But as you all keep saying, it takes time - something that is in short supply round here. I'm still doing it though. What do you think eventually prompted the move to the fiddle? (I'm through OAIM's 12 beginner's fiddle lessons, and consolidating while awaiting their next course).
I am also in the process of re-learning a lot of tunes I know and seeing how to apply ornamentation to them. The results are instructive - as is the fact that when I go back to the mandolin and unintentionally apply fiddle techniques, more often than not it doesn't work.
Maybe in another 30 years I will hear what Michael hears, but in the meantime it has actually somewhat spoiled my enjoyment of the music because there is this constant voice saying "What are you missing?".
At which point you start to question why you're doing it, and at least look at the balance.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, music, this music, is like an onion. It has many layers, when you first start listening you hear the outer layer but over time as you educate your ear you discover there is a next layer, one that was hidden from you at first. It makes listening to good music a journey of discovery with new things to be heard, even in material you think you are familiar with.
Why add things a majority of people will not notice? Well, for one because you notice them yourself and you put them there because you think they make an aspect of a tune shine. Some people will notice. There's always a good listener, it may be the old guy in the corner or another musician you're playing with, there will be a response.
All these little things also make up a texture. In the playing of Séamus Ennis for example there is a lot going on that will not be obvious even when listening closely. All these things combined provide a texture to the man's music, a texture that ultimately sets his music apart from the music of people who do not apply the same 'things'.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If you eschew the detail, it's not holistic.
Fair point, Llig. In some ways I think we are talking about degrees of the same thing. e.g.:
- Seeing a vaguely green thing on the horizon and wondering if it's a forest (the many lovers of Celtic Woman)
- Looking at a clump of trees and thinking it's a nice wood (me)
- Scrutinising the end of one twig and finding it fascinating. (You)
At the end of the day, they are all different ways of looking at the same thing. I guess they are each fit for a different purpose, but we all have our preferences, and I'm as incredulous about CW's approach as you are about mine. It's not always easy to switch from one the the other, especially when you've been doing it for a long time.
I'm still not gainsaying you - but what happens of you look at one on Monet's paintings in the same way? You might understand the brushstrokes, but you have to stand a long way back to get the full impact of the picture.
The nagging thing which no one has yet to mention is the word 'talent'.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Prof., nice post, thanks. True of many other things too, I think - but perhaps especially of music. Already part-way along the journey. There was a time when I thought The Dubliners were It. Then I heard the Bothies (1982).
But do all people reach the (same?) destination, or do they stop along the way, even if they don't want to? What do you make of my friend and his symphonies? He didn't even play an instrument, but he heard stuff I couldn't. Or rather only could once it was pointed out.
Undoubtedly part of the problem is reliance on recorded music, which is the same every time you hear it. I used to go to lots of gigs - have heard most of the 'names' live, but that doesn't really help either. I have gone on about the lack of wider access too many times before.
Incidentally, I wasn't saying that Full Set are especially great musicians, just that there is pleasure to be had from their music nonetheless.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, I mentioned Séamus Ennis. After thirty or more years of listening I still come across things I didn't notice before. Same for some of Bobby Casey's music. There's an immense richness of textures and musical ideas in that music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Aye, Prof, but that rich texture really comes out in solo playing, but Ian seems to eschew that whole element of the music, as he has said he's not interested in the details and the micro-dynamics, but rather the macro-dynamics you hear in band arrangements. I couldn't help but feel a bit sad when I read that. For me, and I think many would agree, solo playing really is the essence of the music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And it's all fine. It's fine to prefer bands to Bobby Casey and not want to spend time developing the ear to begin unpeeling the layers. I know plenty of session musicians who are happy as larry dabbling along in sessions once per week and wouldn't even know half the names being dropped in this thread. The difference is that their not on thesession.org asking why they're not getting it and acting generally unhappy about it.
It would be like me whinging that I still can't ride upper level dressage, even after 20+ years of riding horses, whilst not taking lessons, not riding a zillion horses per day, not paying much attention to the detailed, subtle things the top riders do. I don't do any of those things and after 20+ years I'm still a mediocre lower level rider, but I'm not moaning about cause I know fine well what I have to do to get substantially better and I know I can't be arsed to do it. There are other things I want to do, like play Irish music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, not 'not interested' but not experienced. I agree solo playing is closer to the spirit of the thing, but I am always 'distracted' by too many disparate things Especially disparate instruments.
As I've said many times before, I am neither a trained nor in many ways experienced musician, I'm a long-standing dabbler - and perhaps that is the problem. I've existed in a kind of parallel universe where I was playing what I *believed* to be trad music for quite a long time. It has given me some vestiges of the 'real thing', such as knowing a fair number of tunes (albeit without all their ornamentation) and a degree of dexterity which has allowed me to make quicker progress with the fiddle than expected. It was also distorted by a degree of acclaim from people whom I was always aware didn; really know what they were talking about. But I was always aware that it was in some ways a facsimile. Hence my angst at finding on here a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of.
Maybe all this is actually a necessary readjustment, but believe me it's not an easy process. Partly becasue it seems to involve a lot of un-learning. It doesn't mean I'm not up for it, though - otherwise I would have made myself scarce ages ago.
My listening has moved from The Dubliners to Bothies, to some of the lesser-known bands, to smaller ensembles and to the more accessible soloists such as Hayes. It's been a good journey, and I've surprised myself by enjoying stuff that I didn't in the past, or didn't expect to. So maybe there's hope yet! But overlaid on that is still this apparent dichotomy between emotional and rational appreciation. I'm sure Michael doesn't see it that way, but I think he may have forgotten what it is like to be a learner, let alone one who is having to eat a whole load of humble pie. That's not meant to read as a sob-story.
And I still get my greatest enjoyment from sitting down with a small number of other people and playing, working on arrangements as opposed to the more ad hoc situation of a session - what you might just call orchestrating the music. I will never be a good classical musician because I can't take the discipline - have failed at it on each of the three times I have tried to take formal lessons. I like the freedom that this music brings, without it being total improvisation.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Keep listening and be open to your tastes changing, again. When I first got into this music, I struggled to listen to the "scratchy old out of tune" stuff. Get me Lunasa any day. Now I'll listen to Lunasa as mindless work background music, but I am far more into the old solo stuff.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
listening and listening, just had a lesson in microcosmic detail that changes the whole nature of a tune.
Without the f# lead note the implied chord from the melody is A. With the f# it stays in D, wow. Important? Yes, because I know from backing this tune that the tune doesn't go to A at that point. Small mistake that makes a big difference. I'm sure I'd have gotten there in the end under my own steam, but having just had it pointed out to me has helped me travel that little bit further forward and given me something else to consider.
So a good lesson in the importance of the finer detail of the old lead in note, a detail that would have left me wanting when launching into this is knowledgeable company!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Solidmahog, interesting point. But this is a good example of my bizarre cocktail of ignorance and knowledge. Don't mean to patronise, but I always knew that...
I can only liken this whole experience to seeing an optical illusion one way for a long time, and then suddenly seeing the alternative...it's disorientating.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Ian, yes, I always thought I knew that too, but not for that particular phrase in that particular tune, as it turns out I was treating as "passing" a note fundamental to the tune and therefore missing the point on occasion.
I'm not talking about the lead into a part, I'm talking about a phrasing aspect where I'd not fully appreciated that my choice of note was detracting from the character of the phrase and so also the tune, to the degree that it would cause problems playing along with other couthier individuals. Simply put, I hadn't known the tune as well as I thought. Once pointed out it now seems obvious, it wasn't that obvious at 09:30 this morning when I was trying to learn it ; < )
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I agree with what Prof. and TSS said higher above. With me(aside from ITM) every little key stroke on the piano, every little change in tempo or dynamics, ever little variation of my chordal and melodic progressions all mean something. The add the "me" factor to the music. People may not notice all of the little nuances, but they sure know when they're not there(to my knowledge, especially with ITM) These things have come from listening to others as well as listening to myself. Asking the question "What am i doing that i don`t like, and how can i use it to enjoy the music more?" For some reason, some musicians think that learning technicals, mechanics, and nuances is harmful to their "style" i guess. If you like playing tunes plain and stripped, and the same way everytime, then good for you. The problem is you think you're missing something, which is obvious.TSS and Prof. explained it well enough though.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To sum up one point i was trying to make, Nuances and Variation make music more "Interesting." The more "interesting" the music is, the more Enjoyable it is to play/listen to. If i'm right, the opposite of Interesting, is Boring. Who wants to listen to/play boring music? That's what happens when you play music the same way everytime(unless the music is interesting on it's own, cause someone else made it interesting enough)
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I see your point, Fiddlelearner - but when the emphasis is on the tune, you hear a really great tune and the thought is, "I want to play that" not "I want to a*se around with it". Well, it is here, anyway.
That's what I hear: "a really great tune", followed by "a really great instrumentation", not "a really great player".
I suppose it comes back to how set in stone you consider them to be, and if you're already aware that you aren't quite cutting the mustard, the temptation is just to replicate as closely as you can.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You cannot force nuance. I wouldn't say it's only playing for yourself if most people don't notice some of the detail. You're playing for the tune (<insert that quote I use from Liam O'Flynn>)
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'll be honest, some tunes i like because of their bare melodic patterns. But what makes a tune special, is when it is played by someone that "knows how to play". And i mean really knows what they're doing. For example, i like all the tunes i play, but i don't enjoy them that much because i *don't know how to play well. But when i hear Kevin Burke, Liz Carrol, Mareid Ni Mhanoigh(sorry if i mispelled her name, im away from my computer) play those same tunes, i like them a lot more because They are Great Players. When i hear a tune i like, by a "great player", i think, "That tune was played well."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"- Looking at a clump of trees and thinking it's a nice wood (me)
- Scrutinising the end of one twig and finding it fascinating. (You)"
This is disingenuous, to say the least ... accusing me of "not seeing the wood for the trees" just because I appreciate the detail. Your insist that just because I see the detail, that somehow precludes me from seeing the whole. This is completely wrong.
I know a lot about woods. When you approach a wood, the first thing you already know is the time of year. Then, if you can get an idea of the size of the wood, you can also get a look at the predominant tree species. Then when that's done, even before I step into the wood, I can list all the species of birds I'm likely to see and or hear, plus all the species I'd be pleased to see/hear (not that I'm not pleased to see/hear the more common ones of course).
So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does. But do I get something more out of it than someone without that knowledge who just wanders round the wood enjoying merely a wall of indecipherable bird song? No, not necessarily ... and this is the point Ian, I think, is making. And he's right on that one.
However, when I go to the next wood, I'm in another wood. And when I wander through that wood and hear a song I don't recognise I'm thrilled.
If you are really looking for a difference between our approaches, this statement of yours is telling:
"Hence my angst at finding a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of."
I'd have said, "Hence my wonder and delight at finding a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you have a simple choice now. Do you want to play this music or just listen to it for enjoyment? In order to even sound vahuely like you're playing the music properly you have to listen to the detail while also listening to the whole, and if doing that spoils your enjoyment of the music, then you should stop playing. Don't waste your time fiddling about with band arrangements. These are for bands of musicians who have their sh1t together and who have spent years listening to the detail and becoming proficient players.
Here's some shocking news for you now: those tunes you think you know but are just now trying to work out ornamentation for - you *don't know them*. I know you can't possibly know them because if you did, you would never say that you were going back through trying to put ornamentation in. You're right, it's a facsimile. So now if you're fascinated enough with this music that you want to be able to play it yourself, it's time to sit down and learn your first tune and learn it well. A Liz Carroll album is as good a place to start as any. Listen to her and learn, but don't get depressed when you listen to the detail and realise that you were wrong in your whole way of approaching the music and that Michael was absolutely right (and selflessly spending time trying to help you even though he doesn't even know you - v. admirable). Just take a deep breath and enjoy the journey!
Or not... and just give up trying to play it. It's your choice.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's frustrating learning how much Experience is involved in this :/ I'm still coping with the fact it will take a multitude of years to learn the music well. The fact that i'm not Irish and will never be able to play the music like them. The fact that i can't even learn from an Irish teacher. But i won't let the facts hold me back. I'm learning this music. And i will do whatever it takes to make it sound as Irish as possible. Why? Cause, I like it because it's Irish. I like it for all of it's subtleties and nuances. The unique melodic progressions. Everything that makes it what it is. The less Irish it sounds, the less i enjoy it.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Fiddlelearner, never ever say to yourself, "I'm not Irish and will never be able to play the music like them". It's defeatest nonsense. Liz Carroll ain't Irish.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I remember a time when I realised that I didn't really know the tunes I thought I knew already. It came as a bit of a shock when it became clear that it was going to take me years to sound any good even playing one tune and that I was going to have to revisit tunes to make them sound better. Now I get that feeling regularly and I've realised it's just part of a never-ending process.
I don't like the music because it's Irish, though. I like it because it's good music and it's fun to play.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't completely agree with Dow -- I think it's fine to just dick about with the tunes and play them if you enjoy playing them. Many people do. You don't need to give up playing. Just accept that if that is your approach, you'll plateau at a different level than people who put the work and time into "listening to the detail."
And before anyone goes any further on *that* topic, you don't need to be Irish to play the bloody things. Do people find it psychologically easier to assign their deficiencies and frustrations to something they can't control, like whether or not they were born on a certain island in the North Atlantic, than something they can, like how actively and singlemindedly they pursue the study of the music, or even face their own issues with impatience (no one can play this stuff well after a year, or two, or even three), laziness, or whatever else may get in your way?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
A caveat to my first paragraph....
The main problem, as I see it, to the "dicking about" approach, emerges when you want to play tunes with other people. Most of the musicians I meet who seem to fall into this category are not very adjustable players, for lack of a better word. They play the tunes the way they play them aren't tremendously proficient at adjusting to another player's swing, speed, and phrasing. If you're not able to listen closely enough to albums to hear the subtelties in someone's playing, you're not likely to be able to hear that in the playing the guy sitting next to you in the pub.
One of my session pet peeves are people who force me to change the swing and timing of a tune I started because they cannot play it even a slightly different way from the way they usually play it. This might not be you, Ian, but from what you say, it sounds as if you're not focusing very much or interested in microdynamocs and tiny shifts in swing and phrasing, and if only to be able to play with other people, it would be good focusing on this. Even if it's just a wee bit.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Silver Spear, we'll have to agree to disagree. What you describe as "dicking about with the tunes", I would describe as "dicking around with notes". It's an important distinction.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're a harder man than me.
I'm okay with dicking about -- I dick about with quite lot of things (not the music, though). I don't see any reason to quit climbing and riding, say, just cause I'm not very good and not likely to get very good.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"If you're not able to listen closely enough to albums to hear the subtelties in someone's playing, you're not likely to be able to hear that in the playing the guy sitting next to you in the pub".
Yes because the guy sitting next to you knows the tune. He's watching your fingers going up and down wondering what you're doing, and wondering why you get any pleasure from sounding nowhere near authentic.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, the reason why I advocate quitting is because Ian admitted himself that when he listens more closely to the music, it takes away from his pleasure. Why carry on doing something that's non-compulsory if it's not pleasurable?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think he does like it, and I think he realises that he has to listen closely, but I think he's resisting because he realises what a big task it is. Perhaps he's scared of opening his mind because he thinks as soon as he unlocks the mysteries of the detail for himself, the magic will be lost and he won't want to play anymore. All I can say is, the mysteries never stop and the closer you get to the sound you want from yourself, the more rewarding it is.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
BTW, Ian, never lose sight of that "macro" view of the music you describe. That helps with overall phrasing and arrangements if you want to do that with bands down the track. But now it's time for "micro"...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does>>
How on earth do you know that?! you don't . its a supposition, speak for yourself not the rest of humanity. cheers.
Dow ; As regards ornamentation, what ornaments do you suggest Ian uses on mandolin? cranns ?rolls? cuts? Surely you know that triplets are the main ornament for this instrument? That a great % of the ornaments in the lexicon are not physically available to banjo/mando ? Are you suggesting that the music is not 'authentic' without these ornaments? ! Utter Nonsense . It boils down to individual style, the particular instruments played and preferences nothing more. How pretentious would it be for a player to adopt ornaments so as to sound 'Irish' ? Are yous suggesting that Cape Breton Fiddlers, or Shetland, or Scots are not 'Authentic' because they play the tunes in a different style. ?
Get of yer high horse lads there are many ways to play the music and have fun, it might not be your way..... If you look down on players who dont ornament then ye haven't spent much time in Ireland thats for sure.
This music is approachable on many levels, the level you or I might feel appropriate to aspire towards is not for everyone . If a player and the listeners get pleasure from the music then what more do ye want!? To conform to someone's idea of what Irish music should sound like?! based on commercial recordings or what?
Fundamentally its dance music, if you can play a set of tunes, at pace, rhythmically strong, with no basic errors, and folk enjoy dancing to the music... job done.
You want more? great, but that doesn't make you any more superior than those who dont.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh dear Dr, Dow rather than engage in debate you stoop to insults and abuse . I would have thought better of you... Its strange, do you feel because your belief's are questioned that those questions constitute a personal attack and so respond in a pre emptive strike? Or what? My guess is that a few trolls will descend to join you in your abuse... Whatever.
My point was that the tunes are played in many styles and that they are all valid, whether you or I like listening is a different matter.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No, piobagusfidil, I don't want to engage you in debate. I came here to give some suggestions to Ian, and it was meant in a kind way. Sorry if it has come across the wrong way.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ah sure not to worry about it Dow, Its hard to communicate on a board like this without misunderstandings and misapprehensions , well thats my experience anyhow! So my apologies If I come across as aggressive, Im not, just forthright!
Fair enough it was meant in a good spirit, and good for you to make the effort. I just feel that there are many ways to approach the music and I cant abide the slagging that goes on here from a small select bunch of w*nkers who really dont appear to know as much as they think!
IMO As a newbie fiddler hes better off working on phrasing,lift and drive rather than attempting to incorporate ornaments at this stage. Once the flow is achieved then that is a good time to start with the odd cut/tap and of course they are entirely optional , re my point about Shetland fiddle etc.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Pot, my name is Kettle.
The initial question had nothing to do with your pet cause of incorporating ornaments at some later stage in one's playing, but rather how one should be listening to other players.
If Ian wants to learn Shetland fiddle, he's better off listening to session fiddle players in the manner Michael described above, eh?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jig is the master of quoting bits of stuff out of context. So lest he get further away with it, here's the full quote:
"So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does. But do I get something more out of it than someone without that knowledge who just wanders round the wood enjoying merely a wall of indecipherable bird song? No, not necessarily"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ah yes! Matt and Shannon! They (and a good friend of theirs) are the ones that really lit my fire for trad music! They came to a class while doing my masters. We had a great time, very intimate setting. I went old-time during that time, as that was what was in my own backyard, but have moved on to ITM in the last couple of years.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, what do I say now? You all raise so many points that I’d have to write a book to do them all justice. But thank you to those people who have tried to take a more sympathetic view. I’m sorry, I’ve made this as short as I can, i.e. not at all...
Folks, you are getting all of this out of proportion. For a start, I’m not rejecting any of the advice, just trying to sift through it – particularly where it doesn’t chime with my own experience or that of other people I talk to. I think it would be a good start to concede that the MB does start from a rather ‘specialised’ point on the spectrum, more than I realised.
Consider a few things:
1) I found out what I know about this music in *total* isolation from anyone else, until last summer. From a musical background where the only ‘proper’ music was the classical that I ‘failed’ at, I just listened to LP’s of the big bands - that’s all I had. No internet to help, for much of that time. Never even heard of LC or MH until 2010. Until September 2010, I knew *nobody* who was into this music, let alone who played it. Nobody, not a soul, to answer my questions, let alone play with. It all but killed my interest for a good while. That’s down to a combination of factors that don’t really matter here – but is it really surprising if I made mistakes?
2) Both the music and the mandolin ‘found me’ – it was not a conscious choice. I can only kick myself that I didn’t have the gumption to switch instrument years ago. But I DO know this music well *as appropriate for the mandolin*. I get invited to sessions, and seem to have established a reputation as a good player in these parts, as good as most other amateur trad players you will find. You can draw what conclusions you want about that. I also seemed to be accepted well enough in those Scottish sessions I played at. People comment how quickly I seem to pick up new musical skills. O.K., I’m blowing my own trumpet, but I’ve had enough of running myself down for a while. Dow, thanks for the advice, but I am aware of the argument that says I don’t ‘really’ know the tunes. Not quite: I just don’t know them as applied to the fiddle – and that is indeed a now big job to master.
3) I am not rejecting the advice, just trying to sift it, especially as much is contradictory to both what I think (on the back of a huge amount of effort) and what a lot of other music people I know, think. And yes, it does seem like a huge step backwards effectively to have to start again, but I am enjoying the fiddle very much.
4) My main issue here is not the advice per se, but the insistence from certain quarters that there is only One True Way. I asked for advice, Michael was good enough to provide help; I listened to the music both with and without his comments – and I heard some of what he mentioned. But I ended up thinking, “Fine, but for all its supposed perfection, it just doesn’t grab me”. Nul argument. There are three possible conclusions about this:
a) I am a complete numpty when listening to music
b) a good command of the niceties does not in itself lead to the desired emotional response
c) there are other things that make this music meaningful as well as an individual player’s level of refinement.
For me the jury is still out on this, but the insistence that only a) is correct is not exactly convincing – especially when both personal experience and others I know don’t agree. A music-teacher colleague reacted to Michael’s comments with a word I won’t repeat, though one that he will most certainly recognise, saying that he is conflating know-how with genuine interpretation. I don’t actually think that is true, because of Michael’s reluctance to do that exercise, but it still leaves me with the feeling that the insistence on there being only one true way is not all there is to it.
To illustrate, there is one point in a Full Set track, where the whole band is playing, then they all cut out and just the pipes and guitar carry on into a new tune. Wow! It’s like going off a ski-jump. Nothing to do with micro’s – but as exhilarating as... But at the other end of the spectrum, on the second tune here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7QC88RSoOk&feature=BFa&list=FL-PaDodMHjHY&index=9 All it takes is those slides in the A and quick top F#’s and A rolls in the B section to make me go weak at the knees. Literally. Yep, this bloke’s surely a numpty...
5) I keep getting conflicting messages here. On the one hand, I’m told ITM is now a global phenomenon, where other influences are welcomed (not least by people like LC) and the emphasis is on individual interpretation – but only, it seems, as long as you do it RIGHT. It doesn’t matter who you are playing the music, but if you choose to take another slant on it, that is WRONG. At the end of the day, all of those micro-variations are still just as much a matter of opinion as anything else, and so arguably is the decision to leave them out, should you so choose. Of course there is a consequence, but I just don’t buy the logic that says liberty is acceptable so long as you do as you are told.
6) My greater musical sense that differences of opinion are all part of all music, not matter what level or genre you operate in. Try asking opera buffs! To start condemning and over-ruling people in such an absolutist way is a sign of immaturity in the debate, not the opposite, therefore why would I trust it? It is of course reasonable to claim that a certain genre has specific characteristics which need to be understood and mastered, but not IMHO to say that there is only one valid way of doing so, or that some are more valid than others. To condemn diversity of opinion as ignorance seems like just part of the immaturity.
7) The veneration of LC, and the violent reaction to my innocent comments, only serves to reinforce my suspicions. She may be good, but she doesn’t speak to everyone. Who does? And to cite her as an example of how to do it ‘properly’ to one who doesn’t ‘get’ her just isn’t going to work. But it is not a sign of ignorance not to ‘get’ Liz Carroll – it may even be a sign of an ability to discriminate. I don’t even dislike her music particularly; I just find it short on some of the things I really enjoy about the music. And I still maintain that one of the reasons The White House audience reacted so dimly was that she was the wrong person for that audience, or at least she chose the wrong music. Don’t forget, many people can hardly tell one end of a jig from t’other. They didn’t seem to ‘get’ her either.
8) I am certainly not going to stop either the band or playing in general – I enjoy both far too much, whatever Dow’s worries on that front. I’m not going to promise you would like the sound, but bear in mind the context in which we will have to function – and maybe we will indeed plateau at a different level. We have a couple of s*it hot players, including one who has released ‘proper’ CD’s and played with some of the best – and the rest of us hope to learn a lot from him. What’s telling is that we are either good enough (or they are desperate enough) to be pretty keen to play with *us*.
9) Emily, I am trying to take in as much of all this new-found knowledge as I can. I am not rejecting micro-variations, who knows I probably have my own unconscious ones . I just am not convinced they are the be-all-and-end-all, except in a rather narcissistic sense. Situations vary: for example, unless I really am missing something, our session really isn’t at that level of sophistication. I hope I don’t do anyone a disservice by saying that. We’re just happy to have somewhere to meet and play tunes out here in the trad Outback. And the palpable excitement of those involved in the band is worth it for its own sake, however cr*p we end up being.
10) Piobagus, many thanks for your comments – they are really reassuring right now. Point about the mandolin exactly what I was trying to say, but in fact I’ve been pleasantly surprised how quickly I’ve managed reasonable cuts and rolls on the fiddle. What’s more, I’m really sure that playing an instrument affects what you hear. The fiddle is a particularly dynamic instrument, so there’s a lot to consider, whereas my wife, learning GHB is encountering something far more proscribed – and yes, she has a very experienced teacher. What’s more, in any case, I tend towards Scottish fiddle style, which is ‘cleaner’ than Irish. I’m learning Irish because I like it too, partly because lessons are readily available, and partly because I guessed that it would be easier to adapt in one direction rather than the other.
11) Michael, I really do appreciate the advice you have given, but ‘disingenuous’: that’s a bit rich for such slight provocation, coming from someone who dishes as much dirt as you sometimes do
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I can guess , he said' what a load of pretentious twaddle..'. am I close?
Thing is, the ears and brain have to be trained to hear whats happening. You cant just hear and identify things unless you have prior understanding, its just sound untill the brain can understand. We might hear the sounds but to be able to understand whats happening is another matter.
This is quite easily proven ; take a piece of Arabic music and tell us what's happening, reproduce it by ear. or Piobaireachd. just try it... Until you have an understanding of techniques used, how to approach a sound, how its made, how on earth is anyone going to decipher whats going on?!
Its a process. Someone who has been playing the music a while will obviously recognise stuff that is not apparent to the beginner. So a fiddler recognises a roll , they know how its made, how to make the sound etc subtleties that are not apparent to a others.
Of course there are other ways! Many many more and thank god for that otherwise wed be listening to llig clones and that is not an inspiring thought!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
At risk of repeating myself...
If you have any aspirations of playing this music really well some day -- not just dabbling along at it, but really making an effort to make it sound good -- you're going to have to suck it up and follow the advice given to you here by Michael, Dow, et. al.
There is no "equally valid" way of playing which does not involve paying close attention to the subtelties of phrasing, timing, ornamentation, swing, lift, etc. etc, and the techniques necessary to create all that. Sure, you can play tunes as a bunch of notes and not worry overmuch about all that stuff --loads of people do -- but there is no way it will sound as good as the playing of someone who expends more energy on the detail. Ever.
The scope for individual interpretation is *all* in the "micro-variations." That's the music, unless you're into band arrangements but that's a thoroughly modern phenomenon. Great players, such as Iain McLeod and Angus Grant in that clip you posted, have as much nuance and "micro-variation" to their playing as Liz Carroll. The elements that make Angus' fiddling sound different than Liz's are the weensie, subtle things. The point is that one should train their ear to hear that.
To reiterate, hearing the detail and not hearing the detail are not two equally valid methods of engaging with the music if you want to play it well.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To say otherwise is like looking at the difference between people who have a kind of basic sense of how to ride a horse and handle one and a good imagination for anthropomorphising equine behaviour and people who have developed a detailed understanding of horse body language, horse psychology, and spent years training themselves how to use their own bodies in a way horses can comprehend clearly, and saying, "Those are totally equally valid methods for being a horseman."
The former describes the vast majority of amateur horse owners but it doesn't make it as effective, useful, or valid a method for dealing with these animals as the latter.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wyogal, Nice clip of Shannon Heaton and her thoughts on authenticity. Small world, I took lessons on guitar from Matt for a while, and would be a better player today if the long drive to Medford hadn't deterred me from continuing.
And TSS, you raise good points that build on the theme of authenticity--being authentic is not just throwing together a mishmash of styles because it is what comes easy, you have to learn the rules before you choose to bend or break them!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm still trying to find the bit in the thread where anyone says there is "only one true way". Be honest now, did anyone REALLY say that?!
I'm starting to understand now that some people just want to dabble in the music. They don't seem to want to strive to be as good a musician as they can be and to try out different things in order to achieve that goal. I've never been that sort of person. I've always tried to take any critcism or advice on board, even if it wasn't palatable at the time, and then work on it for years until I was happy. That is, until I have another "a-ha I haven't given that enough attention" moment and I have to focus on something else. I don't think I really understand people who actually reject that kind of advice without giving it a chance. I'll just have to accept and understand that a lot of people are like that.
There are people like that here in Sydney - people who seem to have no wish to improve by constantly aiming to hone their listening skills. Those are the people who do not get invited to private sessions when skilled musicians visit Australia from Ireland. For other musicians who have devoted time to improving their listening skills, the dabblers' persistent dominance over sessions can be extremely annoying. Remember that it's not all about you. The other musicians have a right to be able to go to a session and enjoy playing the tunes that they've taken so much time to listen to and absorb. Dabblers have no right to spoil their fun.
If you want to be a dabbler, feel free to approach the music and do band arrangements in whatever way you please, but don't always expect to be welcomed to any session. And if you sense that others in the session are giving each other knowing smiles and glances, or tutting pointedly, or sighing lots, you'll know why.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No problem with learning techniques. Yes, since being taught how a roll works, I can hear them better. In fact I always could hear them, but couldn't work out how they were done. Llig, if I were to put the instrument down, it would reduce my ability to understand. I can *already* hear - it's just the technique that has been missing. Now that I am acquiring the techniques, progress is proving fairly strightforward - knowing what you are trying to achive has major benefits.
But knowing how to do rolls in itself doesn't guarantee a good result. Should we say it's necessary but not sufficient? That's my point about LC - if only for my ear.
And the point is, on the mandolin, much of what we have been talking about is nigh-on impossible.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hey Dr. I understand what you're saying about dabblers. I try to be humble, and not look down on anyone if they love music. Whether they are just a music lover, and can't sing or play instruments. Or whether they are just dabblers and don't try to get better. Or whether they're not obssessed like you and i. BUT, i feel that we all enjoy music A LOT more if we learn it and learn it well. Whether it be what we're hearing, or what we're playing. I don't enjoy it if i sound bad(and i doubt highly that anyone else enjoys it either.And i also enjoy listening to music that i'm familiar with. No song/tune, became my favorite the first time i heard it...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Fair play Dow and I commend you for your dedication . But how does on define a dabbler? someone who doesn't practice and advance every day religiously , doesn't play at home, sessions once or twice a week perhaps , has a full day job? Sounds like a dabbler to me. But after 20/30 yrs of this its still possible to attain a level of competence and play an instrument fairly well.
We dont all strive to be the best we can. The music serves different functions for us all.
Some of us have a compulsion to achieve in what ever field we have interest, some only want to earn a living and once they do that, aim achieved and they can maintain this level with little more effort.
As compulsive achievers we might look askance on these others, but they might be looking at us going 'feckin nutter' they want different things from their lives perhaps... A relationship , a job, a social life They are not driven in the way we are.
They can still be a great addition to a session.. or not.... Depends on the session, could be a session of dabblers! Theres plenty of them.
Particularly on a forum like this you have to watch out for advice that is dodgy. How does one know as a beginner who to trust? Its simple... google and research your subject and it will become clear whos advice runs contrary to the general consensus of opinion internationally and the opinions of highly competent advanced musicians.
Thing is Ian has been playing a while now, he can see the discrepancies ignorance and bias displayed by some of the advisers, even though they might not see it them selves!
The music is like a /Mandelbrot set, the closer you get the more you see and the deeper layers and intricacies become apparent. Your perspective might be different , you might have good eyes, but the joy you get from your view does not mean that other , without your view, dont get joy from their perspective.
What do we play for, why do we play, what do we want from our music, everyone's answers will be different.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Weejie, surprisingly I know, but I'm not a total idiot. I know that the differences between Irish style and West Highland style are quite substantial, but my point was those substantial differences are made up of an aggregate of much smaller techniques, phrasing, and approaches. As Ian seemed to like Angus Grant's playing, I was commenting that if one wanted to figure out how he does what he does, one would have to apply the same close listening skills to him that Michael was telling Ian he should apply to Liz Carroll.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Wait, i just thought about how flawed my last statement may be, so i'll change the point of view. --Learning more about the art of music, does not take away from our potential to enjoy it. I enjoy a 1,5,6,4 chord progression just as much(if not more) than i did before i knew it was a 1,5,6,4. I think what really gives me joy is the increased knowledge. But that may be just me.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Why divide the world into just two? There are an infinite number of shades in between, for an infinite number of reasons. If I had free choice, I would be spending whole days playing the fiddle right now – but I need to earn a crust.; I'm hardly alone. Likewise, I have no wish to make a music widow of my wife like some people do. In fact, my ‘vocation’ is rather more important to me than that. Not to mention the fact that there are other fish to fry. But that doesn’t reduce me to a dabbler. I want to be as good as my circumstances will permit – if not better!
But to suggest that unless you’re brilliant you’re no good and should give up would be to put an awful lot of people out of an awful lot of enjoyment. And to look down on them for being such is IHMO unkind, to say the least. Not suggesting that you’re doing that, Dow. Just that the group on here seems to lose sight of the hugely varying circumstances we all have, which affects what we can realise and how fast.
In my case, I’m actually rather a perfectionist. My model-making is of the rivet-counter type – projects that take months and years to realise – but I am also aware that that is not all there is to it. I am on film and in print for arguing the pro-rivet counter case, but also pointing out that you need not to lose sight of the big picture of what you’re trying to create, otherwise the result is just obsessively clinical. Perhaps not surprisingly, I got a pasting from both sides for saying it. I seem to make a habit of it!
Rivets are necessary when they can be seen - they add to the overall impression – but there are also some rivets that cannot be seen on a model in its larger setting, and therefore add little. The addition of those is purely an intellectual exercise for those who enjoy such things. People who do enjoy that also seem to have a habit of shouting at those who don’t.
Same with the music – I want to do the right thing by the music, within the resources and constraints I operate within. It doesn’t seem very fair to criticise someone for being limited in that respect.
As for sessions, the whole point is, I *don’t* get that reception when I play, in fact quite the opposite, so I must be doing something right – at least within my own context. And if I did get the response you describe, I would be up and out of there pronto – I would not wish to play with such people. I’m quite able to judge if I’m out of my depth – hence my caution about playing at Bells.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Pretty much everyone on this thread does things other than music. Dow has finished a PhD within the last few years, I'm working on one and doing way too many other things, Michael has a day job and a family, etc. The music can fit into other aspects of your life.
I am in no position to say that if you're not brilliant, you should give up. Except to myself, which I threaten to do on a fairly regular basis.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh. I figured that's what it was. That's sad :( I plan on marrying a musician(or some other type of creative artist) so i won't have that problem. But hopefully i could marry a Woman that loves music whether she's a musicians or not. That would be a blessing. There are some married couples that come out for our local session sometimes. I think it's awesome that a husband and wife can come together and play music. It's truly a beautiful thing.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
When I'm not working, our flat is like a music rehearsal studio these days - me in the back room on the fiddle/mando/zouk/goat and her in the front on her GHB chanter, soon to be the real thing. Then band practice every Tuesday evening, and CD's almost all the time in between. Just count our lucky stars we have tolerant neighbours.
But it's still too short a time.
(and in case anyone's wondering, the bottom just fell out of my timetable for a few weeks, now that the exam season's begun )
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, now you're contradicting yourself. In your post further up, you said:
"As I've said many times before, I am neither a trained nor in many ways experienced musician, I'm a long-standing dabbler - and perhaps that is the problem."
Then, when I used your own term "dabbler", you threw your hands up in horror, saying:
"...But that doesn’t reduce me to a dabbler. I want to be as good as my circumstances will permit – if not better!"
Just exactly which do you consider yourself to be? Dabbler or non-dabbler? Either way it's ok, but please be clear.
And before anyone goes into the whole "looking down on people" bullsh*t, people who are serious listeners and not dabblers CAN BE BEGINNERS. It's all about your approach to the music and willingness to learn. All I'm saying is, if you're a dabbler, don't come and spoil sessions frequented by non-dabblers in the presumption that you have a right to have fun wherever. They've put the hard yards in and enjoyed the progress they've made through close listening and honing of technique and general musicianship. They have a right to explore the music in a session with like-minded people - not with you, the dabbler. A non-dabbling beginner, on the other hand, is different. So long as that beginner has the right attitude they will be welcomed into most sessions and given playing time. Experienced players will even slow down a notch or two for them if they sense that the beginner is willing to listen and learn.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Weejie, surprisingly I know, but I'm not a total idiot. I know that the differences between Irish style and West Highland style are quite substantial, but my point was those substantial differences are made up of an aggregate of much smaller techniques, phrasing, and approaches. As Ian seemed to like Angus Grant's playing, I was commenting that if one wanted to figure out how he does what he does, one would have to apply the same close listening skills to him that Michael was telling Ian he should apply to Liz Carroll. "
In other words, your previous statement was poorly phrased.
On the premise that you are now proposing, the difference between the playing of Angus Grant and Nigel Kennedy is an aggregate of 'smaller techniques'.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I am not a dabbler - or at least I do not consider myself to be. But then, one of the things this thread may be clarifying is that there is no one 'take' or benchmark for what we all think we are doing. Maybe the prevalent black-or-white outlook on that is responsible for a large amount of the discord on this forum.
What's more, the limitations of the inet make it nigh on impossible to clarify. For example, take Emily's point about time, my response is that no one can know other people's situation in this respect, so what's the point in commenting?: (For the record, Emily, the issue is how much of one's time is one's own. If a student asks why I haven't marked their work, the answer "because I was at a session" rightly carries no weight). I if go into necessary detail about why my time is limited, I will immediately lay myself open to cries of 'whingeing teacher', feeling sorry for himself etc.
I made the comment about dabbling at a point when, to be honest, I was feeling pretty beaten down by all this, and beginning to wonder whether I even knew myself any more.
I take most things I do seriously (too seriously, some would say); I ama ware of my shortcomings and am gradually doing what I can to address them - but clearly by the parameters of this group I am nothing but a dabbler.
You can compound the confusion by the fact that, working in a vacuum, you have nothing to benchmark yourself against. On the one hand, by only ever comparing myself to recordings of the pro's I have always felt inadequate about my ability, whereas now I'm actually getting out and playing, the response has been pretty different. What's right? Depends what you measure against.
I think the one salient point from this is the realisation for all of us that the contexts in which we are working are by no means the same. I made that point not long after I joined, but was left then with the feeling that no one really took it on board.
As for playing in sessions, well I am not going to argue the point about the frustrations of less experienced players, but from what you say, the ways they are dealt with are pretty unwholesome. And yes, I have encountered the problem myself, so I know it's not an easy one.
But who is to say what the 'right' attitude is? I come right back (yet) again to the prevalent assumption that some people have god-given right of judgement on these matters. And where people set out the options in such terms, my natural instinct is to be sceptical.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think this thread has run its course.
Weejie, I know exactly where you can shove my admittedly sloppy phrasing that was intended to make a point to someone who (a) wasn't you and (b) doesn't have your expertise on traditional music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't mean to sound so cranky (except at Weejie. It does my head in when people go out of their way to just be a tool for the sake of it), but this entire thread reminds me of the zillions of people I've met in the horse world who will complain until the cows come home about how badly behaved their horse is. When you point out that the problems come from their entire approach to and understanding of horses, they do an about-face and say, "Oh, oh, he's fine and he's getting better and I don't have serious trouble with him."
Then stop complaining about your freakin' badly-mannered horse!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
" think this thread has run its course.
Weejie, I know exactly where you can shove my admittedly sloppy phrasing that was intended to make a point to someone who (a) wasn't you and (b) doesn't have your expertise on traditional music. "
I thionk you've missed the point entirely.
Where do you draw the line in "listening carefully"?
The difference in the palying of Angus Grant and Liz Carroll, like the difference between Angus Grant and Nigel Kennedy is not just one of 'subtlety' but a difference of genre. OK, there might be a similarity in two genres that play jigs and reels etc, which may put an Irish fiddler closer to a West Highland Scottish fiddler than a classical violinist, but in all cases the difference is much more than subtle - and because of that, I pointed out that there was a vast difference. If you don't consider the difference to be more than subtle, then, indeed, it is you who is not listening and whatever point you were trying to make is lost as a result.
So, perhaps you are being closer to an implement than I am. Your reaction is as immature as those in a huff because someone questions the goddess.
Liking and appreciating are two different things. You can appreciate all the subtlety and technical ability of a player - nay even understand what that player is getting at, but whether that player is playing in a style that hits an emotive spot is another thing altogether. They can go together but they don't necessarily go together. Ian might have problems when listening to Liz Carroll due to not understanding her playing (though he does seem to appreciate it) but even if he did 'understand' all the subtle nuances (even on aggregate), it doesn't mean that he is going to find it emotionally appealing. The analogy with rearing horses is not really valid. Such is music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>I am in no position to say that if you're not brilliant, you should give up. Except to myself, which I threaten to do on a fairly regular basis
Well then, you know how I feel. Too easy to assume everyone else on here plays like a pro. You sound O.K. to me: not exactly Liam O'Flynn - but who does, apart from Liam O'Flynn?
Here's a thought, out of the blue. There's probably only one in a million chance of it happening; but it's almost guaranteed. Stop playing mandolin for 2-3 months. Turn your attention to fiddle. 1st day let your wife be a fiddle widow. (You can make up for it later). 2nd day play the fiddle for brief periods of time. 1st week take plenty of breathers. Play for longer periods of time each day or so. After 3 months you won't be great, but you will have put your musical attention on the fiddle.
In the long run I doubt your mandolin playing will have suffered.
However, your new band make think they are the widows. Let them know it's nothing permanent.
On the 1st day play fiddle nonstop. Best if you have the music room to yourself, no distraction, & play everything you have in your head. This is just a release. A kind of primal scream. The real playing (& work) begins once you've detoxed.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Maybe, just maybe, we are nearing closure.
1. Understanding is not the same as appreciating.
2. Appreciating is not the same as Liking.
3. The advice "just listen" presupposes that by doing so, everyone will hear the same thing.
4. ‘Hearing’ those things presupposes that by doing so you will like what you hear.
5. Liking what you hear presupposes that you have the knowledge/expertise to reproduce it.
None of it is certain: music is not that deterministic. My argument in a nutshell.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ben, you’re closer to part of the truth than you know.
I already am playing much more fiddle than mandolin right now: three to four hours last Saturday. It’s driving my wife to distraction I can’t do more without getting backache, but the stamina is growing rapidly.
I’ve now been going like that for 10 weeks. I’m not great by any stretch of the imagination, but I sense that it is coming. At least I know what I’m trying to sound like, and the LH finger strength is already there. The OAIM lessons have given me the rudiments of technique that I just didn’t know before.
Excellent point about release. I have been playing far too fast just for the sheer hell of it, to push myself nearly to breaking point. I’ve got that out of the system and have now started working on things at a sensible pace. I can make some things sound quite reasonable, though I’m still only at the foot of the mountain, just quite a lot quicker than I was expecting.
But I can’t let the band go. It’s taken too long to get this far, and it’s already going to take at least the rest of the year to have anything respectable together.
I’ve decided to put my neck on the line. I’ve put three samples on YouTube, but they will only be there until Friday – I don’t want the whole world watching! These are not rehearsed in any way – I just pressed the red button.
Ignore the terrible PC recording quality. Ignore all the beginners’ problems – very poor tone, incomplete bow control, imprecise finger positions, slow speed (but probably still not as slow as I should have been going). I know all that and will work on it over time. Yesterday when I made them, I was experimenting with very short bowing. Listening to the resultant poor quality, I now know a little more about the tonal price you pay for that, and today I tried something different.
Just remember that until the end of February I had never played a fiddle. Ask yourself whether there is a decent, idiomatic player in the making, somewhere in there – and whether it is the work of someone who really has neither ear nor care for this music. There’s no need to make public comments if you don’t want, and I would rather you didn’t if they are rude. Not that I will be bothered – it’s an academic point I’m trying to make.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Let me know when you're ready to set the other instruments aside for a solid two months. But, if you're having backaches, you've started out wrong. There are 2 types of fiddlers' ~ those who are constantly in pain vs. those who sussed out how to play fiddle comfortably. You can usually see the difference. Go back to the basics.
"But I can’t let the band go." You don't need to. As I said, let them know it isn't permanent. If they love you they'll understand .
But, the choice is entirely in your hands.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And it's getting progressively less as I adapt. The mandolin is a much harder instrument to play. There's just less to know. It also seems to encourage tension, whereas, of course, the fiddle needs the opposite. Took a while even to begin to get hat sorted.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of course the just listen thing is a red herring.;
There is no such thing. If you are interested in how the brain and its ear work read Daniel Levitins book; this is your brain on music'. Very informative. [ Its a shame Danny is not here as he is our resident neuroscientist. Hard luck Danny! ]
If you want to Improve on fiddle , play your scales, double stops arpeggios etc etc simple GDA scales along with a drone forget about tunes on the fiddle.
Look at Jerone , playing well after 6 month.. how did he achieve that... a year of violin lessons perhaps.. hey Fiddle learner, what did you get taught in that year ?............
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
10 weeks?!... well done Ian. I like your triplets in the D Landlady .. How about making those stand out a bit more... A lot better than I sounded after a few years IMO ! sigh...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, perhaps you should post a new discussion for the YouTubes. I'll leave it to fiddlers (& more experienced players) to comment in depth.
My initial impression is rather poor phrasing on "Drunken Landlady" & "Rose in Heather". Although, on the latter, it sounds as if you loosened up as you were more into the tune. Horse Keane's needs a stronger hornpipe rhythm, it's mechanical. Cooley's sounds like the one you have best in your head. You seemed most comfortable of all the tunes.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ben, I don't think it warrants a new thread. I'm not after plaudits or anything - though constructive criticism is never unwelcome here. A lot of any credit should go to Majella Bartley's lessons.
Just to show I'm not afraid to put my money where my mouth is.
piobagusfidil, I have been corresponding with Mr. Stock on a regular basis. He wants a comprehensive critique. Beg pardon if I have somehow offended you.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Sounds good for 10 weeks, Ian. You have more balls than me. I wouldn't put a recording of myself within 10 miles of the Yella Board (though I have been known to send them to people via private email ).
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Putting stuff up is dangerous, that is for sure. On the recently deleted thread of infamy, somebody searched out a picture and made fun of Jon Kiparsky's appearance and pet cat. It makes you wonder.
But I really wish there were more recordings up by members. It would be instructive as to which members know what they are talking about, and which ones are talking out of their lower digestive tract.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes, that would be why I'd never put anything up. I like the possibility that people are deluded enough to believe, from my writing, that I don't actually suck. Why on earth would I divest them of that delusion?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you're going to love this ... but thinking about "Drunken Landlady" had me wondering how Liz Carroll might play the tune. Well, I cannot find anywhere that she has recorded the tune. Here's a couple of others I did find;
practice chanter ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgqCAOLby50
Interesting that he says here's a hornpipe, I don't play it as a hornpipe, though listening to your recording (Ian) I did get a hint of hornpipe rhythm.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, TSS, you don't go around breezily dispensing musical dictates as though they were the absolute word of the ITM messiah, so I doubt you'd be judged that harshly. Plus I've heard you have some skill at the Irish octopus.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
All this talk of excluding 'dabblers' can go too far. One of the great things about sessions is that they are an opportunity for ordinary people to enjoy making music together, a rare commodity these days when so many people simply consume music passively by listening. Set the bar too high, and the session turns into an event only for the elite few, which destroys one of the big reasons that it is so special. On the other hand, set the bar too low, and no one has fun, as the music becomes plodding and painful.
As with so many things in life, somewhere in the middle of these two extremes is a happy medium where the music is good, and everyone enjoys the good time.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The single thing that jumps out at me about this thread is when Ian says the micro-dynamics are like counting rivets, whereas he prefers the macro-dynamics.
Then you'll be missing much of how this music is played by all the best practitioners. It's all about the micro. Dynamics, timing, twiddly bits. The smaller details you learn to hear, the more there is to appreciate. If that doesn't float your boat, then you might be better off in another genre.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, I don't want to go round it all yet again. I didn't say they aren't important. I just said that IMO there's no great benefit in concentrating on them at the expense of the bigger picture any more than there is the other way round.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will makes a good point. Not to say I can manage them myself, but it is in the nuances and subtle bits of this music that I find the beauty. Otherwise it is just Riverdance or Celtic Woman or midi tunes as far as I'm concerned.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, what is 'the bigger picture'?
If you strip away all embellishment, phrasing and the rest of it all you have left is a one dimensional outline that people can recognise as a representation of sorts of Irish music but which in fact an empty shell that is in fact lacking everything that gives Irish music it's content, soul or whatever you want to call it. You have nothing, in other words.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To me it seems the difference between a mannequin and a real person. One is the representation, but let us not forget it is in the real person it is the quirks, the flaws and the thousand little individual nuances that we find love.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Dow, I am not a dabbler - or at least I do not consider myself to be."
Thanks for clarifying that. Ignore my advice about sessions then and turn your attention to what Will Harmon put so succinctly above. It's worth reiterating: "It's all about the micro. Dynamics, timing, twiddly bits. The smaller details you learn to hear, the more there is to appreciate. If that doesn't float your boat, then you might be better off in another genre".
Ian: "I am aware of my shortcomings and am gradually doing what I can to address them - but clearly by the parameters of this group I am nothing but a dabbler".
Ian, that's unfair. I only used the word "dabbler" because you used it yourself in reference to yourself.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I wasn't meaning to be unfair. Some people on here clearly think that.
But I don’t disagree with Will. As seen in our band practice yesterday, our new fiddler really has a command of the detail, and he’s put wings on us. But my initial comment about LC was that she seemed to have failed to connect to her audience. All the other contributory factors aside, at the end of the day, she failed to stop them dead in their tracks, despite being one of the best individual players that there is. Yet I have seen audiences go wild over people far less accomplished, simply because the players matched the music to the audience.
At the risk of repeating myself, to some extent LC fails (so far) with me for the same reason. Whereas I can understand the detail, and I do love the subtleties of this music, for me they are only fully effective when deployed as part of an engaging interpretation of the tunes in that bigger sense. They are not enough on their own. LC *seems* to be less interested in that, which is why I feel that her music is quite ‘samey’. Some of that is me, some of it her. I’m sure it doesn’t cost her sleep
I quite accept that that will be of less importance to people who are predominantly session players; I just don’t accept that it is *absolutely* wrong in musical terms. It’s a matter of emphasis. Personally, I find sessions less fulfilling than band rehearsals, the main reason being the opportunity to experiment with arranging; who’s to say that’s wrong either? In a way, the details are a ‘given’ in that situation, but even there it depends on the instruments in use and the tastes of the players. The proof of the pudding is that it is quite possible to derive deep fulfilment from the music in that and other ways, even if not everyone shares it.
I’m certainly excusing poor playing, but don’t forget we’re all specialists here, even me. What we get out of the music is not what everyone hears. Those of my friends and relatives who hear me labour under the deception that I’m a pretty good player. They don’t know why they are deceived – they have no knowledge of the music other than through me, and nothing specific to benchmark me against. But so far as they are concerned they are hearing something they like, and are even impressed by.
I have now circulated my LC CD round several of my colleagues. Without exception, they all decided her music ranged from 'uninteresting' to 'really boring' . Who’s to say they are ABSOLUTELY wrong? And they’re not all musical numpties either.
Much of the advice has been really helpful, but its failure to see/accept the other side of the coin is why I won’t roll over on this. What's more, even though it is calledThe Session, a wider acceptance of this diversity might make this group all the greater.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Incidentally, I'm still persevering with LC, but I can't say that better familiarity has yet shhofted my view greatly. IMHO, interesting detail, but not an interesting listening experience. I wouldn't want to play like that either.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This thread has shown clearly that there are some things which people just have to discover by themselves. You can't always shortcut people's learning by pointing out what is a essentially a simple step they can take. It really has to come from them. In fact, with some people, making any observations can be detrimental and it can make them dig their heels in deeper in the absolute conviction that their instincts are right. After reading this thread, I want to make efforts on my own part in the future never to be like that.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, it's not a matter of digging heels in for its own sake. It's just that much of the opinion goes against general musical and wider common sense. Which is still not to disagree with the specifics of the music, nor to say that the discussion hasn't made me re-think some pretty big things - but ITM is not a little bubble entirely divorced from the wider human experience.
As for learning, there broadly are two ways of doing it, as I'm sure you're aware: inductive and deductive. The advice on here has largely focused on the latter; some people work better with the former.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're right, you can take the horse to water and all that but in fairness this discussion is clearly a continuation in Ian's quest of finding out what, in his own words, he is missing.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
p.s. boy are you right about those other aspects of the learning curve. I struggle with it daily, don't forget. But I also know that initial rejection of an unfamilair notion is not infrequently just the first step to assimilating it.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I know enough about inductive and deductive learning being a teacher myself. It explains why Michael was so reluctant to give you specific examples of what to listen for in LC's playing. I'm sure he'd much rather you got it for yourself. But then he was pressured to give specific examples. Be serious now - how much individual attention and how many private e-mails would it take for Michael to actually ELICIT from you what particular aspects of the music you need to pay close attention to? It just wouldn't work. That sort of stuff only works in the classroom when you can get direct connections and instant feedback as well as pairwork and groupwork.
You as a teacher should recognise the signals people give off when they're trying sensitively to highlight a gap in a learner's knowledge and to push them through their Zone of Proximal Development. Now it's over to you. Enjoy the journey
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves."
That's so way off the mark. So many assumptions there...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"It's just that much of the opinion goes against general musical and wider common sense."
*Who's* musical and common sense? So far, Ian, most of the responses you have gotten on this thread have been from experienced players, many of whom I have heard play in "meatspace" and know they're bloody good. Irish trad is a specialized genre and it all sounds "samey" to your average listener who has no great interest in it, even if they're a music major at Julliard. Most music which your average non-tradhead listens to, whether it's classical, rock'n'roll, whatever, seems primarily structured around macro-dynamics and arrangements, which, as many posters in this thread have oft-repeated, trad is not. My feeling is that the invention of trad bands was a measure of bringing trad music to this audience, making it something more accessible and comprehensible, which is great but even people who play in bands would acknowledge that's not where the heart of the music is.
My main point with this is that a poll of your colleagues, who presumably have no great familiarity with and passion for Irish music, isn't very convincing data. Your "poll" of people on this website, who do understand this music, has generated very different results. But you keep insisting that the opinions expressed here, challenging your premises which you doggedly keep arguing, go against "general musical and common sense." Then you look for reasons behind this disparity, which don't entail altering your fundamental premise, such as dismissing aforesaid advice as "session players" while you "prefer bands." Lots of people who play in sessions also play in bands. The majority of good players who post here have probably been in one at some point or another.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I assumed you teach. Yes, I understand your points.
I had also read the deeper motives; they're not unwelcome.
Of course that last commment makes assumptions and generalisations, but this group nonetheless exhibits traits common with other similar groups I have known. One is the sense of self-reinforcement of a common consciousness. Another is the way they react to people who have the temerity to differ, and not just me.
I too have been misjudged here. I am not making any special claims whatsoever for those clips, but I hope they demonstrate that I at least have *some* awareness of what this music is all about - and the effect that changing instruments is already having.
Truth is rarely one-sided, and at least I'm prepared to acknowledge my limits.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"the way they react to people who have the temerity to differ"
I'm sorry you see it like that. I'm also sorry that you can't see why you aren't appreciating the brilliance in Liz Carroll's playing. I hope you do see it eventually. When you do, let us know, eh?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So am I Dow, it's not what I was hoping to find here. I'm also sorry that people can't see that the difference of opinion here is nowhere near as wide as you all seem to think.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Seems to me that you asked for advice (How can I improve my playing) and you just don't like the answers (focus on the micro-dynamics, the small variations in timing and phrasing), because you're not interested in that aspect of it.
The good news is that your fiddle playing is coming along so even if you claim you're not interested in that stuff, you must be subconsciously picking it up to some degree. Although Like Will said, it still mystifies me how someone could not be interested in that stuff and be interested in Irish music. Oh well.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, specialised groups of all sorts nearly always vanish up their own backsides talking to themselves about themselves as though the rest of the world didn't exist. You should see what it is like in professional circles - ANY profession, from what I hear. And you should see how baffled parents look when teachers start spouting teacher-speak at them.
Groups of all sorts tend to look inwards on their own focus, talk to other people who share the same world-view and forget that the rest of the world really doesn't share their inevitably distorted perspective. 'Fraid I seem to be one of them.
That is not a back-handed swipe at this group, but if you all can't see it that may be part of the problem. It's also true of (nearly) all such groups that I've ever seen - the price of specialisation. It's certainly true of model-making groups. But it doesn't give them a monopoly of the truth, even though they often think it does.
It's also why those bankers don't 'get' why the rest of the world hates them: they exist in their own little self-justifying world where everyone is just like them. They have lost all sight of the greater perspective on what they have done and how other people see it.
They also don't like it when someone pricks their awareness of it, but they usually react by dreaming up all kinds of self-justifying reasons why they should continue with their present behaviour. Yes, those bonuses are still being paid, we are still being told that they are 'necessary'. And yes I am aware that some will think that is exactly what I am doing myself.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware this was actually the Liz Carroll Fan Club I had joined, but I'm not going to say I like her music if I don't. Even that won't necessarily stop me listening and learning from it it just won't move me the way some music does. But if that means I need to leave, then please boot me. If I equally disliked all other good players, then you might have more of a point, but that just isn't so.
Look, at the end of the day, this is all about ENJOYING music. For some of us, it's about more than that. Me included - up to a point. I KNOW that I get deep fulfilment from this music, doing it just the way I do - not that it stops me from wanting to do better, and some of that involves what you have all been saying.
But it is just not possible to gainsay what is for me, a self-evident truth, that only *I* know what works for me.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thanks Emily, but I'm clearly still not getting through.
One last attempt for old time's sake; I have work to do. I have *no problem* with the answers, and I am working on the advice. Yes, I got frustrated when I couldn't hear so well what you were on about - but the main cure to that has been the OAIM lessons, not anyone telling me to "just listen".
I just don't think these answers here are any more complete in themselves than what seems to have become characterised as my opposing view.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hmmm, the softly softly approach clearly isn't working. Ian, if you don't get on board with the Liz Carroll thing soon then we'll have to hand the matter over to the heavy mob. They will install a massive sound system outside your flat and play Tommy Peoples tracks at you night and day.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Better yet -- who has some old Dinny Delaney tapes?
No one is saying you *should* like Liz Carroll, unless you're totally missing the point of the last few hundred posts. We've moved on from Liz Carroll and what we've been arguing is, as far as I know, the importance -- or not -- of close, active listening in your own development as a trad musician. To whoever. To Liz, Angus Grant, Martin Hayes, anyone.
And are you really comparing thesession.org to the guys who caused the financial meltdown? Really?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, it looks like twice, you have asked for peoples opinions about something that they know nothing about. First your Wife, then your college friend. You know very well that in music, that is not the way to find out what's good and what's not. To learn what good music is, is to see what stands the test of time. This means in our own life as well. --I'll make a confession. When i first came to this website, i wasn't completely turned on by the musical sources that were given to me. But i did realize that my "pre-concieved notions" may have been wrong so i kept listening. When i listened through the Kevin Burke cd the first time through, i DID NOT LIKE IT. Ok, maybe a little, but not very much. But now aftter listening to it for a couple months, i absolutely love it. --This isn't the first time this happened with an unfamiliar genre of music. And just because your Wife and college friends don't like it, does not mean that you wont learn how to. --Also you`re on dangerous ground implying that you`re right and everyone else is wrong. You say that we`re not looking at your opinions when from this side it looks like you`re ignoring everyone elses opinions, and facts to back them up.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Also, what message board have you been reading where it's an insular group who all agree with each other and have the same narrow perspective? I'm pretty sure it hasn't been this one.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's getting a bit like advocating reading Ulysses without getting any of the references to the classic, literature and history. It's a damn good story innit?
I'm not missing the point. Tommy Peoples wouldn't be too bad, but I'd prefer Kevin Burke. Incidentally, I also prefer Kathryn Nicoll's playing (admittedly only based on a few small clips) to Angus Grant, at least as observed live with the Shoogles.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It says that ian has been in the music game for about 30 years. That's a long time(to me anyway lol). How could someone that has been into an artistic lifestyle for so long not understand the signifcance of Nuance and Subtlety? I mean, yes the big picture is beautiful. But would it be as beautiful without all of the fine lines? The variations in color? The attention to detail set by the Artist?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian-I don't think you should force yourself to listen to LC. My goodness music shouldn't be such a chore! Set her aside for now. Come back to it later and you may find that you really enjoy her music in a year or so. Besides that, I'm having a hard time keeping up with what's going on in this thread!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hey wait a minute! Ian! If noone else has said this, i will, but i'm sure someone else has! The Nuances and Subtleties are important because(trumpet sounds*) They make the Big Picture Pop! They bring it to LIFE! The darker colors make the lighter colors BRIGHTER! The fine lines make the fluffy lines look fluffier! The different shades of blue make the color blue an interesting color! Opposite colors make each other stand out*purple, yellow**red, green* All the tinting and shading make for variation in depth which makes causes for realism! Every little bow stroke, every little change in color, every little line makes the picture what it is! A Work of True Art! Ya'll done got me excited!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thinking about it further, I would have loved to have been one of your students, Ian.
"Excuse me, sir, I don't understand why I failed this exam. I believe my answers are as equally valid as your so-called 'correct' ones. The fact that you disagree with me suggests that you're being willfully blind to alternative points of view, because teachers are such an insular, inward-looking group who only care about or are cognizant of their own perspective."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I used to Listen to Liz, but then I was turned on to Tommy Potts, Bobby Casey, Paddy Canny, Martin Byrnes, Jimmy Powers. and many many more So I suggest these folk might be a bit more your cup of tea Ian? and if you others are not familiar with these players check them out !
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't see what the big deal is. If you don't like someone's music, that's your preference. You don't even need to say why - maybe you haven't pinned it down yet.
When I don't like a person, for example, I don't feel the need to externalise it, or ask for other's approval, even if they're very popular. If I don't like them, it may be just a gut instinct and that's that. The same applies to music.
As for Lake Effect, I have that CD. Not one I would play very often; however, if Liz was playing locally, I would be first in the queue to hear her play. She's wonderful live.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily,
quick-ish answer to your last point.
A lot of resistance to education is actually rooted in unnecessary coercion.
The first thing I do as a teacher, mostly but not exclusively with the older ones, is to create a culture of what you might call 'shared enquiry'. It can be a high risk strategy, but it suits my subjects, and you will have to take my word for it that (eventually) the students respond.
From the teacher's point of view, it invoves the admission that s/he does not always know 'right'. I have no problem saying to my students, "I don't know the answer to that, let's find out" Or with the older ones, "Let's consider the options". Then it is a matter of evaluating the evidence - that's where the teacherly guidance comes in. You'll have to believe me, in the long run, it works.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Em
Not really - just the first 20 or so posts and the last few; it all seemed to be getting a bit nit-picking at one stage.
Not that this is unusual; seems to me that some discussions are ostensibly excuses for people to flex their intellectual(?) muscles when all they end up doing is skewing the debate in a direction at odds with the original question.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There's a lot to discover in Liz Carroll's playing; maybe for some people it's too much of an effort to try and not worth it in the end.
For example, I struggle to hear the "music" in Derek Bailey's playing. It's just not for me. Great technique, undoubtedly, and an incredibly personal style. But for everyone who actually "gets it" I'm sure there are as many who profess to and don't. I just don't see the point of spending your life hoping something grows on you.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I know how to listen I just open my ears .
For an opinion I open my brain .
As for Liz Carrol I met her in a session once great player nice personality , I found her even better in the session than on her albums
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Some thoughts about recent points, said more in sorrow than anger:
1) I asked non-specialists their thoughts deliberately. They are not all music-ignoramuses, though. An alternative interpretation of the responses might be that such people retain a more balanced overview than those of us for whom ITM is of disproportionate importance. I include myself in that.
2) The common sense I refer to is not irrelevant, but largely drawn from my own experiences of trad around me over the years, isolated though I grant they have been until now.
3) The consensus on the MB is not as one-sided as is being made out. You are presumably not hearing the small but steady trickle of off-list back-voices that I am. I am not about to violate anyone’s anonymity by being more specific, but the fact that they don’t want to speak in public may be significant. And I am not in the habit of self-deceit by fabricating such claims.
4) It took one of those back-voices to pull into focus what my real misgivings are here. So I won’t take all the credit for this, but you may remember certain allusions I made a long time ago.
I could no more change genre than I could live on Mars. I was deeply drawn to this music in my youth, and nothing else will do. I can’t quite rationalise why on an emotional level, only an intellectual one. But it is the emotional side that is always my final arbiter, a form of love. And what really concerns me here is what is happening to this Music, if the voices on this list are to be believed.
I like it precisely because it is the music of ordinary people, many of whom were only ordinarily-skilled. I like it because it is friendly, and welcoming and unpretentious, and not in itself over-intellectualised. I like it in the modern sense because of the lack of affectation that means the trad equivalent of Michael Jackson is prepared to kip unpretentiously with one of my band mates when in the area, with not the slightest grandness to be seen.
I don’t see people sneered at because of their lack of ability; yes they can be frustrating, but a pub is a democratic place and unless there is a formal contract, just who is to say who has hegemony? I recently witnessed one poor old guy having his instrument put in tune by someone who could – and then we all carried on; that is as it should be.
I don’t see/hear about people ignored because they don’t meet muster, or where you feel you can’t play in a certain pub in case you’re not good enough or in case you say or do the wrong thing. I don’t see people unprepared to showcase their music for fear it will be ridiculed. (Just Why DON’T we see more examples of people’s work? It’s easily done, and actions speak louder than words. Yes, there are some honourable examples to that).
This music should not be placed on a pedestal where it becomes dimishingly accessible to ordinary people. There should not be hero-worship and a competitive hierarchy based on adherence to rules imposed by a self-appointed elite. People should be free to practice and enjoy this music in whatever way, at whatever standard that they can, without fear of judgement; that is the essence of folk music. Historically, it is a music that took second place to dancing, not the platform for egotistical, competition to see who knows best at the expense of the rest, of one-upmanship by those who think they are one up. My guess is that a lot of the old guys didn’t see it like that either.
When it comes to changing genre, maybe it is not *me* that needs to do that. If you really want all that you say you stand for, shift to Classical – that’s (regrettably) where you will find all the sniffy hierarchies you want, the cliques, the rarefied atmosphere, the intellectualisation, the veneration of genius, the worship of vanishingly small nuances by a tiny minority. And to be fair, some people who just get on with it.
Outwith this list, I have *never* heard a discussion about all of these niceties; the most common observation is “Blo*dy brilliant tune!” Three of the guys in the band are experienced, accomplished performers, one notably so, but there is not a drop of superiority in them; they are happy modestly to muck in with the rest. That, too, is as it should be.
If your trad world consists of all the things your messages have conveyed to me, then thanks, I’m glad I live in the trad outback, where we just get on with enjoying a good tune. I don’t want in on all that. You are trying to turn it into a quasi-classical discipline, which is exactly what I *don’t* want it to be. And the more you insist you are absolutely, unquestionably right (astonishing for such educated people who ought to understand all about Doubt – or – um - perhaps not...), the less convincing the whole edifice becomes. I’m not suggesting that your intentions are malicious, and I thank you for your help – but just stand back and look at the whole musical world you inhabit – hierarchies, back-biting, exclusion, elitism, name-calling. I’m not sure even all of you really like either, if the truth were told. Just maybe it takes an outsider to see all from all of the stuff you are saying without even *mentioning* Music. THAT’S why I’m not convinced.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, if we do get a chance to have a tune while you're in Scotland (and not in Sandy Bells, cause I won't play there), you will realize that if even a sentence of the above post was directed at me or the people I enjoy playing tunes with, then you're being ridiculous.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I truly must be missing something. I'm reading everything, & I can certain understand where the truth is (& imho isn't) in what you're saying, Ian. But you're clearly frustrated & the criticisms aren't hitting the target. It's scattershot.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I feel I have to elaborate a bit on my previous post, I have had the dinner I was cooking while I quickly got that one in.
Ian, you are expressing a few notions about irish music there that are so way off the mark that it's hard to even begin to respond.
First get away from the ridiculous notion that this is music of ordinary people and therefore it should be simple. I can tell you from experience that the ordinary people I have experienced in Clare have among them the closest and sophisticated listeners I have ever come across. Some of the people playing highly complex and detailed music I have come across were exactly these 'ordinary people' uneducated maybe in many ways but highly intelligent and articulate people who knew their music inside and out.
Playing with these people chat between tunes often related to such and such player who had this or that turn or twist in a particular tune. And the extend of the detailed knowledge of a wide array of players these men (they were mostly men, a few women had it too though) carried around never failed to amaze me.
It isn't about putting music on a pedestal, or maybe it is. And so what. Ordinary as the people I am talking about were (and are) they were mad about music and it filled their lives, raised their hearts on dark days. Why not put it on a pedestal?
This music is like other arts the really dedicated practitioners know what it is about, they are the musical equivalent of writers of literature. Their music is full of references to other musicians, a little deliberate quote from so and so, in homage, or delighting in a beautiful turn of phrase or a particularly eloquent statement.
Ordinary people yes. Simple people, certainly not.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, what you call elitism, I think of as hard-won insider knowledge gained by impassioned experience.
And the only unfriendly reviews of someone else's playing I've ever seen on this board were aimed at self-proclaimed experts whose videos showed them to be far, far less capable than they wanted us to believe (and over ten years here, I can think of only a handful of these instances--I can name names if you want, so you can compare to those off-list murmurs you're hearing).
In fact, the mustard board is nearly always encouraging of other musicians. Look at the thread congratulating Patrick Murray's fleadh results, Jerone's learning curve, and all the kudos to Jim (FIDDLE4) for his many videos on YouTube. I see this as the norm on this forum.
Once again, it seems like your preconceptions are clouding the real picture, yet you seem intent on sticking to those mistaken preconceptions. Oh well.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You've very likely let the *anonymous* cat out of it's proverbial bag. If I'm right (& I'm inferring from what WH said) I wouldn't reject him entirely but I'd compare his notes against each & everyone of the contributors above before deciding on the whole picture.
Check your email, Ian
Ben
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Prof. I was not confusing 'ordinary' with 'uneducated'. Plenty of ordinary people are highly intelligent and well-educated. And from what I can perceive from a combination of visits, some friendships and more distant watching, yes, some Scots and Irish seem to have a deeper vein of empathy for the Arts (in the broadest sense) than we English seem, collectively, to have. So no surprise and certainly no criticism there.
‘Simple’ is no criticism either - even Llig mentioned the simple form of the music. That's its attraction. But all of those things are different, I think from over-intellectualising it. There's a world of difference between commenting on someone's twist on a tune and insisting that’s all there is to it.
Ben, there is no one cat – in fact a number of them. Most of them are not regular contributors on here, and no one has dished any dirt at all, just different, seemingly plausible arguments. A couple have said they don’t want to get caught in the crossfire, which is absolutely understandable to me. I think I have said enough on that already, I’m not about to blow people’s confidentiality.
All I would say is how the hell is Piggy in the Middle here meant to know who to believe? Especially when one lot talk sense so far as I can see it - and seem more prepared to concede the validity of plurality, and the other lot have the weight of numbers and possibly experience? I have neither the time nor the inclination to go digging deeper into that particular can of worms.
Emily, Ben and others, first of all, none of this is personal. Why would it be? I have never yet met you, and all of the discussions we have had have been sensible and civilised. How can I tell what your personal experiences are? Maybe one day I will find out. I sincerely hope for you that they are indeed positive, and I can see no reason why you would continue with them if they were not. But how can you tell what mine are either? I probably come across as a neurotic or ego-maniac.
Will, there may not be unfriendly reviews on here, but there is one hell of a lot of unfriendly language. If I were intent on sticking to my mistaken preconceptions, the easiest thing would have been to have walked away from all this ages ago.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think it’s safe to say Liz Carroll is an acquired taste…as is all traditional music…and Scotch whisky, for that matter, which goes to show that it’s often worth the effort to learn to like something that doesn’t immediately appeal.
Learning to like something can take a long time, however. I drank cognac for a couple of years before finding out about whisky. And years ago, when I discovered I loved Johnny Cunningham, I found out that one of Johnny’s favorite fiddlers was Martin Byrnes, so I went right out and bought a copy of Martin Byrnes’s LP. Big surprise to find I didn’t like it much---it’s very wild-sounding, especially compared with modern artists. And it wasn’t until a few years ago, when I started learning fiddle myself, that I went back to that Martin Byrnes cd and heard it in a whole new way. It’s my favorite cd in my whole music collection now.
So I think eventually, if you maintain an interest in traditional music, you’ll come upon Liz Carroll again and it will strike you differently.
What I do object to, however, is the tone and content of your original post. You said some pretty unkind things about an accomplished, well-respected, and well-loved musician, one who is living and breathing and might even end up reading what you wrote (probably not, she has better things to do, but you never know). You called her a “classical wannabe”, “self-indulgent”, “monotonous”, “her tunes don’t work as trad tunes”, etc. How insulting! Other posters have tried to point out that you’re factually wrong, and I would agree with them, but I’m more concerned with the idea that you would say that about another musician. Not nice.
Every musician has something to offer. It’s up to us to seek out the beauty in what we hear.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you are persistent. You're the last person I'd consider walking away from a row.
Personally I won't be happy until you have given up on Liz Carroll or alternatively meet her & sat down with the woman in session. One way or the other. This balancing on the precipice is too tense for my blood.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jeez Kennedy, those are tame comments on this board! They are his opinions which he is entitled to. We may not agree but he has the right to speak freely .
During free and open debate we can , if we choose, attempt to offer our views and opinions and discuss the matter. Whether he or we change our minds is a personal decision and entirely up to him/our selves. Peer pressure to make him conform to a majority opinion sucks.
I uploaded a Liz Carrol set here a few years ago after asking her. A member I greatly respect here made a number of comments that are similar to Ians. I think they are great tunes, he thinks they are not, to put it mildly ! thats life! we agree to differ.
The fact is that , as I pointed out, a lot of fiddle ornaments are not available to the mandolin... As a lot of pipe ornaments are not available to the fiddle. That doesn't make the fiddle a lesser instrument. It doesn't make fiddlers who cant hear what's going on in pipe music deaf and ignorant and worthy of pity and disdain!
Liz is a fiddler, a good fiddler, but she, Im sure, would rather not be deified , shes one of the lads when she sits in a session in Tulla or where ever and im sure she can recognise Ians opinions for what they are... opinions.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, re: unfriendly language, yes, you're doing it yourself, as kennedy points out in her post above. "Unfriendly" and critical is precisely how you started this whole thread.
You may not be intent on sticking to your preconceptions, but you certainly haven't shown any inclination to take other perspectives on board. Instead, you've argued every point and grown more antagonistic.
It might help to revisit your purpose here. Are you really out to learn why so many experienced traditional musicians hold Liz in high regard? Or are you here to defend your preconceptions?
What's funny to me is that the best responses to Ian's query have spotlit Liz's musical qualities of simplicity, openness, giving, and generosity, and then Ian calls us all a bunch of self-appointed elitists.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You might also consider that every single person who's chimed in on this thread clearly did so with the hope of giving you whatever insights they could offer. They've tried to be helpful. Your subsequent characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
piobagusfidil, I might be of the “opinion” that the big hairy wart on the end of your nose is in fact really ugly, but you won’t hear me saying anything about it, to you, or on an internet message board. Why would I say something that would hurt your feelings, that’s negative and unkind? Ian is free to have his opinions. I can certainly object to how he expresses them.
I just don’t see the point in bringing up someone’s name. For example, I love bluegrass music, but I can’t stand “newgrass” or anything that makes bluegrass sound like jazz, which has become popular over the years. I could easily name you at least a dozen musicians who, *in my opinion*, have besmirched the entire bluegrass tradition with their non-melodic improvisations and funny chords and showboat styles of playing. Ugh. Despise the stuff. But there’s no point, because they are fine musicians, and others like them, and it’s a matter of taste.
Just because you have an opinion of any kind, doesn’t mean that you should venture it on a public forum, especially if it’s negative and unkind to a living musician. That’s bad form. It’s the kind of thing that gives this website a bad reputation.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I would like to set the record straight about Liz Carroll and me
First of all, my OP was not intended in any way to be a personal criticism of her or indeed an artistic one. Just why would I presume to do that? I accept entirely that I used some words ill-advisedly and I immediately retracted them at that point. But I also assumed, apparently also ill-advisedly, that people would take them for what they were: the reactions of one listener. I assumed that by now, people ‘know’ me well enough to understand that never, at no point, do I claim to speak anything other than my own thoughts.
What I was not prepared for was what appeared from here to be a mistaken and disproportionate reaction. I still think it was. Eventually, someone was able to pin something more on why I ‘should’ change my views. To some extent it was useful, to some extent it answered nothing. I was referred to an interview with her, but in actual fact it revealed little that I thought I was going to find. I’m going to go round in yet another circle if I try to explain all that again.
Liz Carroll played in London not so long ago. Unfortunately I discovered too late and had a conflicting commitment, otherwise I would have gone. I will still go and see her if I get the chance; in the meantime I will be putting the CD in the shelf and come back to it at a later date. Once again, I’m plenty experienced enough to know how this can work. Even if I still don’t like the music, I will probably continue to listen to it occasionally for ‘educational’ purposes. But the insistence that she can do no wrong is daft, as I’m sure she would agree (how uncritical can you get?) – as is the fact that I don’t know what I’m talking about simply because I prefer different musicians and maybe look for slightly different things. As I said earlier, I hate the way forums distort simple points and make people sound extreme.
Will, yes I argue every point. Are you telling me that other people don't? It's called critical appraisal, at least I like to think so. It's the opposite of blindly accepting what you're told. In the long run it's productive. I wouldn't want you to think that all of this has gone in one are and out the other, I'm in the process of sifting and I've learned things. But a good pupil is not necessarily an uncritical one, in fact quite the opposite.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>Your subsequent characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless.
Guilty as charged to the latter; you're drawing conclusions about the former, except by *impression*. I can't argue with what your impression is, only whether it's the same as what I intended.
As I've said before, to the best of my abilities, I I try to maintain a polite and considered approach and always concede where it's seems appropriate to do so. I accept where I know I lack knowledge; 'unknown unknowns' are a problem for us all. I try to distinguish between fact and opinion. I never insult people personally, at least not intentionally. You know as well as I do how easy it is to misinterpet things online.
But I will argue stand up for my views to the extent that they seem reasonable from here - they are the result of as much thoght and cinviction as the next person's - and I'm not afraid to be unpopular as a result.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless
Actually, having just re-read that post, I think (hope) it was clear I wasn't having a go at the people here, maybe (some) of the mindset they (possibly) rub up against. I don't want to be on the receiving end of it.
I hope I'm wrong in my conclusions, but it was not me who described the social and musical hierarchies, the snide remarks, the indignation at supposed session-wreckers etc. that go on. I don't find the distinctions made between the 'right' and 'wrong' beginners particularly charitable, but then I've never witnessed them either.
But why pick up on the one negative point, rather than all of the positive points I made? I fall over myself to be consensual wherever I genuinely can, and it all normally gets overlooked. Ah well, that's life, I guess...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>Are you really out to learn why so many experienced traditional musicians hold Liz in high regard? Or are you here to defend your preconceptions?
I'm sorry for multiple posts, but too much needs a response.
Will, why did I go out and buy an LC album? Why was I even thinking about her? Why would I have gone to see her had I found out in time? (you'll have to take my word on that one). Why on earth do you think I need to defend my preconceptions on here? I have happily existed with the music without needing to do that for several decades. Why have I *not* written LC off?
And as for attacking her in the OP, well I'm flattered that you give my opinions so much importance. Far more that I do myself. My, there are some thin skins round here.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So you can either keep banging your frustrations against genuinely well-meaning people's perspectives and observations, believing in the notions you've brought to this, or you can choose to be more receptive to the insights offered here. It's up to you.
To me, you started off this thread on the wrong foot. Bit like wading into a hurling forum and criticizing some star hurler of being a wannabe footballer. Bound to rile the other members. And perhaps reveal of your lack of understanding of hurling.
So start over.
FWIW, when I listen to Liz Carroll's playing, I don't hear anything remotely "classical"--not in her technique, style, compositions, etc. Nothing classical about it. She's an Irish traditional musician, always has been, no ambitions to play anything else (unlike Martin Hayes, who has played more than his share of rock, jazz, Orange Blossom Special, and whatever pleased the bar patrons in Chicago back in the day). Yes, her tone is rich and full, but so is Oisin MacDiarmada's and today's Kevin Burke and Tommy Peoples and Brian Conway and James Kelly and.... Certainly Liz lets her fiddle sound like a fiddle, not too clean like a violin. Her playing often includes grit and chop and a bit of dirt. Mixed in with smoothness and clarity and focus. An amazing blend.
That said, there are Americanisms in Liz's original tunes, and sometimes (though not always) in her playing. She tends to emphasize the back beat a fair amount, but other Irish players do likewise. She also likes hitting two strings at once (for drones and doublestops), using the bow for percussion, and she's not beyond shuffle bowings (not unlike Cathal Hayden and Kevin Burke)--there's no disputing some influence from American fiddle music. I'm not sure why anyone would expect anything different from an American fiddler simply being herself.
In contrast to your analysis, what I hear in Liz's playing (I'll admit that I've heard her live a number of times) is remarkable playfulness with the nuances and micro-elements while never losing sight of the bigger picture and overall theme of a tune. The little stuff serves the whole tune. She's not afraid to trust her imagination and sense of the music. That may run to a more modern sensibility, especially in her own compositions, but it's also clearly, thoroughly grounded in the tradition. So when she plays Silver Spear, I hear the age-old tune, and am treated to variations (a well-placed downhill folded scale run in the B Part) and subtleties I've never heard anyone else put in there. That's the measure of a musician who has both the chops and the thousands of hours living in the tunes, building an understanding of the music by learning from her predecessors, and discovering her own musicality.
It's one thing to prefer a more consistently laid back player like Martin Hayes (but go listen to his version of The Crooked Road on Under the Moon), or a more spare player like Sean Smyth, or an insanely inventive player like John Carty. But panning Liz's playing as leaning toward classical or jazz, and being monotonous, focused on the internal structure at the expense of the whole tune--none of that makes actual sense. You might as well accuse Matt Molloy of playing too few notes or discount Tommy Peoples for sounding just like every other Irish fiddler. While we're at it, Cathal Hayden plays too slow, and Bobby Casey's repertoire was anemic....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Come to think of it, I'd suggest that you take a break from Liz and go listen to all of Bobby Casey's recordings. Then treat yourself to a dose of Paddy Fahy. Then look up Jim Egan's album of Ed Reavy tunes (http://www.jimeagan.com/linernotes.cfm - you can listen to snippets of each track). And *then* come back to Liz and see if you're view of how she fits or doesn't fit into the tradition has changed.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
But Will, in the modern game it's an oft-heard and legitimate criticism that a star hurler (Ken McGrath and Seán Óg Ó'hAilpín say) is playing like a wannabe (GAA) footballer!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you are starting to remind me of the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail, who suffered terrible wounds, but kept saying, "'Tis but a scratch", insisting he had "had worse", and after his arms were gone said, "It's just a flesh wound!", and finally after all his extremities were chopped off yelled, "Come back here you yellow bastards! I'll bite your legs off!"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Haha Al!
If you didn't see it up top ian, here it is again. Aside from Liz Caroll, my problem is you talk all this talk about "seeing the big picture", and fail to realize that the nuances and subtleties are apart of the big picture.
It says that ian has been in the music game for about 30 years. That's a long time(to me anyway lol). How could someone that has been into an artistic lifestyle for so long not understand the significance of Nuance and Subtlety? I mean, yes the big picture is beautiful. But would it be as beautiful without all of the fine lines? The variations in color? The attention to detail set by the Artist?
Hey wait a minute! Ian! If noone else has said this, i will, but i'm sure someone else has! The Nuances and Subtleties are important because(trumpet sounds*) They make the Big Picture Pop!
They bring it to LIFE! The darker colors make the lighter colors BRIGHTER! The fine lines make the fluffy lines look fluffier! The different shades of blue make the color blue an interesting color! Opposite colors make each other stand out*purple, yellow**red, green* All the tinting and shading make for variation in depth which makes causes for realism!
Every little bow stroke, every little change in color, every little line makes the picture what it is! A Work of True Art! Ya'll done got me excited!
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So translation?
Dissonance emphasizes Consonance.(Dark colors vs. Bright colors
The little articulate melodic patterns make the rich harmonic patterns sound more full.(fine lines making the fluffy lines look fluffier
With instruments that can cover more than just the absolute pitches, you have a lot more sound to work with.(variations in color. *different shades of blue)
Little changes in rhythm, dynamics, and tempo make the music sound more real and alive.(Shade and Tint)
Every little flick of the finger(every little bow stroke).
Hopefully this opens your mind up a little bit about Nuance and Subtlety. It is very important because it is a HUGE part of the BIG picture.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, this has got *really* silly, all round. I would like to wrap it up if we can. I have no reason to doubt people’s good intentions. I can only hope that the same comes through in return. But ultimately on an internet forum there is no way of knowing beyond people’s track record (if you see it), and their say-so. If there is nothing else to go on, you need to return to first principles and judge arguments on the way they are constructed. That is why I spend a lot of time trying to ensure my posts are clear and fair. Clearly I still don’t always succeed. You have to give people a hell of a lot of latitude online – and then double it.
Even now, that OP is being misinterpreted. Even when I realised that was so, and elaborated, people still carried on insisting that I was somehow personally attacking LC. It was the personal reaction of one insignificant individual to one CD, nothing more. But even in my posts of largely positive, consensual comments, people insisted on homing in on the ones they felt were negative. The frustration was with that, not the course of the discussion.
Likewise, people’s insistence that I wasn’t taking their comments on board – well, they can’t see what’s going on here, any more that I can see there. Those clips were an attempt to show that my playing is not as antithetical as people seem to think. They have already persuaded me that I needed to change instrument. That’s not insignificant!
I said repeatedly that I was not rejecting people’s advice – but no, this not the same as unconditional acceptance, which is what people seemed to want – some of it makes sense and some of it doesn’t. People here say they know what they are talking about, but they don’t exactly provide huge amounts of evidence. I am also told that some people who claim to know what they are talking about actually don’t. Well how am I to know what to believe? Especially when people construct weak arguments such as things being “factually incorrect” when they are either patently matters of interpretation/opinion or things which would require inside knowledge which they never provide. What am I meant to do? Just go on blind, unconditional faith and believe everything I am told? And what to do when it is contradictory either with other advice or with my own real-world experience? Are you really just expecting me to accept everything unquestioningly? I don’t expect that of my own students.
Your critique of LC at least provides something for me to go on – and you had the sense to couch it in terms of what *you* hear, not some kind of absolute truth. The classical bit was not only my reading of it – and anyway, big deal: I may be right, I may be not; maybe even LC herself doesn’t know. Nobody has yet provided anything where she says definitively, “I am not in the least bit influenced by classical technique” (note technique, not content), “not even subconsciously”. It’s all just supposition and debate. Bottom line, we learn that some fiddle players approach classical violinists in tonal quality. Great: suits me fine!
I have a bit of a dilemma now: would you go out and spend more cash on further recordings of someone you weren’t inclined to like? I might be more inclined to wait until I can see her live. Lake Effect is quite possibly not the whole picture (I did concede as much). In the meantime, I will put that CD on the shelf for future revisiting. And FWIW, I finally had a colleague who came back to me today saying that he liked that CD very much.
The reason I have kicked up a fuss here is simply that I see no reason to take people I have never met entirely at face value, just because they say I should - especially where no apparently ‘good’ reasoning is being employed or where it contradicts first-hand experience. That’s no insult – I wouldn’t expect you to do the same with me – in fact that is exactly how people have been dealing with what *I* had to say. Even though I try to be as plain and straightforward as possible, there’s no reason why you should take my word for it. Actions speak louder than words.
A lot of what has been said is now in the melting pot here. It’s not been rejected, it’s just being digested. What did you expect would happen?
• At present I still stick to my original critique of Lake Effect:
• lots of technical detail, some of which I may not be able to hear.
• Respect for a clearly excellent fiddle player.
• And a lack of emotional response to what she plays. You can’t order that last one!
Plus the other conclusions:
• Ornamentation, detail and interpretation clearly more important in this music than I understood, even though it is historically different in purpose from that which people now seem to be using it for
• The music needs ornamentation to be what it is: who could argue with that? Until I switched instrument I didn’t fully appreciate it because I had never really had to confront it. Work in progress on that one.
• The indispensability of micro-variation? Well, I’m prepared to consider the *possibility*, always was. But I’m not entirely convinced by this still/yet. Desirable maybe, but indispensable? It doesn’t fully add up either with my listening experience, my knowledge of my mates here or indeed a certain amount of logic regarding the subjectivity of interpretation in music. There something approaching a logical flaw to the argument that interpretive detail is essential and non-negotiable. How about the interpretation that leaves it out? Not so sure. Next step will be to ask my band-mates what their views are on this. That will help.
Someone once said that the mark of a mature mind is the ability to entertain a thought without necessarily accepting it. You can make up your own mind about the first bit in my case , but I like the idea. I try to practice it. Look at those above points: where is the rejection of all people have been saying?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
• Ornamentation, detail and interpretation clearly more important in this music than I understood, even though it is historically different in purpose from that which people now seem to be using it for
-- Citation needed. Clarification also needed: the ornamentation is different in purpose or the music? Either is wrong though. Historically the music was used for dancing... *and* for listening... Same as now.
• The indispensability of micro-variation? Well, I’m prepared to consider the *possibility*, always was. But I’m not entirely convinced by this still/yet. Desirable maybe, but indispensable? It doesn’t fully add up either with my listening experience, my knowledge of my mates here or indeed a certain amount of logic regarding the subjectivity of interpretation in music. There something approaching a logical flaw to the argument that interpretive detail is essential and non-negotiable. How about the interpretation that leaves it out? Not so sure. Next step will be to ask my band-mates what their views are on this. That will help.
-- What are you listening to? Good players or mediocre? Who are your band mates? Good players or mediocre? Variation is indeed indispensable, in the sense that it's what good players listen to from other good players. But regardless, it's the attention to this level of detail that people are arguing with you about. You kept saying that you're only interested in larger scale things (like switching from an Eminor tune to a Gmajor), but that's the level of detail that mediocre musicians pay attention to. To be more than just mediocre, you need to pay attention to a smaller scale of detail.
BTW, I'm using this definition of mediocre: "Of only moderate quality" That is, not horrible, certainly can still be fun to play with, but not really good. Not good enough to play on stage, certainly. (Like... in a band.)
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<that it's what good players listen to from other good players. >>
Well thats an opinion.. Perhaps if was framed; << good traditional Irish players>> it might be true , but its a rather sweeping statement, got any citations .
But you raise an interesting point; who do we play for? ourselves, in which case your reactions reactions are irrelevant. Do we play for other trad musicians? or perhaps mass crowds of Spanish people who have never heard trad... the list is endless.
The great majority of people on this planet wouldn't recognise all the little rivets if it hit them in the face. What on earth is the point of putting your thousand and one rivets in if no one notices them, unless you play for your self and they matter to you. Or you play for an audience that does notice them.
But hey, its not about performance is it!?! in which case why on earth should anyone give a monkeys what the audience thinks?! he plays tunes with his mates. They enjoy it, Job done.
How does one define mediocre? in relation to what?! in relation to Say Paddy Keenen or Seamus Ennis I wonder how many pipers here are anything but mediocre....or fiddlers compared to Bobby Casey and Paddy Canny....
Its all a matter of degree.
There are many forms of music that dont revolve around ornaments and micro variations. Popular music for example, Rock music, Baroque music you name it.....
Mediocre musicians.... hmm , ok who here is not mediocre? In your opinion or the opinion of who....
You see its a value judgement, relative, basically meaningless without clear definitions.
Nico you make several unsupported statements masquerading as fact, which are merely your opinions.
I might agree, or disagree, but that's beside the point.
Personally I consider dance-ability drive lift, spirit, guts, Balls, to be far more important than anally 'rivet counting.' Of which pipers and fiddlers seem to be worse.
Its not a value judgement of others preferences, which we are all entitled to its merely what I value.
So for example I enjoy Slipknot, DK, and many other music. If you dont, that doesn't mean your ignorant and have bad taste in music.... [though I might think so ] its merely one persons preferences.
However if folk wish to create a hierarchy of ability in rivet counting, then of course rivet counting is important! and if you don't appreciate rivets , your a lesser being for it. Got that? and of course if all you have is lots of rivets, but nothing much to hold together then you might well be challenged by an opinion that rivets are of little importance in the greater scheme of things.[ not that that applies to anyone here, does it?]
Ps there are countless mediocre players playing in bands, sessions etc all over the world, in fact the great majority of musicians are mediocre in relation to the geniuses at the top. We cant all be brilliant. Sure aspire to it, learn and progress. incorporates those rivets , if you feel like it.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you remind me of a student of mine. He is Korean and is trying to learn English. At home in Korea he has always learnt English by doing repetitive grammar exercises in class so he gets good grades on written tests but is unable to speak and finds it difficult to string an intelligible sentence together.
The other day I caught this student writing out lists of words and translations into Korean, like a dictionary. I tried to explain to him that this was not going to improve his English because a lot of the words mean completely different things depending on the context and the words very rarely translated exactly anyway. I explained that it would be better to practise what he knew by speaking to people in class (he's usually silent). He told me that this was a waste of time and that he wasn't learning any vocab that way because the people in his class had a limited knowledge of English, so how could he learn from them? I tried to explain that language was all about communication and that the most important thing was having something to say in that language. Constructing sentences from dictionaries was only going to leave him with very unnatural-sounding English. He told me that he had always learnt best by writing things out and that he knew what was best for him. And thank you, but he preferred not to speak because he didn't enjoy it. Anyway, his test results spoke for themselves - he was better at English than his peers so he didn't NEED to practise, he pointed out.
In the end, I gave up. When he graduates, I wonder whether he'll realise that he has failed to achieve what he originally came to the school for.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Do you not know what "moderate" means? Maybe you know the word "average".
I'm sorry, but you put a lot of words into my post that I didn't say. To me the small details do in fact include things like lift and drive. Placing your notes so that you control the lift, the phrasing, the rhythm... that's all micro-details. I don't include guts, because they're 9m long... that's pretty big. and half the population doesn't have balls, so that can't be too important.
As far as " good players listen to from other good players" (duh, we're on thesession.org, of course I mean traditional... literacy isn't your strong suit is it?), actually I do have many citations. But in a lot of ways it's akin to name-dropping. Besides all the living musicians who have said something similar to that phrase, you might look up interviews with people like Patrick Kelly and Willie Clancy (to name two). Lots of citations. I'm really surprised someone who is a self-professed non-mediocre musician would argue it, in fact!
"The great majority of people on this planet wouldn't recognise all the little rivets if it hit them in the face."
And yet is it the great majority that defines what irish traditional music is, or is it defined from within (ie the practitioners of irish traditional music define who are their fellow practitioners and what constitutes traditional music and so on...)? It's a rhetorical question, because we both know that it's definied from within. This means the good players (not just the greats, those who you mention, but also people who are considered traditional by other traditional players) define who and what is good. Admittedly it results in fuzzy borders, and it also results in pockets of mediocre musicians self-defining their group as being "traditional" even if they wouldn't really be accepted by the larger community . This also explains your post script, by the way.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
you are dealing with an Asian construct there, Dr Dow.
without meaning to generalise, the culture demands demonstration of expansive memory for information, imho. '
"I tried to explain to him that this was not going to improve his English because a lot of the words mean completely different things depending on the context and the words very rarely translated exactly anyway. I explained that it would be better to practise what he knew by speaking to people in class (he's usually silent). " He won't know what the hell you are talking about, he doesn't come from that perspective.
In the end, it is probably about *why* he is learning English, does he want the grades or does he want to communicate in English.
I am trying to learn Thai, actually, and get a nice response from my friends about my pronunciation and apparent ability *which is miniscule*, but yes, it is about communicating what you want to communicate.
Chok dee. Good going.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well said piobagusfidil.
This is music for ordinary people, people in every street or village can do it, properly, fully and completely. Here's something posted today (not by me) in a completely different forum:
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're right, Skull, he doesn't come from that perspective, so he probably didn't understand what I was talking about. I get the same feeling from Ian. You can only point something out to someone in the hope that it will give them a different perspective, but if they just won't listen then you just have to shrug your shoulders and give up.
The only problem comes when that Korean student opens his mouth in class. He gets frustrated because the other students don't understand a frickin word he says.
He thinks it's because of their rubbish listening skills...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bernie, the limits of mediocre musicians have never constrained the better proponents of this music. Let's not start dumbing it down for the sake of folks who can't really play. If you think it's Liz Carroll's technical abilities that set her apart, you're missing the point. Also, there's a difference between thinking this music is available to anyone vs. realizing that it takes effort and passion to learn to play it well. Sure, lots of folks dabble in it, and are happy with their own results. But they're not doing their local sessions any favors with their weak playing. If you'd like to be welcomed at most Irish sessions, you'll want to aim for a higher standard than dabbler or flailer.
I'm with Dr. Dow. Ian's attitude will hold him back far more than any mechanical difficulties with fiddle. That's a shame, but then some people are determined to learn the hard way. I sincerely hope he has time.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
P.S. That last post of Jig's (aka piobagusfidil) is as wide of the mark as anything he's ever posted here.
I feel sorry for anyone who *aspires* to mediocrity or accepts it as their ceiling. Find a different hobby. Or at least refrain from pushing your defeatist silliness on the rest of us.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I read an article on the web a few years ago, I wish I could find it again, it was about the psychology of learning and practicing this kind of music. The main point the author put across, far better than I can, is that it is good to enjoy your own playing for what it is at every stage of the learning process. He cautioned strongly against something I see people doing here all the time, that is, comparing themselves (and others) unfavourably against "the masters", as if virtuosity, elitism and mass adulation are what this is all about.
Will, I think you have an excellent understanding of how to play this music. But I don't think you understand so well why it is played.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
no nico your right , literacy isnt my strong point! nor typing , Im saved by spell check!
Its interesting though your post because it raises a number of points; what do we play for, what is important to us.
definition of traditional... very broad indeed and who agrees on that definition? For example Shetland fiddling is very different to west Clare styles, to travellers styles etc but its all traditional. You might say that they are different things, I strongly disagree, they are different in some respects but still part of a continuum.
As regards who defines good and bad... ? The traditional community defines what is good and bad within the context of what the community considers important, fair enough. But thats purely subjective. For example a Clare stylist might well consider Donnegal style not even to be Irish music ! There are many facets to the music and promotion of one aspect to the detriment of another so as to fit in with preconceived ideas of what the music is....
Ive no idea what Will Harmon is on about, I certainly never suggested anyone aspire to being mediocre, though some people are quite happy to remain at that level, thats their prerogative and if they and their friends and audience are happy with that... good for them. and of course its all relative , who are you comparing to....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bernie, once again you're way wide of the mark.
There is no single reason why this music is played--it's as varied as the people who play it. Personally, I don't compare myself to others at all, but I enjoy learning on the fly when playing with other experienced traditional musicians. FWIW, I've never understood the notion of music as competition--contests and scoring, and ranking players. That just doesn't make sense to me.
So the claims here that some are "defiying" Liz Carroll are just silly. It's not about idolizing her at all. Just enjoying what she does with a tune.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'll take that a little further.
Bernie, I play this music because I love it. I started our local session because to me this music is good craic that friends and neighbors can gather around. It's a catalyst for community and friendship. Even here in the back of beyond, far from Ireland, the music is as central to the Irish-American community as it is in Doolin or Gweedore. Young and old dance to our music, we play it at weddings and wakes, we celebrate special days with it and it carries us through the dog days of summer, the long nights of winter.
Finally, Bernie, I hope some day you come to recognize the hopeless irony of your posts here. You protest against what you perceive as elitism, yet you have the arrogance to suggest that you understand better than someone else why this music is played.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Jig
"literacy isnt my strong point!"
Please try not to take this as being mean, because I'd like to give you some advice, and not be mean about it! You might want to keep this in mind when posting here.
Unfortunately, your post *did* imply that you were suggesting that people should (or do, and that we should welcome it) aspire to being mediocre... Since you say that's not what you intended, and two people (at least) with whom literacy *is* a strong point read it that way, then you should be aware that you need to work harder to make sure what you write actually means what you mean!
It seems like we're on the same page about a lot. For instance, your "a Clare stylist might well consider Donnegal style not even to be Irish music" is one of the scenarios I was implying when I said that "it results in fuzzy borders".
Please do yourself a favour, and like the handyman says, "measure twice, cut once"... in other words, re-read things a couple times before posting.
Back to your post:
"But thats purely subjective" -- Of course it is! But I think it's clear that the only definition of "traditional" (with respect to Irish music) that makes any sense is "that which is defined and accepted as traditional by the members or practitioners of the tradition who are accepted as being traditional"... or, more succinctly: "it's defined from within". Yes, it's subjective, but it's also a consensus...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You want to give me advice! LOL, you use words that are clear , concise yet you dont appear to understand their meaning?! yet you consider yourself literate? consensus it most certainly is not. look it up.
To reiterate, I did not by any stretch of the imagination suggest that people should aspire to mediocrity! . if you suggest i did, then where is your supporting evidence? should be a simple cut and paste job there.
I pointed out quite succinctly that the very word mediocre is meaningless with out clarifying what comparison you are making. Yes its relative, and so relative to what?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Actually, a consensus is exactly what it is:
Consensus
1.
majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month.
2.
general agreement or concord; harmony.
I only tried to give you advice so that your posts here would be more useful and accurate to your feelings. I'm sorry you aren't able to take it onboard, but I won't be interacting with you anymore.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes you gave me advice based upon your misunderstanding of clear written English.
You give a link to a dictionary definition ,? yet you quote something entirely different?!
Consensus requires unanimity as it clearly state in the dictionary you link to.
There is no unanimity therefore there is no consensus.
You are entirely mistaken. Democracy is NOT consensus decision making, it is the decision of a majority. You haven't even read your link.
I dont need to go to Wiki to know what consensus means. Just sayin like...
Did you even read the whole line? You should be aware that words sometimes mean more than one thing. Novel concept, I know. Obviously you *don't* understand what it means, or you wouldn't be arguing so viciously. I'm sorry that you are illiterate, but maybe you should fix that before posting online. "Just sayin"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Also, just to clarify, I copy and pasted one definition (from dictionary.com), posted a link to another, and provided an encyclopedic link. It's good to have multiple citations that all agree...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Alright, one last link, and then I'll leave you to have the last word: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus
Notably, read this section:
Consensus is not unanimity. Sometimes voluntary agreement of all interested editors proves impossible to achieve, and a majority decision must be taken. More than a simple numerical majority is generally required for major changes.
It's important to reiterate that consensus is *not* strictly synonymous with unanimity. Sometimes, but not always, consensus does result in unanimity.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are no citations for that wiki article. you are mistaken. It even contradicts itself.
cōnsēnsus (“agreement, accordance, unanimity]
Its quite simple and obvious that there is no agreement as to what traditional IM is... Are C Lennons tunes trad? Is what Tommy Potts did traditional. What tunes are within the genre? which are out. ? Are the views of the Fleadh adjudicators reflecting a consensus opinion amongst trad players?
What defines the 'group'
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>There is no single reason why this music is played--it's as varied as the people who play it.
That is one of the most sensible things I’ve read in the whole of this darned epic.
I think the thing is, I do come from a different angle. For a start, I have no in-built loyalty to any particular music by dint of where I come from or who I descended from. I didn’t grow up in the music. I know I’m hardly alone in that, and it doesn’t mean the issue need be problem. You assured me some time ago that it is of no significance at all. But my angle is at least in part the product of how I came to this music, and where I’ve been since. What’s more, I am always going to sit on the fence between Scotland and Ireland, possibly a luxury afforded by ‘belonging’ to neither of them. That is bound to affect my own music. If anything, I prefer Scotland’s ‘cleaner’ style (not my word by the way).
Secondly, my angle is different because of what I want to do. I am beginning to appreciate just how this music *need* not only be played by bands – but it has always been irrevocably tied up for me with the aspiration to play in a band setting. That is by no means to say the band is more important than the music - you wouldn’t catch me playing any other music just for the sake of being in a band - but it has influenced what I listen to and for. But it was also the effect of this music as played by bands that got me into it in the first place, no matter how inauthentic that may be to some. There plenty of honourable examples of trad people dedicating their musical careers to working in bands. This, I think, is why LC’s music doesn’t appeal as much as some – she doesn’t seem greatly fussed with that side of things; even when I buy solo artists, I always pay some attention to the wider instrumentation they are suing – it’s just what interests me. I came here because I understood that a good band needs good individuals and I wanted to ensure I was as good as I could be. But being a great soloist is less important to me than being a competent band member.
I have also compromised by virtue of playing a number of instruments; again I’m hardly alone, even on MB. I have to spread my time and effort more thinly. Maybe not a good thing, and maybe in time the fiddle will change that. But there was method in my madness: apart from simply liking the sound of so many different instruments, it was a conscious decision, considering the lack of willing/able musicians, to be as versatile as possible so as to cover for whatever might end up being missing should a band be forthcoming. It is proving useful as anticipated. Yes I know all about Jack-of-all-trades.
In that sense, those niceties will perhaps never be as important to me as they are to the more single-minded single-instrument people: I’m also working on the mandolins, bouzouki, and hell, I quite like even beating the goat in moderation. I may be great at any of them, though the fiddle certainly is the most addictive at present, and I won’t be satisfied with less than the best I can achieve, within those and wider constraints.
Finally, with regard to the band: from what I am hearing, we are possibly the only band playing some form of performance trad for miles. There are a few ceilidh bands. That’s no excuse to be bad of course – but in terms of audiences, we will probably not cause too many ructions if we are not tip-top ultra-refined, and we might even bring pleasure to some. That’s important to me. There has already been some small interest in hiring us. I’m aware that that may be blasphemy to some, but I feel it’s a realistic appraisal of the possibilities for a bunch of 40/50-something blokes at this stage in time. It’s also the approach that a good number of Irishmen made famous careers out of: effectively being the first step into the real stuff for people who had never heard it before; that is most likely to be a similar in context to what we end up doing. Come back Ronnie Drew, all is forgiven.
I will continue to work at the music, and be mindful of what everyone has said – but at the end of the day “There is no single reason why the music is played”. It may not be your chosen way – but who’s to say it’s wrong?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I won't pretend I've ever been good at saying complicated things in three words. Brevity is not always a virtue. Just count your lucky stars you're NOT one of my students. They can't escape.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, I sincerely hope you have fun with your bandmates and enjoy the gigs you get at least as much as your audiences will enjoy the music.
For me, this discussion has never been about what anyone chooses to do with the music for their own enjoyment. That's wide open, no holds barred. And it reinforces why players the caliber of Liz Carroll and Martin Hayes are held in high regard for their stretching of the traditional envelope (when they choose to do so) as they explore their own creative imaginations.
Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so. Many traditional musicians have a sense of the tradition that spans 200 or 300 years at least, and the bulk of that has featured solo playing, and some duo or small groups (but not rehearsing bands) playing for dancing. Even ceili bands are a 20th century invention.
So the subtleties and variations that go a long way to defining what this music is are a result of the freedom of solo playing, not of blending into a band. In fact, bands (and large sessions) tend to discourage nuanced playing because it just gets lost in the sauce. You will likely stumble on a prejudice against ensemble playing among many (not all) traditional musicians, especially the better ones, even the ones who play in bands themselves.
Also consider looking for ways to set aside your "angle" on this music when you can. To genuinely learn something new, we often have to shuck off the old familiar patterns and understandings because they prevent us from seeing and hearing the new thing for what it is on its own sake. I know I benefitted greatly when I finally ditched the expectations I carried from bluegrass and old timey music as I dug deeper into Irish traditional music. And it goes beyond the music, to "getting" many aspects of culture that are peculiarly Irish. It doesn't matter where you come from. What matters is where you go.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I won't pretend I've ever been good at saying complicated things in three words. Brevity is not always a virtue. Just count your lucky stars you're NOT one of my students. They can't escape."
I just hit the 24,000 word mark. For just one chapter (there are a few other completed ones). I win the long-winded competition. :P
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Keep up the good work, Emily - you'll be as verbose as me one day - just make sure you learn the nuances. Couple of years ago I was contracted to write a book with 100 000 word target. No trouble at all. You can probably see why
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Come on, Dow, "utterly profound"? isn't that a bit pleonastic?If they were all profound, no qualifier is needed. I can see how you spun it out to 80,000 words
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> I sincerely hope you have fun with your bandmates and enjoy the gigs you get at least as much as your audiences will enjoy the music.
Will, thanks for your good wishes. We live in hope.
>>Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so... Even ceili bands are a 20th century invention.
Yes, I know. And they haven’t always done the music a favour, I know that too. I recoil like the rest from some of the atrocities we see committed. But against that, there is always the old chestnut about the music evolving. It's also why I/we need to be as good as we can be, withour own context. I can assure all the guys agree on that.you,
>>In fact, bands (and large sessions) tend to discourage nuanced playing because it just gets lost in the sauce.
Yep, don’t disagree there either. Ironically, that was the basis for my reservations in the first place. There’s clearly the acoustic issue in there, but also the trade-off between quality and quantity. But in actual fact, what’s this? I prefer playing regularly with a small number of people whose playing you get to know, over a large, ill-disciplined session. The fact that you then go out and ‘perform’ is only part of the fun.
>>To genuinely learn something new, we often have to shuck off the old familiar patterns and understandings...
Yes, that is already happening. You can’t see what has happened to my CD collection since I started talking to people here. Not that there’s not a long way to go, but I will get there in my own time – wherever ‘there’ is.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ah people have played music together forever. What makes anyone think that historically folk playing Irish music did not?
Is it based upon historical evidence? or just another internet myth?
What evidence is there to support this assertion and in what period is this evidence based?
Folk like getting p*ssed and having wild crazy times dancing to bands/groups/sessions. What makes anyone believe that this is a modern phenomena?
Yes of course as an art form , solo playing is quite possibly the pinnacle of the art. But music serves a social function, it brings people together to dance , show off their steps, their new tunes etc etc acts as a focal point for communal gatherings.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jig, I'm sorry you don't seem to understand the difference between a band and a session, or a band and a house party. Ian is talking about a rehearsing, gigging band. My comments were in reference to that.
Go read The Northern Fiddler for historical accounts of how one or two musicians would play for crossroad dances and house dances. Go read Hammy Hamilton's Ph.D. dissertation for a thorough explication of the relatively recent history of sessions. Just because *you* are unaware of the research doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Sure, trot out your old painting showing a group of musicians playing for a house dance way back when. That in no way proves anything about the existence of *bands* in this music.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No will, despite your protestations there is a great deal of supposition employed in any Historical field. The fact is we simply don't know.
Yes the works you mention , based upon research are valid to the extent that they show that at certain times and places particular situations existed. But no more than that. Your statement above is simply an assumption, not fact. Opinion masquerading as fact. best be clear about that eh?
In one village they might not employ any ornaments and a whole bunch of lads might play together, as a band. Im not saying they did, or didnt, we dont know.
If your suggesting that the painting of piper, fluter and drummer playing together for the dance is not based upon historical fact, what else in the painting indicates that to be true?
Anyhow how on earth do you know whether those lads played together regularly? or rehearsed tunes together etc etc, you dont, its merely an assumption. We dont know. you dont know, your imagining things to be true when there is no evidence to support your assumption.
You could be right, you could be wrong.
Im not. trying to prove the existence of bands. Im not the one who made a categorical statement based on a couple of pieces of work., you are. If youd like to support your assertion with some evidence .....and of course there is none, after all how can one prove something non existence in this field?
We can make suppositions, assert beliefs , make statements that to the best of our knowledge something was true at a particular time and place, but no more than that. Certainly not blanket statements encompassing the last several hundred years! its a ridiculous assertion.
Ireland has been through many many changes over the last thousand years. , over the last 15 yrs! 50 yrs , 100 years 200 years . A study of Irish history that encompasses such a wide field is a lifetimes work and more . A PHD and a book do not history make.
People have been playing music together for time immemorial . To assert that these activities, uniquely ,did not occur historically in Ireland is, shall we say... unsubstantiated.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, you may be tempted to reply to pigobagful, but I doubt it will do any good. How can you change the mind of a person who lives in a world where scholarly research and historical analysis produces mere "supposition?" After all, when he doesn't agree with it, it is simply "unsubstantiated."
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Al, no worries. This is no supposition. Jig's own history here has amply substantiated his neolithic mindset.... Besides, the argument's always the same.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Very true Ian, if you study the History of Ireland, from an Irish perspective, Im particularly interested in Medieval History, then the view is extremely different to that purveyed by the British establishment.
It seems that there is very little understanding displayed here, vague references to a thesis and a book appear to amount to the complete argument.
Im well aware that there is very little certainty in History, particularly in relation to politics.
Look at modern events..Just the last century to understand that History if often a complete concoction of fantasy designed to promote an agenda. Look at the twin towers.. The scientific evidence is overwhelming, absolute proof that they were demolished in a controlled demolition. According to the laws of physics, let alone the mass of evidence. , yet the common perception is one where the officially promoted conspiracy theory has credence as though it were fact.!!?
Getting back to the particular issue in hand. . There is, of course, no proof whatsoever to support an assertion that Irish musicians historically did not play together in groups, bands or whatever you might like to call them. The supposition is fanciful and unsubstantiated. The entire argument comes down to a small group of acquaintances attempting to insinuate that they are right and Im a loony! LOL abuse does not constitute an argument, it is an admission of failure and ignorance.
As it happens there is an awful lot of historical evidence going back many hundreds of years to suggest that Irish musicians played together in many forms of music and plenty of statements that they did so, such as Johnny Dunn ;banjo, Dick Stephenson ;piper, and fiddler; one of Bob Thompson's son touring Ireland in the 1880s. or G Leech and J Cummings playing together etc etc
People sing together , they play music together they dance together they pray together .
Its only common sense to realise that if the crowd is large and noisy then either the musicians need to play very loud instruments, or join together in a group, or both! Of course its also fun!
So then perhaps a definition of 'band' is in order.
>> a group of two or more musicians who perform instrumental or vocal music.
<<a group of people formed because of a common belief or purpose>>
a group of musicians playing>>
a group of musicians >>
So really there is factual, literary, photographic and pictorial evidence that bands have been present in Ireland throughout History.
There is a wealth of iconographic evidence pointing towards ensemble playing in Medieval Europe , what on earth makes anyone think that somehow Ireland was an exception?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Not so pictures are drawn and painted... iconography
literary.. well Im sure you can figure that out.
Photography was first invented, that we know of in 1000AD, but no Im not saying we have photos of trad musicians from then! but I do have rplenty of old photos of pipers etc from the turn of last century and into the 19th C.
As to young man... well now don't you think your making an assumption there, If Im referred to as 'young man' its by the over 60's.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
you see its not hard to disprove Wills statement, not hard at all. Only one piece of evidence is required and there is plenty. piper and fiddler the Hannafin brother... Hannafin and Touhy why John McFadden and Sgt James Early...
The Dublin Pipers Band[UP], the Delacy family band.....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
FWIW, Jig's reference to the Delacy Family Band points to a photograph from 1913. The "band" in question is four war pipes (not uilleann), two whistles, and a drum.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The pinhole camera goes back to Leonardo Da Vinci, see the Turin shroud for the first photographic print. but anyhow if this is questionable [though demonstrated] then try 1827 ...
The UP was in reference to the Dublin pipers band, see the coma.
The band in question... The one that didn't exist according to Will .!......hmm . facts, photographs, history....
.. Rollicking boy.. wouldn't be a glove puppet by any chance....anyhow perhaps old man , your not a member recently suspended... .. in which case perhaps you'd like to actually back up your assertions with information? A nameless face less somebody who makes no positive contribution ? Perhaps you might offer some factual historical information or do you actually know anything at all about the subject ?
Maybe youd like to answer a few questions? or ask some to demonstrate that your not a 16yr old pretending to be something your not. ? If your an expert im sure you can ask difficult questions.. and answer them...
Im quite happy to back up everything I say here with facts and evidence , are you?
http://www.thesession.org/sessions/display/2714
"Auburn Benjamin Steen, flugelhorn - known as 'Chico' to his friends and 'that loser' to his other friends - could graduate to an absolute waste of space but lacks the integrity"
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
pigobagsful, WIll is not saying that never in Irish history did more than one player play at the same time until recently. If you look carefully at what he was saying, he qualified what he was saying, referring to formally organized bands, playing the particular brand of dance music that we talk about on the Mustard Board. You are arguing against something no one said (and not for the first time, I might add)...
(And is the 'glove puppet' connected in any way to the person on the grassy knoll that long ago day in Dallas? I sense a another conspiracy involving the Mustard Board 'in crowd.')
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Look Al, of course will didnt say that. He said this;
>>
Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so.<<
Which of course as I pointed out is not true. Thats all, just correcting the misinformation , no more. Shame he has to be so unpleasant, in his reply while being wrong , but sure whats new there!
Rollocking boy.... [how i want to insert a B instead of the R . ]come on there's only one guy with an attitude and mouth to match those comments on bens link posting regularly here, but suspended. Answers on a postcard .....
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
T he point about the Band history is that folk have always played together. That although its High Art, its also approachable by all, the old boy scratching away, in the pub the young virtuoso , those annoying kids who play so fast and those old blokes who play so slow... it can be played on fiddle banjo box pipes by kids etc there is a session and place for everyone.
Band have always been a part of music scenes , it defies belief, and the evidence, to suggest otherwise. Of course there are players who wouldn't countenance playing in a session or with others., or for dancers, but those are the exceptions. IME
Although my taste doesn't stretch these days to bands these days , I listen to solo fiddlers , pipers and whistlers, I recognise that they have their part to play and that they serve a social function .
Ensemble playing is completely different to solo playing, chalk and cheese. It requires some different skills that are every bit as valid.A bunch of virtuoso players dont necessarily make a good band and a bunch of so so players can kick ass.
Although the advice in this thread is directed at Ian, me thinks he has made a few points that a few of the 'pros' here could well do with reflecting on, unless of course they are so good that they know everything! In which case lets here them! and see if we agree with their assessment.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
piobagusfidil--you said "Look at modern events..Just the last century to understand that History if often a complete concoction of fantasy designed to promote an agenda. Look at the twin towers.. The scientific evidence is overwhelming, absolute proof that they were demolished in a controlled demolition. According to the laws of physics, let alone the mass of evidence. , yet the common perception is one where the officially promoted conspiracy theory has credence as though it were fact.!!?"
If this is evidence of your 'understanding' of history than you are a clown. The editors of Popular Mechanics debunked all that crap point by point. Look in to it..... doesn't help your case at all.....do you believe everything you hear? Goodness that was a bad example! And I enjoy the way you fight, with passion, for your opinions here but damn......that's idiocy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> there is a session and place for everyone.
>>Ensemble playing is completely different to solo playing...It requires some different skills that are every bit as valid.A bunch of virtuoso players dont necessarily make a good band
As this thread heads resolutely westwards, there is surely a very good point in there, which takes me back to its heady early days, and what I originally wanted to say - when I hadn't even realised how far-sighted the addition "handle with care" to the title was to prove to be...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Cheers ian, I started gigging as a bass player at 14, my son has been doing the same recently. Hes a lot better at that age than I was !!
I get to gig with guys like [name drop warning] Christy Barry , Anton Warde because Im fairly adept within that context but its the solo playing that interests me and like the guys above say, if you want to play solo in front of guys like Johnny Purcell, Jim Wenham,Eugene Lamb, Micky Dunn etc and receive complements afterwards you do need to spend time and effort listening for the detail and incorporating it in your playing. I strongly recommend you come over to Ireland and check out Willie week for some in-detail pointers. All the talk and listening in the world wont help particularly unless you know what your listening for.
If you just wanna play a few tunes with your mates in a bar then its not so essential IMO.
@ shanty, objects do not free fall the path of greatest resistance. Try it.
Those are the laws of physics in operation. The facts are overwhelming, dont rely on the editors of a popular magazine for your debunking, do it yourself. No i dont believe everything I hear, I believe things based on the overwhelming evidence put forward by the professional architects who design and work on these building every day. Let alone the evidence amassed by other scientists. I dont see this forum as a place for this kind of debate, but just as above there are reams of undeniable facts to support my assertion. Now where are your facts ? answers on a postcard.....,.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>unless you know what your listening for
Well I think I'm not too bad on that, at least for my current abilities.
What is really pleasing is that I *can* hear where the rolls, cuts etc 'want' to go. The finger flexibility is mostly already there, and I'm pleased with the speed of progress now the actual procedure has been clarified by Majella.
Lots still to do of course - but the exercise has been worth it already, in as much as I have a clearer idea about how much of my previous deficiency was down to me, and how much to my choice of instrument.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Instrument choice. I know I played mandolin and Banjo as my main instruments , and occasionally sill do, for 15 years befor I was really taken with the fiddle and even then I still 'sang' in the style Id developed over those years.
Of course living on the road the only music I listened to , basically, was the music we played,, there were no recording devices etc or cassette recordings to pore over . It was a style forged around the Yog Iron .
Im glad to say that from mixing and playing with Christy Barry and Padraig Kelleher that I was able to imbibe some of their stylistic flourishes and I feel Ive improved greatly since, with the help of my friends.
So I feel holistic development is the way to go, taking things as they come, doing your best with the limited resources available and building up from solid foundations of rhythm and lift.
Playing in a band, or solo, for dancers is IMO an important part of this music and is to be recommended above having a few finger flourishes. all the rolls and cuts wont matter a jot if ye aint got rhythm.
Pipers playing for pipers can get away with rhythmic errors because we know how bloody hard it is, but that wont cut the ice with dancers who only know whether it works for them, or it doesnt.
Enjoy.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Pipers playing for pipers can get away with rhythmic errors because we know how bloody hard it is, but that wont cut the ice with dancers who only know whether it works for them, or it doesnt."
Long ago, when I played with a group of dancers, I was talking one evening to the Highland piper before he was about to play for some Highland dancing. "You watch", he said, "and see how much of a headache it is playing for the dancers. I have to compensate for all their mistakes". The following evening, I was talking with one of the dancers. "You watch", she said, "and see how we have to make up for the mistakes the piper makes". They were both right, though there weren't really all that many mistakes from either the piper or the dancers.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Lark in the morning? jeez no I dont play that on the whistle. Christy Barry set... yep my new tunes on an instrument I occasionally pick up. Which ishy its not in my screen name
As regards pipers getting away with poor rhythm... Well Robby Hannon is one of the best, yet even he can feck up, in public, on film. and still be considered by some to be the best technician. Seamus Ennis can do the same, in public, on film and on a released recording and still be considered one of the greats, both of which I whole heartedly agree with, they are.
But were I dancing a 2 hand reel to that playing It would feck up the footwork. Right or wrong IYO?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ok, fair enough and I agree, perhaps I put it poorly . But still my point is that a mistake that interrupts the rhythm can still have a result that can throw others off , were they dancing or playing along, that would likely be frowned upon by musicians not conversant with the difficulties inherent in public performance playing a wild beast like the UP!
One of the reasons I admire Robby so much, apart from his amazing Album![ get it everyone!] is that he goes for it, hes willing to take risks and plays like hes on fire! I like that.
The set I play is as Christy plays it, the 4 tunes, I dont actually know the names of them so perhaps I was then?
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You know Will, I too admire your passion and your eagerness to proffer helpful advice here. We're not so different in those respects.
Sometimes, Like Robby's playing, you post like you're on fire.
But this forum is a different environment than a music session. Being on fire isn't usually such a good thing here (I can speak from personal experience on this ). It often just leads to a general conflagration.
Look, I'm trying to be diplomatic about this, but it's bound to sting. I'm genuinely sorry for that. My hope here is that a little reality check (similar to what another member recently gave me) might help you participate and contribute here with a lot less friction.
We're all doing the best we can with this music. Just like you, when we offer advice here, it's based on our own experience and what we've learned from other brilliant players. And it behooves all of us to keep the strength of our opinions in check a bit. Even great players like James Kelly, Kevin Burke, and Christy Barry aren't so sure of themselves to think theirs is the only way.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's a bit of nonsense to call the pipes a wild beast. They're not more difficult than any other instrument to play well. It's a lame excuse to be honest.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well fair play Will, but still , trying to be diplomatic about what? what stings?
Look Will, like you, Im just myself and Im sure we have lots in common! Like being stubborn SOB's
Im not a diplomat, I have my strengths and weaknesses like everyone. I certainly dont mean to cause any trouble but I will stand my ground . I do not take kindly to abuse directed at me, or anyone else and I will speak up where I feel justice is not being done.
I certainly dont consider 'my way' to be the only way, but it is A way and everyone has the right to speak, and learn from each other.
But like Ian, Im not obliged to take on board any advice unless it ties in with my own experiences, and like you Im free to proffer advice that I consider to be valid.
We can agree to disagree on issues and maintain Harmony, but I dont roll over for Anyone, Im happy to learn from anyone and everyone but they have to demonstrate they know what they are talking about, and despite all the bull that gets thrown at me here, I do, and where I dont, I am happy to acknowledge my ignorance.
As regards reality checks... I already have a fair grasp of reality. anyhow good on you for your Post and heres to friendship [ or at least tolerance .]
Sláinte
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ok it was just playful nonsense , I actually originally wrote '; '' 'riding a wild beast' but edited it to 'play,' I nearly edited out the wild beast too but WTF.
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I am sure, pigobagsful, that your 'fair grasp of reality' is second only to your grasp of history. You said above, "...perhaps I put it poorly..." One of the few times I think you were guilty of understatement...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Liz Carroll is like Paddy Fahey; they have both carved out their own territory in Irish trad music. You can criticize them for their uniqueness if you like, but they are both powerful influences and have made remarkable contributions to the music.
Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So, I took the advice, bought a Liz Carroll recording and have so far given it several careful listens. For the sake of those who know, it’s ‘Lake Effect’. Admittedly it’s only one of her recordings, and those who know better will be able to advise on how representative it is; from the clips I listened to before buying, they all seemed similar in style, give or take different amounts of supporting musicians. Will I be buying more to find out? Well, unless Llig suddenly emerges from the clouds and smites me with his Liz Carroll Appreciation Charm, then probably not.
I can hear her technical excellence perfectly well; the more so as I continue to work at the fiddle myself, but the music simply does not reach out and grab me. That’s not the same thing as questioning her musicianship, simply saying that it does not resonate with this listener - which was pretty much my first reaction. And I don’t actually think that is necessarily an admission of ignorance – simply different preferences; give me Hayes/Cahill any day. I had some interesting discussions with some musically-savvy friends at the weekend. They were also of the opinion that it is perfectly legitimate to conclude that certain, even gifted, musicians simply aren’t to your taste, even that it’s daft to claim otherwise.
My wife listened, ‘un-primed’; she’s not musically illiterate. Her immediate reaction was that Liz Carroll has an excellent depth of tone compared with many fiddle players she has heard, and is clearly technically excellent, but that collection sometimes sounds like the work of a wannabe classical musician. The string quartet only reinforces that impression!
What’s more, perhaps understandably for such an able musician, she seems more interested in composing her own tunes than rendering the established cannon. Well fair enough, but to my ear, for all their obvious stylistic roots, many don’t really work as trad. tunes, and are more like slightly avant-guard classical compositions. I find this to be true of many modern tunes and I know this has been discussed here before. At a certain level, genres, I guess, cease to be so important...
I can see why Llig talks about Liz putting 'herself' into the music, but my feeling is that there is *too much* of her in it, and it comes close to the self-indulgent - but curiously, the effect is remarkably monotonous – unless you are listening with the ear of a technician looking for supreme technical display. She’s more interested in the internal structures of the tunes than creating an interesting ‘bigger picture’ for the listener. But IIRC, this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression, for all the greatness of the masters. I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz. Again understandable when you reach a high level, but surely not essential, and perhaps not even desirable?
One of my friends also observed that technically-amazing music can sometimes become so ‘involved’ that it is almost unlistenable-to in a more general sense. I wouldn’t go nearly that far with L.C., but I think he has a point. I wouldn’t recommend her to a newcomer as representative of the tradition, for all her reputation.
In model-making circles, we have the term ‘rivet counter’ for those who obsess about the technicalities of their craft, right down to hundredths of a millimetre of accuracy. They claim that without technical accuracy, it is not possible to render anything convincingly; they also love the technical challenge. The term is often used pejoratively (albeit with a degree of grudging respect for the skill involved) though I think this is unfair. But for all their amazing accuracy, some such models simply fail to capture the essential character of their subject-matter, and people are beginning to realise that technical supremacy sometimes only produces a clinical kind of excellence. I think this is rivet-counter music.
I’ve also been listening to a young, upcoming outfit called Full Set. Anyone know anything more about them? I would like to hear others’ views.
http://www.myspace.com/fullsetmusic
While technically good, I don’t think they touch Liz Carroll in that respect, but IMHO they are far more interesting to listen to – a combination of modern-ish interpretation with respect for their roots. For me, they have some lovely tunes and are excellent at creating sets and arrangements that provide contrast and dynamics which bring out the implicit character of the music. That, to me, is more important, and equally valid, as superlative technical displays.
Apologies for rambling, but that long thread did get me thinking, and I did what I was bid. Here’s a hopefully-considered response. No attempt to criticise others or say they are wrong – but I still think there is more than one way to skin the cat.
Ian
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
As one standing outside both "genres", Liz Carroll sounds very American Irish to me. That's fine. Sounds good. Different to Irish style music though. Great stuff though - calls for different drinks. (Does that make it clearer?) Southern Comfort for Liz's stuff, the black stuff for the Irish. Yeah, that'll do.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Skull Duggeraigh Dubh
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Good stuff, Ian. Now duck, I think I hear incoming fire!
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
She came to a place I was playing in fourteen years or so ago/ We still had some of the old guys, Junior Crehan, Michael Downes, Paddy Galvin, who had played there nearly forever. They played in the same house with Paddy Killoran forty years earlier.
At some point Junior asked her, as he would, to play some of her own. Just for a while it was like she was from a different planet altogether.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I would totally dance to Liz Carroll. Amazingly expressive and danceable music. Wouldn't listen to it all the time, because I do agree with your impression that it tends to be a bit samy.
I would also disagree that Liz' music is anything about "technical display". You have to ignore the amazing technique. It's irrelevant. You don't hear a wider picture... I do. It's awesome. It has nothing to do with "classical" music or "jazz". It's all about using the ressources of irish music: dance rhythm, modality over harmony, precise articulation, precise timbral control. (by precise, I mean that nothing comes out that isn't "intended")
I her album with Daithi Sproule in particular, she sounds very much from the same "school" as Martin Hayes to me. Playing music first and foremost, without any bol locks of trying to be "traditional".
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Tirno
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are two lines in your novel that really jump out at me Ian - Firstly - "technical supremacy sometimes only produces a clinical kind of excellence." This is a great observation, and strangely not one I would equate with Carroll's playing. Granted I have not heard the album you are referring to, but when I listen to the track she cut with John Whelan a few years ago "Fresh Takes" and the set that includes the Red Haired Lass and The Scholar, I hear a very expressive musician deeply steeped in the tradition.
The second line refers to the apparent multiple ways to remove the skin from a cat. That is one of my very favorite odd-ball gross-out analogies in the English lexicon of expressions. I love to know what sick bugger came up with that one.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Jusa Nutter Eejit
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
One thing I think I still need to hear is her playing some of the great 'proper' trad tunes. I don't doubt it would be awesome. Unfortunately, there are almost none on the album I bought.
Tirno, I wasn't implying that it was unnecessary showing off - of course the technicality is there for a reason, and I can certainly appreciate that everything she does is fully considered. I am as awestruck by virtuosity of any sort as the next person, but I listen on an emotional level too.This just doesn't speak to me on that level, like much of this music does.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I have listened to snippets of three Liz Carroll albums and I found it all nice but a bit monotonous. But it needs to be more than nice.
I also listened to Full Set on their My Space page. To me they sounded like most of the current crop of new traditional bands but I liked the tunes.
I also thought that the guitar playing (which I disliked), especially on the reels, was the usual galloping racehorse style, typical of most itm guitarists. It was very similar to John Doyle on the Liz Carroll albums.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by overbeyond
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Have you seen Liz live? Trying to judge her by recordings is much like trying to judge Martin Hayes by recordings. You don't get the whole picture.
Lake Effect is produced by Liz and John Doyle. I enjoy the recording, but keep in mind that John Doyle was an active collaborator. To me between tune choice and arrangements that album sounds like Liz and John were looking for a bit of an avant-garde sound rather than strictly trad.
As others mentioned, you might have a listen to some of the clips on Trian's first album (Liz, Daithi Sproule, and Billy McComisky), through iTunes or Amazon. It's a little more straight-up traditional to my ear.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ElaineT
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Further thought, Tirno: I think you are unwittingly agreeing with me
>>It's all about using the ressources of irish music: dance rhythm, modality over harmony, precise articulation, precise timbral control.
Yes, I can see all of that, but you can "use the resources" of the music to produce something that acutally *isn't* Irish traditional music at all. That is precisely what she is doing, to my mind. So did the likes of Flook. Great band in many ways, but somehow many of their tunes were sterile. Actually, many of those qualities are really just the marks of general good musicianship.
>>Playing music first and foremost, without any bol locks of trying to be "traditional".
...and again - precisely my point that music in general is more important to her than mere genres. And why not? I still wonder whether there isn't a bit of her that longs to play something else altogether. Maybe some Pagannini? Handel? Grappelli?
Meanwhile, I carry on enjoying 'traditional' music, whether people are *trying* to be that or simply being it. I never thought I would hear the word Trad abused on this board!!!
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"...the music simply does not reach out and grab me."
Me either. Nor the hot young kids' clip.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by David Levine
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Elaine T - yes, entirely fair points. Will try to correct when I can. Recordings are never good enough on their own, but it's all I've got to go on at present. Hence the caveats. And thanks for the recommendations.
Overbeyond. Comments about Full Set agreed with. Undecided about guitar as you say, but for me this band just touched something that some of their peers haven't. Choice of tunes and good contrasts, I think. They have a rather odd choice of songs, though.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
who cares, you either like her or you dont, all that ramblin is a waste of time.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Joseph Tailyour
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This one is my favourite recording ;
http://www.thesession.org/shop/display/B000000DVA
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
'Lake Effect' Near and dear to us Chicagoans.
Ian
I would offer that drawing any conclusions about Liz Carroll's work from "Lake Effect" without putting its vintage and timing in her career does not do justice to her play.
It is an older CD. Also, it seems to be from a period when she was starting to write her own tunes. After listening to the CD which we bought after watching her and John Doyle at the World Music Company (RIP) in the South Side Kingdom of Beverly, Herself commented on the extreme consistency (somewhat repetive to be less generous) of the selections.
Having heard her play at everything from benefits at Gaelic Park to the pub at Blackthorne in East Durham, that collection is not representative of her work. It is a very good collection, which I think should in fact be taken as a developmental work. At Catskills last yearm they were selling a notated collection of her original works which has some very nice stuff in it.
Her newer original tunes have some of the characteristic riffs that were heavily relied on in Lake Effect, but are much more varied.
I have tremendous respect for her. She is an awesome player and has written some nice original music as well.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by zippydw
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
..."putting its vintage and timing in context...."
sorry
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by zippydw
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Zippydw, points taken - not surprised to be told that that album is not the whole story, though I did listen quite extensively to clips before buying. I can hear the earlier albums are different (when younger, she was still playing straighter trad?) but decided that something more recent might be more representative of what people were recommending. I know that album is still not exactly new. Maybe I just chose unluckily.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
good for you for actually buying it and giving it a try--that is more than i did a few years back! i operated under the mindset that if it didn't immediately appeal to me, to not listen to it and give it a shot, like you have.
i remember telling a friend of mine that "martin haye's plays too slow" and being nonplussed by the snippets of liz's album that my friend played for me. granted, this was more than 4 or 5 years ago, and my ear was much less developed, but still i never gave either of them a chance. i was always a james kelly fan, and i just never strayed from what i knew i liked.
i had the chance not too long ago to play with liz carroll for about 3 hours at my local session. she was filling in for the session leader, who was at home recovering from surgery. let me tell you--after those 3 hours, i felt like a fool! i went back to look at those grainy videos on youtube, and all of a sudden they "made sense." i could hear what she was going for, and it's fantastic. it was also very helpful to play with her for so long... just listening to my own playing on top of hers made me realize i never blend and trample all over tunes.
soon after, i finally got martin haye's first album. on the first listen through, i couldn't believe anyone could play the fiddle like that. to think--a chicago-man like myself, and had never given martin hayes or liz carroll a chance!
so, if you don't like it now, you don't. she's a great fiddler, and sometimes you just gotta put something on the shelf to appreciate it later. heck, i didn't even like james kelly's "capel street" album the first time i heard it, when compared to his "melodic journeys" album. now capel street is probably my favorite album of all time. if i had to get on a space ship while the earth was exploding, and i could only take two cd's to show the rest of humanity what irish music was all about, capel street would definitely be on the short list.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by daiv
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Not unlucky. It's a good album- don't get me wrong.
Living in Chicago, we're lucky to have her playing regularly around here, and being a bit older than her and having started following her from the time she was playing in school gyms, there is the luxury of perspective.
Lake Effect is a nice CD, somewhat developmental. A work in progress. I wish my 'finished projects' could be anywhere near as good as her works in progress
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by zippydw
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
daiv
another Chicago kid?
Martin Hayes really sneaks up on you. His latest CD is one of my favorites
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by zippydw
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I found Liz Carroll over the yearsfrom asking at sessions, "great tune, where's it from" and frequent getting the answer "it's a Liz Carroll tune".
There is a change in style in modern compositions in the Irish trad idiom and I think Liz is in the vanguard there.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by portnasaol
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
daiv, yes I agree about leaving to 'mature' on the shelf for a while. Exactly what I plan to do.
Funnily enough, it took precisely two listens to like Martin Hayes, though.
Ian
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If you've ever listened to Trian it's more trad.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by Earl Cameron
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This is one of my favorite Liz Carroll tunes. But we are all individuals and do not have to like the same things...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkxN8mcXJzQ
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Reading Ian's first post, I'm struck that if I didn't know he was talking about Liz Carroll, I'd never guess. That description of her music is so far wide of what it is. I'd laugh about it and shrug it off if it wasn't for that fact that Ian is so serious about it.
The only conclusion one can come up with is that Ian really doesn't know what he's listening to. His constant insistence of bigging up her technique backs up this conclusion. The very first thing you have to do is realise that the technique is utterly irrelevant (and it's not even that good).
I think Daiv's post hit's the nail on the head with her music: "all of a sudden it made sense. i could hear what she was going for, and it's fantastic."
I've had moments like that with music, Tom Waits, for example. For years it was just a bloody racket, then eureka, I got it, and it was fantastic.
I think there are musics that are easier to get, straight away. Martin Hayes is easier to get partly because he's a great performer. But also, because he dumbs it down a bit.
But Liz Carroll doesn't play that way. She's an extraordinarily playful character with absolutely no veneer. She plays what pleases her, what moves her, what makes her giggle. Her performance is almost non-existent. One of the critiques that was reiterated a few times above that astonished me the most was that her tunes are too samey? I'm astounded at such ignorance. Her tunes, while obviously Liz Carroll tunes, are astonishingly diverse, and to not hear this is merely an admission that you are not hearing it.
But why defend it? Mostly, I think, because I get so much enjoyment out of it I'd like to share it.
But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. And some other numpties who don't know what they're on about back up the slagging and someone else can say they are wrong. But anyone looking for a bit of enlightenment is only able to read each point of view as equally valid.
It's a travesty.
# Posted on May 11th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, She doesn't need to play better, you need to listen better...
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<Martin Hayes is easier to get partly because he's a great performer. But also, because he dumbs it down a bit.>>
>>But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. <<
Martin ' dumbs it down?!?' LOL
Did llig really make that post with a straight face? Surely not even the arch-troll him self could curse this site and people who slagoff musicians while slagging off a different musician in the process?! Not actually realising what he himself is doing.!!! Classic.
A proverb about eyes and planks comes to mind there.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well said llig
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Gromit
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm sure this is easier than you are all making out, and Mr Stock, fancy, your almost making an apology for not liking something "as much as you should".
OK, so I don't play fiddle and don't therefore listen to too much fiddle playing, but I could draw comparisons between pipers who (to me) are Gods and those that are not.
The long and short of it is that we all admire different qualities and our individual idea of "perfect" will almost certainly not agree with anyone elses.
I make no apology for saying that there are certain players I don't like as much as others, and I am most certainly not going to go into detailed self analysis about why I may be wrong. Suffice to say, my opinions are my own and were not given to me by somebody else.
Ian - go with what you LIKE - stop trying to do missionary work on yourself - life is too short. Think of all the time your wasting by listening to stuff that you don't enjoy.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I wasn't slagging off Martin Hayes there at all, I said he is a great performer, one of the best I've seen, certainly the best diddley performer I've seen. And this great learned and honed ability to communicate with his audience makes him easier to "get". The "dumbs it down a bit" (a bit, not a lot) is about playing to the audiences level, playing on their level, playing to audience expectation. His phrasing is repetative so the listener finds it easier to not get lost. He's great.
(anyway feck off jig)
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Good point, ormepipes, if you don't like it, don't listen to it, and for God's sake, don't go yammering on about it on the internet...
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I thinks that's fair enough, if you don't like it, don't listen to it. It's just that a problem could occur when you end up not liking something because you don't understand it.
I don't like opera, but I fully appreciate that I don't know anything about it. So I'm happy not to listen to it because I'm not interested in it. So no problem.
However, Ian Stock is a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"God's sake, don't go yammering on about it on the internet..."
Nope, sorry, can't agree with that - freedom of speach and all that.
It's everyones right to say what they think, and fortunately, everyone elses right to disagree with it!
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm so chuffed that llig said exactly the same as one of my sentences that I'm going to go ahead and retract the samey bit (I put all my liz carrol on random and it isn't all that samey at all). On the other hand, when I'm not in the mood for certain kinds of music, some musicians I just need to change the song. When I'm not in the mood for Liz Carrol's music I have to change the whole CD.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Tirno
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ormepipes, "Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding."
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think that Lizz Carroll's music does require a certain kind of attention ... a certain kind of close attention. And yes, if you're not prepared to give it what it asks, it's impossible to listen to it at all.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
nah-i don't think it requires any certain attention. the first time I listened to her I liked it. here was the bold simplicity I crave. He doesn't need to like it and I don't know why he's hung up on it.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Arse. This thread reminded me to brush up on a bunch of Liz Carroll tunes I learned and don't seem to be playing much at the moment.
Must...stop...ever...shrinking...repertoire.....
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, take a workshop from her, if you're lucky enough to find one. She's as good a teacher as she is a musician---she loves the music, sharing it, watching and helping others learn---she's a joy to learn from.
At one point she asked us if any of us had ever written a tune. Only 7 year old Haley raised her hand! She told us that we should all try to write tunes. I still haven't given that a go, but it changed my attitude, for sure, and I plan to try it one day. I think it would expand how I experience music. And who knows, I might end up with a nice tune!
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by kennedy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"But also because of one of the things I really hate about this website. Someone can say something slagging off one of the worlds best musicians (and, by the way, one of the nicest people) and it stands as a searchable "resource" to someone maybe wanting to do a bit of research before buying a record or go to a concert. And some other numpties who don't know what they're on about back up the slagging and someone else can say they are wrong. But anyone looking for a bit of enlightenment is only able to read each point of view as equally valid. "
You know, as a free speech absolutist, I've often had to say to people that the only cure for bad speech is more speech - and that's the only response I can make to this.
If you disagree with what Ian had to say, maybe you should try to put together your thoughts on what you think Ian's not hearing, and give them a full-length exposition.
I would be fascinated to read it, and I think I'd probably learn something very useful from it. It would be interesting to get a chance to hear through your ears.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
@zippydw: born in Chicago, experienced most of my early music as a child there. i seem to keep moving further and further out, though. as soon as i move out of st. charles to dekalb, maurice lennon starts playing in mcnally's, lol (but i still make the visit almost every week) and in Geneva on Fridays. lately when i can i pop in at nevin's or molly malone's, but gas just costs so much. what are your usual haunts?
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by daiv
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon, I hear what you are saying, and I'd say I'm a free speech absolutist also, I disagree with any form of censorship (except for censoring what children have access to, of course - with a sliding scale dependent on their age and maturity)
I might try to put into words exactly what I love about her playing, but it would take a while, and I'm busy today. Also, it's not something I really care to do, to analyse in great detail. I'm not against it per say, and I don't think it should necessarily get in the way of the enjoyment of the visceral (though I've seen that happen, often), it's just that it wouyld bore me to death. Also, someone else would just chime in and say they disagree, spouting some nonsence that merely comes from not understanding what I was on about. Happens all the time here and its a waste of time. But I agree that's defeatest, so maybe I will have a go. Though there is satisfaction to be gained from discovering things one's self.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Kennedy, that's a great post, it captures her well. One of the defining things about Liz Carroll, and Liz Carroll's music (same thing really) is that it's all give, every bit of it. It/she is stuffed to the gunnels with generosity.
And yes, writing your own tunes is one of the best ways to explore what makes a good tune. Each time you try it, it gets better, because your understanding gets better.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Martin Hayes - a Chicago man?!!!!! I would have thought he's about as rooted in the hilly landscape of Co.Clare as anyone could possibly be.
Re Liz Carroll - personally I tend to agree with Ian's sentiments of her recordings but each to their own. Obviously my ear is not well enough developed yet - I'm also a bit iffy about Joe Burke and some of Matt Molloy!! I'm quite sure Liz is a fantastic person and a great musician but we are allowed to have personal preferences and make purchasing choices based on those, are we not?
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by the wounded hussar
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
As I said, most peoples' person preferences are based are based on ignorance, hence the global preponderance of terrible pop music. Of course it's fine to not like Liz Carroll, but don't do so out of ignorance and pass it off as mere preference. Every single reason Ian gave for his "preference" of not liking Liz Carroll was ignorance.
Examples:
Her tunes "all seemed similar in style"
• "a wannabe classical musician"
• "she seems more interested in composing her own tunes than rendering the established cannon"
• "many [tunes] don’t really work as trad. tunes, and are more like slightly avant-guard classical compositions."
• "it comes close to the self-indulgent"
• "the effect is remarkably monotonous – unless you are listening with the ear of a technician looking for supreme technical display."
• "you can "use the resources" of the music to produce something that acutally *isn't* Irish traditional music at all. That is precisely what she is doing"
Every single one of these critiques is simply not true.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I suppose we'll just have to carry on in ignorance so. Looking at my prejudices, what I see in common perhaps, are three musicians on three different instruments, all fitting a lot of notes into the tunes - is that fair comment? Maybe it's too much for the present.
What I do agree on, is that you can't possibly base a sound judgement on recordings - particularly the way everything is often carefully manipulated in studios and software nowadays. But then, maybe that is all what one has available - still not fair though. Mind you, dis anyone here ever hear Michael Coleman in the flesh - hardly and the recordings are all the evidence.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by the wounded hussar
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's a common complaint, "too many notes".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG3rgIaXdpk
But once you understand the purpose of all those notes, once you appreciate their subtleties and purposes, you realise that there are "just as many note as are required, neither more nor less"
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Every single reason Ian gave for his "preference" of not liking Liz Carroll was ignorance".
Phew!
You obviously have your "good" reasons for liking her; could this be down to ignorance?
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by overbeyond
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I saw Liz and John Doyle in Manchester a couple of weeks ago; it was a truly inspirational gig. For starters llig's right in that Liz is a lovely, warm approachable person who was happy to chat to anyone who went to say hello. This warmth and integrity shone through in the music she and John made that night and the atmosphere in the club was one of real joy in the music. I sat listening and counted myself one of the luckiest people in the world that night to be able to experience music of such quality in a world going to sh*te.
This music comes over best live and I'd reserve judgement until you've taken the trouble to go and see Liz live.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Sugarfoot Jack
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thanks Jack
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"As I said, most peoples' person preferences are based are based on ignorance, hence the global preponderance of terrible pop music."
So if everybody knew the truth, like you do, they would all like Liz Carroll instead of Lady Gaga? I thought you had more sense Michael.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of course that's silly. Because not very many people are interested in Irish diddley music. But Ian is. I'm happy to be ignorant of opera because I'm not interested in it
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, Liz does sit down & play in sessions.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
My pals and I love Liz and love learning her tunes-current fave is a great Gminor tune-Annie Lacey's.
Defending personal preferences is a waste of time-you love what you love (at any given moment).
Enthusiasm can be contagious.
I dislike dissing.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by primrose lass
Handle with Care
That's it then isn't it? Sessions! Enough with always listening to recordings & sitting in concerts. Find the tunes with the people who play the tunes. There's no need for anyone to force someone else's enjoyment on themselves. Keep searching, but don't deny your own pleasure. We're each different. Hallelujah;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrLk4vdY28Q
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Last session we played "Air Tune". I don't play fiddle so I'm not sure what to make of our fiddler's comment, "It's hard for me to believe the tune was written by a fiddler, because the fingers don't fall where you'd expect them."
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"At some point Junior asked her, as he would, to play some of her own. Just for a while it was like she was from a different planet altogether."
Peter, do you recall which of her tunes Liz played?
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Anyone who is interested in where Liz is coming from might like to read this transcript of an interview from 2000 (Same year that Lake Effect was released):
http://www.thistleradio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74:liz-carroll&catid=41:archived-interview-transcripts&Itemid=69
Lake Effect is one of my favorite CDs. You can hear her playfulness coming through. To me, it just sounds like she's having a great time playing her tunes.
Yeah, it doesn't sound like what an old Irish guy would have played in 1950 in a pub in London -- But um, she's not any of those things...
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by green whistler
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I wouldn’t recommend her to a newcomer as representative of the tradition." Fair play. The best way to introduce someone to Irish tunes is to play them. If Liz Carroll sat down with a newcomer it would be the same. She wouldn't say, "Listen to one of my CDs,
."
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I thinks that's fair enough, if you don't like it, don't listen to it. It's just that a problem could occur when you end up not liking something because you don't understand it."
You don't have to understand it to like it. The process works the other way around - your drawn to something because you like it and then you learn about it. Unless, of course, somebody else is forcing their tastes and preferences upon you - and you are let them get away with it !
"I don't like opera, but I fully appreciate that I don't know anything about it. So I'm happy not to listen to it because I'm not interested in it. So no problem."
That is EXACTLY the point
"However, Ian Stock is a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music."
So as a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music you have to LIKE all the other exponents? - where does Celtic Women fit into that ? - I know so many people on here rail against them. Are there any trad fiddle players that you don't like? - and do you force yourself to listen to them? - what makes your taste any better than Ian's ?
The answer of course is that your taste is not better than Ian's, just different. There must be room for all of us with all of our personal preferences, The trad as a whole is in severe danger of stagnating if we don't allow that, but non of us have to listen to stuff we don't like, doing that is just pointless.
Surely the next logical steps would be to spend hours learning tunes that we don't like and playing them in a style we do'nt like either - anyone for The Kesh on regge bodhran ?
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, I’m not going to say this time that I didn’t know what might flow forth on this thread! What is truly amazing, however, it the degree of misapprehension that has still ensued.
I am certainly *not* apologising for my tastes, but neither am I so egotistical as to think I have nothing to learn from people who hear differently.
We of course face the usual internet issue of having no context for the people speaking. For example, Llig, yes I am serious about my music but don’t think I’m sitting here permanently wracked with angst over it. You will just have to take my word for that.
I am puzzled by the degree to which my comments seem to have been taken as an *attack* on Liz Carroll, which they are most certainly not, least of all in any personal sense. What possible grounds could I have for doubting that she is a lovely person? But what on earth has that got to do with the quality of her music?
Let’s be clear, LC is simply a handy vehicle for a bigger point – which is what people (can) get out of this music, and (in the eyes of some), who is ‘right’ and who is the idiot. I’m generally cast in the latter role, and I’m perfectly comfortable about it, it bothers me not one jot – but I am still waiting for someone to demonstrate just *why* their musical experiences are so much better than mine. I can assure you, this music moves me deeply, too, just not in the ways YOU seem to see. Who's 'right'?
But so far, this ‘fiddle beginner’ (come on, Llig, you know darned well there’s more to me than that) has at least made some attempt to define that which he, personally gets from the music, which is more than can be said for my critics. The fact that at present I get more satisfaction from Full Set than Liz Carroll and some others don’t, is of course only down to the fact that I am downright ignorant. Yes of course, silly me. But at least I have identified what I like (and dislike) about my preferences.
If this is the great music that I believe it to be, it should surely be able to stand up to rigorous critique. If you can’t have an intelligent, tolerant discussion about the merits or otherwise of an art form, the most plausible conclusion is that there actually isn’t very much to discuss. Which of course, I don’t believe. Anyone who claims 100% authority, especially in something like the arts, comes very close to torpedoing their own credibility, yet that’s what’s happening here. And people seem to think *I’m* naive in my understanding!
Ironinic, really. The deifying of Liz Carroll bears more than a passing resemblance to the idolatry that also follows all those ‘terrible pop’ musicians around. Just depends on which gods you choose, I suppose. I bet Lady Gaga’s fans think she is ‘one of the best musicians in the world too’. And I thought we were above such uncritical idol-worship in these musically-erudite halls. Llig, that claim is probably the greatest insult you could pay to your Idol, and she, being a modest soul, would probably agree.
At the end of the day, we have got no further than people arguing for that which they personally feel. It's just that some dress it up as outsized, objective authority and use it to beat others with, and it does our shared passion no artistic credit at all.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Traditional music of any kind isn't an 'art form' and in that mistaken belief, I think, lies your problem with getting to grips with the music.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
MacC, would you say why not, please? I suspect you're going to find a few dissenters there. Music is art in most other places; it meets most attempts to define art.
There are such things as 'folk arts'. Some would argue they even gain something over more formal arts these days, by virtue of lacking self-consciousness about what they are.
I did not say that it is 'high art' - and that is part of its appeal, at least for me.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
...and I don't have a problem getting to grips with the music, I am already gripping it well, just not in ways some people seem to consider valid
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well isn't it that sometimes musicians put so much of themselves in their music that you have to "know" them to appreciate it?
Or be a very experienced listener to "get" the personality from their playing?
Reminds me of the Johnny Doran recording I have - I didn't like it at all. Until I saw a documentary about I him. It made sense after that.!
I met - and heard - Brian McNamara and like his music very much. A friend of mine thinks "it is nice". Whereas he met - and heard - Eliot Grasso - and loves the recording much more than I do. On CDs of musicians neither of us met we have a similar taste...
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by Irina
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I read it as meaning that it's roots (agh horrid word, sorry!) were cultural rather than artistic.
I prefer to think of it as soul music myself - because it touches my soul. It reverberates through my very core - no other music does that so consistently. You don't just hear this stuff, you experience it with all of your senses. When you come to play it, it does'nt live through you, it lives inside of you.
Then again, I've always been strange !
But that takes me right back into personal preferences. My soul is unique to me (thank God for that I hear you all say).
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ormepipes, I can relate to that. I was on the verge of using the word culture rather than art myself.
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You know, when we have "spats" on here, I always feel obligedto say that there is more that binds us than comes between us. These are mere differences between brothers and sisters. And yes, I am 100% sincere in that belief.
It's just that I think any casual readers of this forum would think we were probably the most disperate bunch of human beings on the planet.
I bet we would all have one hell of a grand session if we were ever to all meet up - they would be talking about it for generations !
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Amen to that!
# Posted on May 12th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ormepipes, I never said that as a beginner fiddle player with an interest in Irish music one has to LIKE all the other exponents, I said one should be careful and make the effort to understand it before deciding one doesn't like it.
Ian:
"my comments seem to have been taken as an *attack* on Liz Carroll, which they are most certainly not."
You listed - which I quoted - a whole lot of stuff that is simply not true. You only percieve those things to be true because of your ignorance. (ps, I'm not dissing ignorance, we are all born ignorant. I'm not saying you are and idiot, I wouldn't engage with you if I thought you were).
"What possible grounds could I have for doubting that she is a lovely person? But what on earth has that got to do with the quality of her music?"
Becuase the person is the music, the music is the person. Inventive, open, joyful, and most importantly - as many people here have coroborated - stuffed to the gunnels with generosity.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If someone said, "Liz Carroll's playing isn't for me -- I'm not into that fast, drivey style, I prefer more laid-back, Clare-type fiddling," I'd be like, "Fair enough."
But you suggested things such as she "sounds like the work of a wannabe classical musician," which made me think, "Eh??"
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think you captured the essence of it, TSS.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The irony to me is if I were to say the Mustard Board has deified any musician I wouldn't have considered Liz Carroll to be on the list. Is all of this because she has recently received some awards?
My jaw dropped as you went on at length about the problems with my elevating a musicians' status too high. There seems to be a series of misunderstanding which is in danger of becoming self perpetuating.
Ian, I have to confess when I told you, "perhaps Liz Carroll has become a god in my ears." I was playing off something you had said. I was trying to be facetious.
sigh
Yes, Emily ~ eh? is the word of the day; once again.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Ben Steen
(Not so) Rigorous critique
"If this is the great music that I believe it to be,"
Yes!
"it should surely be able to stand up to rigorous critique."
Not really, if you consider taste varies; as do styles.
"If you can’t have an intelligent, tolerant discussion about the merits or otherwise of an art form, the most plausible conclusion is that there actually isn’t very much to discuss."
Hmmmm... yes, yes, what?, no
"Which of course, I don’t believe."
Yes! That's why we are here.
"Anyone who claims 100% authority, especially in something like the arts, comes very close to torpedoing their own credibility,
Fair play
"yet that’s what’s happening here."
One second please ... exactly who is claiming 100% authority?
"And people seem to think *I’m* naive in my understanding!"
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Same as most Mustardians.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Lost in the Loop was like the uncarved block for me. Perfection. A lot of tunes, most tunes perhaps, are perfect(esp the ones I like
) but Lost in the Loop jumps out at me as a perfect tune. Cup of Tea comes close but it's got that gooffy third part that doesn't quite seem to fit in. Sure it serves a purpose but it's lacking. Banish Misfortune is perfect, so are a lot of others but Lost in the Loop is so 'deliberate'. It's perfectly "woody".
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, Shanty's right about that tune, it's an extraordinary piece of craftsmanship and a must to learn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkxN8mcXJzQ
And an excellent example of her masterful phrasing. I love the way she varies the swing on certain beats, listen to what she does with the swing the first time round the second bar compared to the next time round. And listen for how she bows the third bar compared to how she bows it's repeat in the seventh bar. And listen to her placements of he little bowed trebles, she never puts one in the same place twice, and listen for how some of them anticipate the down and up beats and how others fall languidly behind the beat. And listen to the amount of variation in the cuts and taps, they go from one extreme of minute little percussive flicks, hardly audible, to very even semiquavers, right through to slower even triplets - three across four. And listen for how she varies the attack and how she varies the way she slides up to some notes disguising the down beats, some times it's a languid joining of two quavers, sometimes she just whips it up. And listen to how she joins together all these different articulations to keep the phrasing interesting and fresh all the way through. Listen to how the variations subtly push and pull the overall shape of the melody. And this is just that one recording. Hear her play it live and it's completely different again. I could go on and on, but I hope I've said enough.
So learn it. It's not the easiest of tunes on the fiddle, there's some odd string crossings in the third part, but it's nowhere near being a difficult fiddle tune, especially at the pace she plays it there. And I've just had a shot of it on the mandolin and found it to be really easy on that, so learn it on your mandolin first if that would help you.
(p.s., You've got the recording, don't look at no dots, if you do that you'll miss the variations. And don't slow it down with your computer, you'll distort the timing of the articulations.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bloke unintentionally sets off a bit of a ruck on an e-list. Is given some advice, which he follows up, but decides that his original view was, *for him, for now*, largely correct. He ponders whether to follow up on list, and hesitantly decides he will, to acknowledge those who took the trouble to advise. Risks starting another ruck, despite doing his damnest to couch his comments as fairly as possible.
Perhaps the key thing here is, ALL I am doing is to make some personal observations about what I heard and what I thought about it. Such critique can only *ever* be a matter of opinion, mediated by experience; the latter is as varied as the former. I suspect that it is mis-read because some others here *do* see comments as absolutes. It is certainly not me claiming 100% authority, and if you instinctively see it that way, then perhaps that says more about you than me.
I was just attempting to stimulate debate about what LC’s great qualities may or may not actually be. But, with respect, if we can’t get past “I disagree so you’re wrong”, we really are rather immature. I would have expected better of experienced musicians. Perhaps my critique is actually the work of someone with a BETTER ear than yours, and I’m finding things YOU are missing? After all, I’m not an inexperienced listener – to many sorts of music, not just trad. – even if I play the dumbo on occasions. Who’s to say?
My ‘critique’ of LC is not the word of Law. It’s not even negative. Just one person’s reaction to what he has (so far) heard – in the absence of almost anyone else defining what is so outstanding about her in a way that goes beyond ‘mere’ individual subjective reaction. Calling her ‘wannabe classical’ is not in my book, an insult, just a reaction to some of the sounds on that one disc, from the ear of someone who has done a good bit of classical listening and participating over the years; in fact it may be a compliment. From the interview mentioned above, which I read in bed last night, it seems that LC does or did indeed want to break out of conventional genres. (And incidentally, I see she makes use of dots when she needs to! ‘faxing tunes to each other’).
I expected to receive more enlightenment that I did from it about why she plays the way she does – other than outside influences she mentioned. Maybe she doesn’t quite understand it herself? From what I have heard, her playing is just too ‘muscular’ for my liking, – and in that interview she almost accepts such a label herself. Since when was writing one’s own tunes a criticism? I used to do the same. I well understand why people do it, but most of hers that I have heard do not yet appeal to me. That’s all.
The ‘truth’ or otherwise of those other points is really a very poor argument – truth doesn’t come into it. Apart from her own utterances on the matter, it really comes down to your opinion and taste against mine. At least I tried to explain *why* I thought what I do. I will continue to do so until me inner reactions and understanding tell me different. That’s all any of us can do.
Llig, your comment about personality and music occurred to me, too, after I wrote that last piece. I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but I do disagree with your absolutist stance that that is all there is to it, and nothing else is valid. I gather that Kevin Burke, for instance, takes a very different view. Your latest bit is helpful – at last you are beginning to outline what makes her special in your eyes – I will read it better later, and look at that tune, but it is pretty much what I thought you would say, and that’s fine. It tells me I am looking for the right things.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you've listed some things there that are mere personal preference and that's fine. It's fine to not like "muscular" playing - what ever that means (watch her play close up, the first thing you notice is she hardly moves a muscle, she is the most economic player I've ever met).
However, truth certainly does come into it and many things you said about he playing are quite wrong. And all you seem to be doing about that is saying that you are entitled to your opinion.
For example:
"Her tunes all seem similar in style". This is so not true. Her tunes are extraordinarily distinctive.
"The effect is remarkably monotonous". This reminds me of someone with the window seat on a plain flying over clouds and not bothering to look out of the window. You define your own standards of monotony rather than actively look. I bet you get bored really quickly.
At times, it's like you are the aural equivalent of being colour blind. It's like you are saying the sky and the grass are the same colour and insisting that because they are the same colour to you, they actually are the same colour.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>muscular" playing - what ever that means
Llig, how do you describe the complexities of a glass of wine? You have to grope around for analogies that might have some traction. I don't mean 'muscular' literally; I just sense that she mostly goes into a tune in a very 'up-front', high-energy, very emphatic way - and indeed in that interview she virtually admits as much.
Personally, I prefer something a bit more restrained - not in the sense of lacking energy, but because I feel the energy and vitality inherent in a tune actually comes through all the more if it is understated. What's more, that's not the judgement of someone who has no listening experience, surely?
I think we will have to agree to differ on this. Many of my questions on this forum spring from the sense I gained when I joined, that even after many years I have still been missing something important. I have been trying to understand it, and I quite accept that others may have more refined listening skills than I. But the insistence that there is one truth, and only one truth, actually undermines many really helpful points, because it shows an ignorance of their limits.
I understand the point you are making, but I look for different things in this music, and if anything you have made more *more* confident that that is entirely valid. From what I can tell, the things that affect me about this music are relatively unimportant, or even lost, to you. I would start with your insistence that a tune has no existence independent of its performer.
I sense you are a person of deep conviction; me too. But I daily have to remind myself that what seems like fundamental truth to me may be anything but to most others.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
after all that has been written, what sticks in my mind was the reference to LC being a "wannabe classical musician."
wow.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wyogal, yes, it's simply not true by anyone's imagination.
Ian, yes, I understand now, 'up-front', high-energy, very emphatic. I'd agree with that and I love it. And if that's not your cup of tea then that's fair enough. Ironically though, she does it in a very laid back and restrained way while expending very little energy and in a manner that is more cheeky than emphatic - and these contradictions are marvellous.
I'd describe Martin Hayes as much more emphatic than Liz Carroll. He has his way of playing and he'll stick to it. He's much more repetitive than Liz Carroll.
Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?
It's a good question. Is a tune merely the sound, or is part of it stored in the collective consciousness and memories of those who play it? I'd say that definitely, something is stored in a collective consciousness, that's what makes us able to play together down the pub. But is that thing that's stored a tune? I'd say not, it's merely a memory of a tune, an imprint. I'd say, on balance, that a tune has to be made of vibrating molecules of air. Or at the very least, sung in the silent forefront of your mind's ear.
I was in Paris last year and a particular painting I saw had a profound effect on me and I remember it very clearly, in lots of fine detailed brush strokes and colour. And I imagine that many other people around the world have memories of it similar to mine. Do we have the painting, or even part of it in our collective consciousness? We certainly have something, a memory at the very least, possibly something more, but your couldn't say we actually had the painting itself on our heads.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I've only heard Lake Effect and Double Play and on the basis of that I would say that her style has become more influenced by American fiddle styles down the years. So maybe if you said 'wannabe bluegrass fiddler' then I could see where that was coming from. But no, not classical.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by johndsamuels
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are some american isms in her playing but these are not specifically bluegrass. She is certainly no more a 'wannabe bluegrass fiddler' than a "wannabe classical musician". But that she has deliberately absorbed many different influences is surely not only to her credit, but consistent with all the best traditions in Irish music.
She is an Irish musician through and through, all be it with a chicago accent.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think she sounds more Scottish than Irish.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There is no way that calling someone a "wannabe" anything isn't at least slightly pejorative.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Blimey, you know even less about scottish music than I do
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If only there had been internet message boards when Tommy Potts was still alive...
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
(to Bernie)
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, what are the things about this music that we're missing?
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, is it fair to say you consider the following one of your fundamental *truths* about how you perceive this music ~
"this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression, for all the greatness of the masters. I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz."
Also, in that context how do you consider Martin Hayes playing?
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
What do you mean about Tommy Potts SS?
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
'Also, in that context how do you consider Martin Hayes playing?'
Did you see the gigs Martin Hayes did with Bill Frisell?
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Have you ever heard him play? If you have to explain the joke...
He has a very distinct sound and really pushed the boundaries, his, the tunes, the instrument, and he doesn't sound anything like your run of the mill trad player. You could imagine some critics grumbling about how his playing wasn't "traditional," except they didn't have the internet to grumble about it on.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To Ian, I would advise finding some of the really old stuff, like wax cylinder older stuff even, and listen for the wildness, creativity, and individuality they had in their playing. Maybe it will give you more context for Liz.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Did you see the gigs Martin Hayes did with Bill Frisell?"
!!!!
That, I've got to hear.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Spear,
Ian Stock doesn't seem to me to be grumbling about Liz Carroll, he is just commenting on how her music strikes him. The response he got is more revealing psychologically than musically.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Maybe Ian needs to hear some early Liz Carroll. Check out these.
http://www.youtube.com/user/paulgoelz#p/u/48/5SqCwUf5x0g
http://www.youtube.com/user/paulgoelz#p/u/8/UqoE5wu6svU
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by cboody
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
'That, I've got to hear. '
They did a small tour in Ireland in 2007. Hayes, Cahill, Frisell
Thelonious Monk stuff and all.
http://www.glor.ie/What%27s%20On/Music_HayesCahillFrisell.htm
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Nine clips on youtube by the looks of it too.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Try this one Jon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYKgKD1RX9M
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Woah! We could get into some really involved stuff here if we’re not careful. Question is, do people have the patience for more long posts?
.
First of all, the ‘wannabe classical’ bit. Well, I don’t see that as an insult, though maybe it is my use of the word that is a problem. I am certainly not suggesting that LC wishes she were a classical musician, though I find myself wondering what would be the result if she gave it a try. Nor do I particularly mean that her music sounds classical, though it was during parts of The Ghost and Lake Effect that the thought first occurred; the instrumentation contributed, but I think there’s more to it than that. And actually, it was my wife who first raised it, who listens to more classical than I do.
IMHO it is the *tonal quality* she extracts from her instrument, admittedly in small parts, that seems to be moving away from that of a trad fiddle towards a classical violin - again only in the music I have to go on, of course. I have no idea whether it is deliberate or not, but I find it interesting, and it was enough for the impression to take root.
Personally, for all that I love the distinctive tonal characteristics of trad fiddle, I still think that, ceteris paribus, the well-played classical violin manages to extract more of the whole tonal potential of the instrument, so my comment is in no way a criticism of LC for achieving that. She has a fuller sound than most fiddlers. There is a whole other discussion waiting to happen on the greater or lesser subjectivity involved in the way we experience tone, pitch etc.
I try to avoid making ‘better than’ type comparisons between musicians, but I am always intrigued by the implications of getting a load of top-notch musicians from different genres together and seeing who had greatest ease or difficulty crossing styles. ‘fraid to say, my money would still ultimately be on the classical players. Zoe Conway is an interesting case, though she still sounds more classical to me in her trad playing than vice versa. But I think people are making more of this than it warranted. No different from describing a red wine as having ‘hints of vanilla’
>>I'd describe Martin Hayes as much more emphatic than Liz Carroll. He has his way of playing and he'll stick to it. He's much more repetitive than Liz Carroll.
Llig, I can see what you mean – I think. Hayes seems to be a more pensive player, and as such he emphasises notes and phrases of the tunes more obviously, but perhaps I meant 'assertive' – LC seems determined almost to impose her playing on the listener, big and rumbustious, whereas I prefer to be more subtly seduced!
>>Ian, what are the things about this music that we're missing?
Ben, recently I went to a fascinating public debate by two academic philosophers on the theism/atheism debate. The killer point came when the atheist demonstrated how all the theists’ arguments in favour of an infinitely benign God can equally be reversed to argue for an infinitely MALign god. I was simply using the same device to argue that the arguments being used at me are just as easily reversed.
I am not claiming any superior knowledge, but if the following helps (sorry, another classical analogy coming up): I think we are all talking about the role of dynamics. Llig et al quite legitimately seem to focus on the micro-dynamics of individual tunes, which I may not be skilled enough to appreciate. That is a common quality of most ‘serious’ music, and equally the concern of skilled classicists, jazz players etc. It is arguably primarily the concern of (advanced?) *players* rather than listeners. But micro-dynamicists sometimes neglect the bigger, more outward picture. Rivet-counters and all that.
My interest is, for the want of a better word, more symphonic, macro-dynamics. My deepest responses come from the inherent structures of the tunes, whereby the particular player is only the medium for their expression – though admittedly some realise it better than others.
I am also moved by the ways tunes modulate within themselves, between A and B parts, and indeed how people assemble sets so that tunes work sympathetically or in opposition to each other. I also love the ways in which different instrumentations produce different textural effects with the tunes and each other, and the ways in which different instruments can produce huge variety from the same tunes.
I love the sounds of the instruments just for themselves, and I love the instruments as artefacts in their own right. I am interested to some extent in the various versions of the same tune, and the effect that has. But all this is somewhat removed from the decisions of the player, in the sense I think Llig values.
That is why I’m instinctively a band musician, because that is where the scope I look for comes into its own. I was going to offer a YouTube clip with a few comments to illustrate, but it seems to have crashed on me. I’ll try later. Maybe you will all say “Yes of course we know about all that obvious stuff” – which is why I have tried to discover whether the deficiency really is mine.
>> is it fair to say you consider the following one of your fundamental *truths* about how you perceive this music ~
"this music was primarily made as an accompaniment for dancing, not a means of individual virtuoso expression... those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical or possibly jazz."
I’m not sure I would go so far as to call that a fundamental truth, though it does inform my understanding that this not music is perhaps not primarily about the performer. I am much more interested in the tune than who played it. I was simply musing whether those who look for deep personal expression in the music might find even more of it through a different discipline.
>>Also, in that context how do you consider Martin Hayes playing?
Well, from what I can tell, he has done the same as all the others and turned it into a performance medium, where personal interpretation is indeed (nearly?) all. I just happen to prefer his way of doing it. While I clearly can’t comment on his micro-dynamics, he seems to imbue his music with much greater outward expression than LC. The fact that may be more accessible may simply demonstrate a greater concern for reaching his audience. LC may be a lovely, social person, but I got the feeling from reading that interview that she is quite inward-looking in what she is doing musically.
>>Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?
Llig, interesting that you should use the painting analogy as it has been in my mind too. The difference is that an original painting is a tangible, unique object in its own right, whereas music, dance etc. need recreating from scratch each time, by means of a medium (the player). Many people still choose to own reproductions of their favourite paintings, of course. I was going to add that the most ‘meaningful’ paintings are not necessarily those with the finest micro-dynamics (i.e. technical realism). The Impressionists being the obvious example. I’m curious what the painting was.
>>I'd say that definitely, something is stored in a collective consciousness... it's merely a memory of a tune, an imprint.
I was thinking about one thing Ben linked to a few days ago, in an old thread: the inherent delight in manuscript. As you don’t rate dots, I guess you have less regard for manuscript, but he was dead right – part of the joy of dots is their tangible embodiment of a ‘potential tune’, no matter how crude. My books of tunes are my imprint of their autonomous being, in a way that maybe you don’t have. The more so when you look at the authoritative collections such as O’Neill’s or some of the Scott-Skinner books – especially in the original, with all the pencil marks and comments on them. In my take on the music, this is a significant part of the tunes’ personalities – that which makes them friends to me in my musical life, as well as a record of that life, each waiting to be brought to life and cherished. In some cases, it’s just a single triplet that makes all the difference.
God. I’d better shut up.
# Posted on May 13th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yeah ... shut up
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ian, let me sum up what you said:
1. You admit you might have phrased it better,
2. But you still stand by what you said.
Now, instead of saying it yet again, go find something useful to do with your time, like playing music!
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
A bit of common ground between llig & Ian, perhaps?
Ian, I noticed from the 1st post it was your wife who made the infamous *wanabee* reference. The good husband that you are, of course, you embraced it.
I hope you can see how it would strikes some of as a back-handed compliment, if not pejorative.
"First of all, the ‘wannabe classical’ bit. Well, I don’t see that as an insult."
But ultimately undesirable?
"I wonder whether those who seek that are really trying to imbue it with the qualities of classical ... Again understandable when you reach a high level, but surely not essential, and perhaps not even desirable?"
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't know what ya'll are talking about, but this is one of my favorite videos featuring Liz Carrol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR1l169_mVA
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jerone, what's with posting 3 *absolute wanabees*
Cheers.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Like i said, i don't know what ya'll are talking about, but i wanted to post that video.
Liz Carrol was one of the names frequently mentioned to me when i first started coming to this website. And i've heard some others mention her name as well.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And they played my favorite tune! ;)
Better that^ than this huh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4K9G2xTs3Y&feature=related
Haha
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Jerone, what's with posting 3 *absolute wanabees*
Cheers."
Aye, of course they are classical wanabees. At 2:50 you can see their sheet music on the floor!
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Weejie
fiddlelearner, sometimes we'all are just talking. Humans are curious about everything. I'm sure you can relate.
Speaking only for myself, thanks for the clip of Liz Carroll, Eileen Ivers, & Athena Tergis (John Doyle too).
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well I do apologise. That last post was excessive. Too much brain food.
Just when I thought we were getting somewhere.
But thanks for the constructive reply, Llig
Ben, 'wannabe' was my word, not my wife's, though she has since corrected me - I didn't appreciate its negative connotations. I simply meant 'someone with a particular leaning' - maybe unconscious. Classical leanings are not bad in my book.
If nothing else, I hope I conveyed that it is possible to get a lot out of the music without needing to be preoccupied with minutiae.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
minutiae... I remember when my Algebra Professor used that word.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Interesting video. How many people here care for Eileen Ivers' playing? I'll count myself amongst those who don't.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by johndsamuels
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of the three, I liked Athena Tergis' playing best, for all her silly faces. Not keen on Eileen Ivers. Haven't come across either of them before. Must investigate. Interesting video.
I've been having a proper look at Lost in the Loop, and Llig's comments about it. Have now listened four times, but obviously need to do a lot more. I won't pretend I can hear everything that Llig is talking about - yet, but I'll keep going.
I like LC's playing on that, and the video clip of the 3 fiddlers, more than the stuff on Lake Effect. I don't mind the tune and will give it a go, but it still doesn't 'feel' quite right to me.
Llig's comments are very helpful for appreciating what he is looking for, but I am still left wondering how important it all is, except to another advanced fiddler. I am pretty certain that you hear music differently when it is an instrument you play yourself. I'm not far enough on with the fiddle to know what might happen if/when I get to that stage, though I have certainly learned a lot about articulation in the last two months. But I have to say that not appreciating all those technicalities does not impair the deep pleasure of the music for me, in the least. I still think it's a rivet-counter's approach to put *so* much emphasis on that at the expense of other things.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
...and the more I watch, the more John Doyle's guitar playing is irritating me...
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Of the three, I liked Athena Tergis' playing best, for all her silly faces. Not keen on Eileen Ivers. Haven't come across either of them before. Must investigate"
Have a glass of wine while you investigate:
http://www.terralsole.com/
It's where you'll find Athena Tergis.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Like! Apart from wondering what the Italians think of all these incomers. Like the wine, both sorts of music, the area (many holidays had there) and have friends in Basel, (who will be with us in Scotland this summer). What more could you ask?
I found this recently - know the town well - friends have a house there, where we spent our honeymoon and often go back. Seems we are in good company!
Note the Scottish connections in the comments. Several locals we know there have strong Glaswegian accents...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j62t7eggjmk&feature=BFa&list=FL-PaDodMHjHY&index=2
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Note the Scottish connections in the comments. Several locals we know there have strong Glaswegian accents..."
Yep, Barga, the ancestral home of the Nardini family, among others...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/scotland/2325959/Barga-embraces-Scottish-tricolore.html
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
What is there not to like about Eileen Ivers?! Some of you people kill me. I can see "not being keen on Ted Jones down the pub because he drinks too much and is never in tune" but for goodness sakes! Saying you don't like people like Eileen Ivers (or Liz Carroll) is almost like saying you don't like fiddle music. Init like saying "I like Irish piping but I 'm not keen on that guy Seamus Ennis, Leo Rawesome, Paddy Keenan, Paddy Maloney, Finbar Fury.....
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well I for one was only commenting on that one clip. I did say I would need to look further...
...and in any case, no - it comes back to which end of the telescope you're looking through. I instinctively start with I do/don't like that TUNE, no matter who's playing it. That's what I see first.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> have been to the Sagra del Pesce e Patata, and the first time we rolled into town the whole place had flags out for the Queen Mum's birthday. My favourite Bargiani phrase is, "Och aye, si si si..."
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm not so keen on Paddy Moloney...
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by SmashTheWindows
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
WHAT???? HOW DARE YOU???? HAVE YOU NO TASTE????
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh, and thanks fiddlelearner for posting that clip from the Absolutely Irish show, I have that CD, but had never seen the video of the show. That was the real deal, a group of wonderful musicians, at the top of their game, and having a great time playing together. Lots of fun!
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think with someone like Eileen Ivers, her approach means that there is bound to be a bit of a dichotomy concerning opinions on her playing. To me, it seems as if she goes out of her way to be original, to push at any and every boundary. Now, without saying what I personally think of the result, it does mean that her playing ends up being very individual, and pretty much unique in fact. And this alone will mean that some people like it and some don't. I just think that's inevitable, given her artistic choices.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, etical blend that, I guess that is a very reasonable and concise response. I think you summed up Ian's point here in three short sentences. Now why do I hear so many people busting on Paddy Maloney?
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>Saying you don't like people like Eileen Ivers (or Liz Carroll) is almost like saying you don't like fiddle music.
Almost, in the sense of "not at all"....
"Saying you don't like Raymond Carver (or Mark Twain) is almost (ie, not at all) like saying you don't like books."
"Saying you don't like Jackson Pollock (or Rembrandt) is almost (ie, in no way) like saying you don't like art."
"Saying you don't like e e cummings (or Robert Frost) is almost (ie, not even a little bit) like saying you don't like poetry."
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Nice, Jon.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Paddy Maloney - absolutely on my "Gods" list - 2nd from the top actually.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you're the one counting Liz Carroll's rivets.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon Kiparsky- That analogy would work had If we were talking about music in general but we are talking specifically about Irish fiddle music. So....Saying one does not like Cezanne, Seurat or Redon doesn't mean that one does not like ART but that one probably does not like the post impressionists.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, I'm not going to say anything more about Liz Carroll, it's pointless, you obviously haven't a scooby about her playing. So until you can come up with something even vaguely resembling an accurate description of what she does, I'm not gonna bother with your misconceptions. What does make me wonder though, is what makes you interested in a form of harmonically very basic music that is merely many thousands of very short and largely monophonic individual pieces composed within an extremely narrow pitch range when you say that what interests you is "for the want of a better word, more symphonic, macro-dynamics"?
However, I'm happy to carry on with the "Does a tune have an existence independent of its performer/performance?" thing.
Thinking about it, It maybe that there's a sliding scale that involves ... at one end:
• The complexity and precision of the composer's intentions coupled with, conversely, the constraints to the performers' freedom to mess about with it.
... and at the other end:
• The simplicity of the composer's "map" coupled with, conversely, the lack of constraints to - or even the traditional encouragement of - the performers' freedom to mess about with it.
So at one end, you get your symphonic macro-dynamics where more than a hundred obedient musicians follow one person's faithful interpretation of a detailed map handed down by the composer. Does this piece of music have an existence independent of its performer/performance? On a sliding scale of yes to no, I'd say it's more towards the yes.
And at the other end, you could get a very short "map" that needn't even exist as a physical entity, it can easily be just a mere memory. And not only is the performer's job to make it their own, it is also the tradition that they imbue it with such micro variation that it is never repeatable. Does this music have an existence independent of its performer/performance? On a sliding scale of yes to no, I'd say it's more towards the no.
# Posted on May 14th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
By the way, in the context of what we are talking about, there is no difference between a tangible and physical object that is a painting and a tangible and physical vibration of air molecules that is the performance of a tune. The fact that one is ephemeral is irrelevant.
And the painting I refer to which affected me so teams with the most fascinating and finest of micro-dynamics. Its strength is the brush strokes. The brush strokes are what it is. A collection of very very personal marks on a canvas. Not an impression of something, but beyond that, post that. It's an expression of something, an expression of the painter.
The link, of course, is not the painting, but merely a recording of it. Standing in front of the actual thing and being able to decode the brush strokes, to see the order in which they were laid, to see how these makes make up the whole is to really experience it. You can directly experience the state of mind of the painter by looking very closely at how it was created. Standing in front of it, the same distance the painter stood in front of it when he painted it. It's an extraordinary experience.
Get thee to the Musee d'Orsay
http://www.cord.edu/faculty/andersod/vangogh_spblue.jpg
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Saying one does not like Cezanne, Seurat or Redon doesn't mean that one does not like ART but that one probably does not like the post impressionists."
Okay, what about "I like post-bop jazz, but I don't really like Horace Silver"? Or "I like the Bach cello suites, but I don't really care for Yo-Yo Ma's recording of them"? Or "I'm a big fan of golden-age science fiction, although I don't really care for Asimov".
All you're saying in any of those sentences is that you're a person with preferences, not just branding. I can like Irish fiddle music without like everyone who plays it, and without liking everyone on the approved list of great players. I can even recognize that a player is a great player, and just not like what they do.
To take an example from another domain:
I think that calling Keith Jarrett anything but a master of the piano would be a statement of one's own ignorance. However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "I think he's a great player, but I just don't like what he chooses to play".
And it's no contradiction at all to say "I love jazz piano" or "I love free improvisational jazz music", or "I love the piano music of the latter part of the twentieth century" or woteffah, and in the next breath to say "...but I don't really like Keith Jarrett".
The only way your claim can be true, it seems to me, is if you believe that liking a genre entails liking every practitioner of that genre, and that seems a very high bar.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yeah, but while Ian is saying, I like Irish music, but I don't like Liz Carroll, He's proved that what he really should be saying is, I like Irish music, but I don't understand Liz Carroll.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The problem arose (IMHO) when the OP gave reasons for not liking LC's playing that made judgments on LC, not his personal preferences. There is a difference. He seemed to be putting thoughts into LC's head instead of just giving reasons for his personal preference.
Therein lies the problem. It was as if the reasons for not liking LC was because of LC's intentions, purpose, and/or issues with the whole "wannabe" crap.
Yes, take ownership of your own personal preferences, but it's just that YOUR personal preferences that come from your own mind, not the supposed intentions of a player, that of course, you really don't know anything about.
Folks say one thing, then are arguing a different point.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Nah jon I'm setting the bar very low. If you don't like the artist that, by general consensus, represent the finest that that art has to offer it's probably not your thing. If I don't like Johnny Cash Patsy Cline or Loretta Lynn chances are I don't like classic American country western music. Not like I'm gonna rally dig Marty Robbins or Waylon Jennings but not like Johnny Cash.
I Also believe this to be true for people with a limited knowledge of said genre. If I listen to AC/DC, Motorhead and Slayer and I don't like them....chances are when I here Megadeath I'm not going to say "yeah, now that's the sh*t I was looking for!" Probably tya don't like hard rock.....
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Yeah, but while Ian is saying, I like Irish music, but I don't like Liz Carroll, He's proved that what he really should be saying is, I like Irish music, but I don't understand Liz Carroll."
It's odd, isn't it, that we worry about whether someone understands a piece of music only when they say they don't like it? I won't say I understand Thelonious Monk's music in any great depth - I can work out some of his changes and I can figure out some of what he's doing, but there are great depths there.
But since I like it, nobody worries about that. If I were to say "I don't like Monk", along comes someone to say "but you don't understand it" - as if understanding it had anything to do with liking it!
This makes me wonder what it means to say that another person doesn't understand a player, or a composer, or a piece of music. Does it actually mean anything other than "you don't like it and I think you should"? If so, what's involved in understanding Liz Carroll - or any fiddler?
(would you say the same about Frankie Gavin? What would it mean to understand Frankie Gavin?)
(what would you say to someone who insisted that you just don't understand some piece of music that you just don't like? would there be a reasonable response?)
(is it possible to go a bit easy on the guy and accept that maybe he just doesn't like something that you like, and maybe that's okay?)
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If he doesn't like it, doesn't understand it, whatever... just don't try to get into the head of the player/performer for the reasons. It's in the head of the listener.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jon, I'm not saying to Ian, "you don't like it & I think you could." I'm saying,"Ian, you're trying to hard." I agree with Ian when he typed the following in the OP, "I had some interesting discussions with some musically-savvy friends at the weekend. They were also of the opinion that it is perfectly legitimate to conclude that certain, even gifted, musicians simply aren’t to your taste, even that it’s daft to claim otherwise. "
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes, interesting Jon, and I have thought about that.
I was not keen on Monk for ages. My brother (a jazzer) kept bigging him up and I was was like, feck off it's just a din. But we sat down one night and he educated me. The rhythm is so precise in its subdivisions. I'd thought it was sloppy and I was wrong. I thought that what he did on the piano was just bash the thing in a kind of random way, that's what it sounded like to me. I was wrong. And thanks to an insistent brother and an open mind, I got it. And the revelation was glorious.
But I disagree that we worry about whether someone understands a piece of music only when they say they don't like it? Ian Stock says he like diddley music, but that doesn't stop me worrying about whether he understands it.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
... trying too hard ...
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
same with me and bebop, not until I was in graduate school and took some jazz history and improvisation classes that I came to fully appreciate/understand what was going on. It may not be my favorite genre, but I like it better than before I was educated about the genre.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yeah, and when I try to educate Ian with some specifics, he just says he's not interested.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Did Ian say he's not interested?
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
yep, I hear ya. Then defends it as his personal preference, while ignoring that his original reasons for not liking it had everything to do with LC (and her supposed intentions) and not himself and what he himself likes and doesn't like.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ben,
"Llig et al quite legitimately seem to focus on the micro-dynamics of individual tunes, which I may not be skilled enough to appreciate."
"My interest is, for the want of a better word, more symphonic, macro-dynamics."
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thanks for the specifics, Michael.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Michael, here is the last bit of some specifics you gave for 'Lost in the Loop'; wonderful tune ~
"And listen to how she joins together all these different articulations to keep the phrasing interesting and fresh all the way through. Listen to how the variations subtly push and pull the overall shape of the melody. And this is just that one recording. Hear her play it live and it's completely different again. I could go on and on, but I hope I've said enough."
I'll go out on a limb here & say that you gave away tons of insight for listening, & then summed up in the quote I copied.
Ian, you certainly didn't reject Michael's information at the time. You apparently went straight into listening, & then listened again. Is there anything llig said in that post which peaks your interest?
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You guys seem to be doing that 'deconstructionist' thing now, where the critique goes on longer than the thing that is being examined.
I think the horse is dead, and continued beating will do no good.
Nighty night...
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"And the revelation was glorious."
Yeah, I can understand that. If you want some glorious, there's a recording that came out a few years ago, Monk in Paris. The first piano solo on there feels to me like what I'd expect Bach would do, if he rose from the dead and spent a few weeks listening to stride piano, and realized what it means to have a bassist and a drummer. And talk about tricky rhythms - he turns the beat around even when he's not playing!
The whole record is full of good stuff - check out the way Monk picks up on the tail end of the sax solo in Bright Mississippi, and just completes the thought, then adds his own thing to it. It's a degree of simpatico in music that you don't often find...
(as for your worries about Ian, I can't help you there... seems like a big boy to me, able to take care of himself)
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Nah jon I'm setting the bar very low. If you don't like the artist that, by general consensus, represent the finest that that art has to offer it's probably not your thing. If I don't like Johnny Cash Patsy Cline or Loretta Lynn chances are I don't like classic American country western music. Not like I'm gonna rally dig Marty Robbins or Waylon Jennings but not like Johnny Cash"
Well, I guess if that makes sense to you, I can't really say much more about it. Seems insane to me - I don't see any problem with saying "I like a lot of coutnry music, but Johnny Cash I just don't dig" - but if it gets you through the night, it really doesn't bother me that much.
What seems really weird to me - crazy like a soup sandwich, really - is the idea of spending any time at all trying to decide whether someone "really" likes a sort of music, or if they're just pretending. I don't get that at all.
Why, do you think, is Ian pretending to like Irish music? Why is he going to such lengths to fool us all? Is this part of some devious plot? Is he just trying to get our trust so he can pull some scam? Is this a power play, is he going to take over the leadership of Irish Traditional Music and rule us all, issuing his edicts over the Mustard Board? What's the game, do you think? Why is Ian Stock deceptively feigning a keen interest in the repetitive catchy dance tunes of Ireland? And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Why, do you think, is Ian pretending to like Irish music? Why is he going to such lengths to fool us all? Is this part of some devious plot? Is he just trying to get our trust so he can pull some scam? Is this a power play, is he going to take over the leadership of Irish Traditional Music and rule us all, issuing his edicts over the Mustard Board? What's the game, do you think? Why is Ian Stock deceptively feigning a keen interest in the repetitive catchy dance tunes of Ireland? And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?"
Well said that man.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Al, I said that the 'deconstructionist' thing was something I didn't care to do, but I was specifically asked.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, not for the first time, yesterday I decided to be out of here . Then I see that the discussion got constructive again...
).
I will try (and probably fail) to keep this short.
I used to have a friend who seemed able to discuss the varying merits of about a dozen different recordings of any given symphony. I was in perpetual awe. But I wonder how many people really can hear like that. Maybe those who can, do get massive rewards, but is it really *necessary* in order to appreciate music, even deeply?
>>What does make me wonder though is what makes you interested ...
Llig, I respond to this music on a purely emotive basis. I love the tunes and the sounds. I like the infectious rhythms, the exuberance that it creates, even in its soulful moments, and I like all the peripherals. I love the tension between the simplicity of form and the diversity that still emerges. I can’t better put it into words.
That incredibly pompous phrase of mine was another poor attempt to explain how I hear ‘in the round’. That performance of The Sheep in the Boat posted yesterday, for me is a pure delight, even if I can’t dismantle it; I feel no need to.
I comprehend your approach, and accept that it is probably necessary if you want to be a top-flight player - but for me, deconstructing the music actually diminishes it - all the more so now I can’t listen without wondering what I’m missing. Is it really *necessary* to put in things that the vast majority of people may simply miss? But then, I am aware that you play only for yourself; I don’t.
Your approach to Van Gogh is consistent: analytical. Me, I would rather just soak up the holistic ‘feel’ that the painting conveys, no matter how it was achieved. I may never ‘read’ it in the way you are able to, but rest assured it still has an impact, and yes, I do try to articulate it. But I’m the guy gazing at the painting from 10 feet away, and you are the guy peering at it from 6 inches (and getting in my line of vision
I would like to know whether you have always done this, or whether it is a product of your own growing ability on the instrument - and whether you do the same with instruments other than the fiddle.
As for the rest of it, Jon is doing a great job as my interpreter:
>> I can like Irish fiddle music without like everyone who plays it... I can even recognize that a player is a great player, and just not like what they do.
>> as if understanding it had anything to do with liking it!
>> Does it actually mean anything other than "you don't like it and I think you should"?
Others:
>>just don't try to get into the head of the player/performer... It's in the head of the listener.
I never said otherwise – but do you ever read critical reviews? They’re written by the audience, not the performers.
>> But we sat down one night and he educated me.
Great! – What do you think I’m doing here? But if as I said, it is *diminishing* my appreciation of the music, wouldn’t it be best just to agree that there is more than one valid way to enjoy this music? I too have a decent ear, just for other things.
>>I try to educate Ian with some specifics, he just says he's not interested.
When did I ever say that? I thanked you for your comments and am still digesting them. But IMO deconstruction has no inherent greater worth than my approach just because it works for you (except, maybe, in very specific circumstances) – that’s all I’m saying . My ‘problem’ with Liz Carroll is simply that she seems to address your end of the spectrum but not mine.
>> Ian Stock says he like diddley music, but that doesn't stop me worrying about whether he understands it.
Don’t waste your worry, Llig. I ENJOY it!!! That's what matters. Your comments have been really helpful, but does that mean I am expected to accept them unconditionally? That really would be the mark of uncritical inexperience.
>> Is there anything llig said in that post which peaks your interest?
Ben, I am working through that tune again and again as time permits, with constant reference to Llig’s comments. Trying not to hurry it; I will eventually learn it. Though I would rather be learning Horse Keane’s Hornpipe (Full Set) or The Sheep in the Boat, which speak to me much more strongly.
>>And what can we do to stop him before it's too late?
Nothing – I already have you all under my control. Resistance is Futile.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>I said that the 'deconstructionist' thing was something I didn't care to do, but I was specifically asked
Before you blast my previous post, Llig, we cross-posted. So what *are* you doing? How do you find/make all those subtleties without some kind of analysis? Intuition? If so where did it come from? My guess is that you *do* deconstruct, just subliminally.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
For my part, I still remember my first encounter with a Liz album "Liz Carroll", and it blew my mind. Still a firm favorite all these years later, as are all the albums that have had a profound effect on me.
She was playing "in a boot" whilst I was away, so sorry I missed her.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Solidmahog
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
my point was a simple one... if you don't like it, fine. Just don't point fingers and make up crap that you only think is going on in someone else's mind.
This thread has gone off on a tangent, in my opinion.
I don't like (fill in the blank) music because they are such wannabe (fill in the blank) and they (fill in the blank) and blah blah blah.
You don't like it because YOU don't like it. period. It's not because LC has supposed pretensions.
Yes, I have read critical reviews, and yours wasn't one of them.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Pretensions was your word, not mine.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Out at a session till late last night so missed a lot of this.
Ian, you seem to be creating a bit of a Catch-22 for yourself. Many of your posts on this board, especially when you first joined, have been kvetching about feeling like you're missing something in your playing, that you don't have it quite right. You got a heap of advice to the effect of "listen to good players," and pointed out that you've been listening to Irish music for thirty years and wanted someone to tell you what you should be listening for. So finally, Michael gives you an answer, a technical description of what exactly Liz Carroll does on that tune to make it sounds the way it sounds. Then you say it's too technical, it's too much of a "rivet counting," analytical approach, and that's not how you want to experience the music.
We can't win.
Part of becoming a really good player of whatever instrument is learning how to hear exactly what other players are doing. It helps. A lot. I knew some people who would sit down and learn a tune, ornament for ornament, *exactly* how Willi Clancy played it. I always had too much of an attention span like a ferret on crack (to steal a simile from Jusa) to manage that, but I could just about get through an A part and in any case, I can hear someone play and know exactly the techniques they're using.
"Is it really *necessary* to put in things that the vast majority of people may simply miss?"
Those things are what make the music sound good, to anyone, and what make the difference between your weekend mediocre session player and a great player. Michael's description of Liz's playing should really be a lesson in *how* to listen, to anyone, be it Martin Hayes, Kevin Burke, those Full Set lads, whoever.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Just to clarify my point, learning how to listen won't miraculously make you into a great player (hasn't me thus far) but it's a good bit of the battle.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, "holistic" means taking into account the whole ... that includes the detail. If you eschew the detail, it's not holistic.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Spear, good comment, as always.
Except that I didn't say I "want" to hear it like that, just that I do. I don't make any great claims for it, it's probably the voice of inexperience - except that it is still possible to get a lot out of the music that way, as a listener. It's also what's driven me thus far.
No problem at all with the point that it takes more to be a good *player* - which is why I have not rejected any of the advice. But as you all keep saying, it takes time - something that is in short supply round here. I'm still doing it though. What do you think eventually prompted the move to the fiddle? (I'm through OAIM's 12 beginner's fiddle lessons, and consolidating while awaiting their next course).
I am also in the process of re-learning a lot of tunes I know and seeing how to apply ornamentation to them. The results are instructive - as is the fact that when I go back to the mandolin and unintentionally apply fiddle techniques, more often than not it doesn't work.
Maybe in another 30 years I will hear what Michael hears, but in the meantime it has actually somewhat spoiled my enjoyment of the music because there is this constant voice saying "What are you missing?".
At which point you start to question why you're doing it, and at least look at the balance.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"wannabe" was your word
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
the point.... it's about YOU, not LC or her playing.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I dunno... it didn't take 30 years to learn how to listen. Maybe four or five.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And you're always hearing new things, which makes the music even better. It's an ongoing process.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>"wannabe" was your word
... which I retracted as soon as I realised why it might be misinterpreted.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, music, this music, is like an onion. It has many layers, when you first start listening you hear the outer layer but over time as you educate your ear you discover there is a next layer, one that was hidden from you at first. It makes listening to good music a journey of discovery with new things to be heard, even in material you think you are familiar with.
Why add things a majority of people will not notice? Well, for one because you notice them yourself and you put them there because you think they make an aspect of a tune shine. Some people will notice. There's always a good listener, it may be the old guy in the corner or another musician you're playing with, there will be a response.
All these little things also make up a texture. In the playing of Séamus Ennis for example there is a lot going on that will not be obvious even when listening closely. All these things combined provide a texture to the man's music, a texture that ultimately sets his music apart from the music of people who do not apply the same 'things'.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Great post, Prof. What I was trying to get at, but far more eloquently.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I know (not the great post part) your post set me off on that train of thought.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If you eschew the detail, it's not holistic.
Fair point, Llig. In some ways I think we are talking about degrees of the same thing. e.g.:
- Seeing a vaguely green thing on the horizon and wondering if it's a forest (the many lovers of Celtic Woman)
- Looking at a clump of trees and thinking it's a nice wood (me)
- Scrutinising the end of one twig and finding it fascinating. (You)
At the end of the day, they are all different ways of looking at the same thing. I guess they are each fit for a different purpose, but we all have our preferences, and I'm as incredulous about CW's approach as you are about mine. It's not always easy to switch from one the the other, especially when you've been doing it for a long time.
I'm still not gainsaying you - but what happens of you look at one on Monet's paintings in the same way? You might understand the brushstrokes, but you have to stand a long way back to get the full impact of the picture.
The nagging thing which no one has yet to mention is the word 'talent'.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Prof., nice post, thanks. True of many other things too, I think - but perhaps especially of music. Already part-way along the journey. There was a time when I thought The Dubliners were It. Then I heard the Bothies (1982).
But do all people reach the (same?) destination, or do they stop along the way, even if they don't want to? What do you make of my friend and his symphonies? He didn't even play an instrument, but he heard stuff I couldn't. Or rather only could once it was pointed out.
Undoubtedly part of the problem is reliance on recorded music, which is the same every time you hear it. I used to go to lots of gigs - have heard most of the 'names' live, but that doesn't really help either. I have gone on about the lack of wider access too many times before.
Incidentally, I wasn't saying that Full Set are especially great musicians, just that there is pleasure to be had from their music nonetheless.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, I mentioned Séamus Ennis. After thirty or more years of listening I still come across things I didn't notice before. Same for some of Bobby Casey's music. There's an immense richness of textures and musical ideas in that music.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Aye, Prof, but that rich texture really comes out in solo playing, but Ian seems to eschew that whole element of the music, as he has said he's not interested in the details and the micro-dynamics, but rather the macro-dynamics you hear in band arrangements. I couldn't help but feel a bit sad when I read that. For me, and I think many would agree, solo playing really is the essence of the music.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And it's all fine. It's fine to prefer bands to Bobby Casey and not want to spend time developing the ear to begin unpeeling the layers. I know plenty of session musicians who are happy as larry dabbling along in sessions once per week and wouldn't even know half the names being dropped in this thread. The difference is that their not on thesession.org asking why they're not getting it and acting generally unhappy about it.
It would be like me whinging that I still can't ride upper level dressage, even after 20+ years of riding horses, whilst not taking lessons, not riding a zillion horses per day, not paying much attention to the detailed, subtle things the top riders do. I don't do any of those things and after 20+ years I'm still a mediocre lower level rider, but I'm not moaning about cause I know fine well what I have to do to get substantially better and I know I can't be arsed to do it. There are other things I want to do, like play Irish music.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, not 'not interested' but not experienced. I agree solo playing is closer to the spirit of the thing, but I am always 'distracted' by too many disparate things Especially disparate instruments.
As I've said many times before, I am neither a trained nor in many ways experienced musician, I'm a long-standing dabbler - and perhaps that is the problem. I've existed in a kind of parallel universe where I was playing what I *believed* to be trad music for quite a long time. It has given me some vestiges of the 'real thing', such as knowing a fair number of tunes (albeit without all their ornamentation) and a degree of dexterity which has allowed me to make quicker progress with the fiddle than expected. It was also distorted by a degree of acclaim from people whom I was always aware didn; really know what they were talking about. But I was always aware that it was in some ways a facsimile. Hence my angst at finding on here a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of.
Maybe all this is actually a necessary readjustment, but believe me it's not an easy process. Partly becasue it seems to involve a lot of un-learning. It doesn't mean I'm not up for it, though - otherwise I would have made myself scarce ages ago.
My listening has moved from The Dubliners to Bothies, to some of the lesser-known bands, to smaller ensembles and to the more accessible soloists such as Hayes. It's been a good journey, and I've surprised myself by enjoying stuff that I didn't in the past, or didn't expect to. So maybe there's hope yet! But overlaid on that is still this apparent dichotomy between emotional and rational appreciation. I'm sure Michael doesn't see it that way, but I think he may have forgotten what it is like to be a learner, let alone one who is having to eat a whole load of humble pie. That's not meant to read as a sob-story.
And I still get my greatest enjoyment from sitting down with a small number of other people and playing, working on arrangements as opposed to the more ad hoc situation of a session - what you might just call orchestrating the music. I will never be a good classical musician because I can't take the discipline - have failed at it on each of the three times I have tried to take formal lessons. I like the freedom that this music brings, without it being total improvisation.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Keep listening and be open to your tastes changing, again. When I first got into this music, I struggled to listen to the "scratchy old out of tune" stuff. Get me Lunasa any day. Now I'll listen to Lunasa as mindless work background music, but I am far more into the old solo stuff.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
listening and listening, just had a lesson in microcosmic detail that changes the whole nature of a tune.
Without the f# lead note the implied chord from the melody is A. With the f# it stays in D, wow. Important? Yes, because I know from backing this tune that the tune doesn't go to A at that point. Small mistake that makes a big difference. I'm sure I'd have gotten there in the end under my own steam, but having just had it pointed out to me has helped me travel that little bit further forward and given me something else to consider.
So a good lesson in the importance of the finer detail of the old lead in note, a detail that would have left me wanting when launching into this is knowledgeable company!
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Solidmahog
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yawn, wake up: "that would have left me wanting when launching into this *in* knowledgeable company!" There, fixed it. The devil is in the detail : ))
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Solidmahog
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Solidmahog, interesting point. But this is a good example of my bizarre cocktail of ignorance and knowledge. Don't mean to patronise, but I always knew that...
I can only liken this whole experience to seeing an optical illusion one way for a long time, and then suddenly seeing the alternative...it's disorientating.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Ian, yes, I always thought I knew that too, but not for that particular phrase in that particular tune, as it turns out I was treating as "passing" a note fundamental to the tune and therefore missing the point on occasion.
I'm not talking about the lead into a part, I'm talking about a phrasing aspect where I'd not fully appreciated that my choice of note was detracting from the character of the phrase and so also the tune, to the degree that it would cause problems playing along with other couthier individuals. Simply put, I hadn't known the tune as well as I thought. Once pointed out it now seems obvious, it wasn't that obvious at 09:30 this morning when I was trying to learn it ; < )
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Solidmahog
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I agree with what Prof. and TSS said higher above. With me(aside from ITM) every little key stroke on the piano, every little change in tempo or dynamics, ever little variation of my chordal and melodic progressions all mean something. The add the "me" factor to the music. People may not notice all of the little nuances, but they sure know when they're not there(to my knowledge, especially with ITM) These things have come from listening to others as well as listening to myself. Asking the question "What am i doing that i don`t like, and how can i use it to enjoy the music more?" For some reason, some musicians think that learning technicals, mechanics, and nuances is harmful to their "style" i guess. If you like playing tunes plain and stripped, and the same way everytime, then good for you. The problem is you think you're missing something, which is obvious.TSS and Prof. explained it well enough though.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To sum up one point i was trying to make, Nuances and Variation make music more "Interesting." The more "interesting" the music is, the more Enjoyable it is to play/listen to. If i'm right, the opposite of Interesting, is Boring. Who wants to listen to/play boring music? That's what happens when you play music the same way everytime(unless the music is interesting on it's own, cause someone else made it interesting enough)
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I see your point, Fiddlelearner - but when the emphasis is on the tune, you hear a really great tune and the thought is, "I want to play that" not "I want to a*se around with it". Well, it is here, anyway.
That's what I hear: "a really great tune", followed by "a really great instrumentation", not "a really great player".
I suppose it comes back to how set in stone you consider them to be, and if you're already aware that you aren't quite cutting the mustard, the temptation is just to replicate as closely as you can.
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You cannot force nuance. I wouldn't say it's only playing for yourself if most people don't notice some of the detail. You're playing for the tune (<insert that quote I use from Liam O'Flynn>)
Re: 'minimalistic treatment'
Eoin O'Neill & Yvonne Casey ~ Custy's Music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BJzwKEaL-s
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/15829/comments#comment328993
November 18th 2007 by Prof. Prlwytzkofsky
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'll be honest, some tunes i like because of their bare melodic patterns. But what makes a tune special, is when it is played by someone that "knows how to play". And i mean really knows what they're doing. For example, i like all the tunes i play, but i don't enjoy them that much because i *don't know how to play well. But when i hear Kevin Burke, Liz Carrol, Mareid Ni Mhanoigh(sorry if i mispelled her name, im away from my computer) play those same tunes, i like them a lot more because They are Great Players. When i hear a tune i like, by a "great player", i think, "That tune was played well."
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Prior to Twitter et.al. ~ Mairéad Ní Mhaonaigh
# Posted on May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"- Looking at a clump of trees and thinking it's a nice wood (me)
- Scrutinising the end of one twig and finding it fascinating. (You)"
This is disingenuous, to say the least ... accusing me of "not seeing the wood for the trees" just because I appreciate the detail. Your insist that just because I see the detail, that somehow precludes me from seeing the whole. This is completely wrong.
I know a lot about woods. When you approach a wood, the first thing you already know is the time of year. Then, if you can get an idea of the size of the wood, you can also get a look at the predominant tree species. Then when that's done, even before I step into the wood, I can list all the species of birds I'm likely to see and or hear, plus all the species I'd be pleased to see/hear (not that I'm not pleased to see/hear the more common ones of course).
So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does. But do I get something more out of it than someone without that knowledge who just wanders round the wood enjoying merely a wall of indecipherable bird song? No, not necessarily ... and this is the point Ian, I think, is making. And he's right on that one.
However, when I go to the next wood, I'm in another wood. And when I wander through that wood and hear a song I don't recognise I'm thrilled.
If you are really looking for a difference between our approaches, this statement of yours is telling:
"Hence my angst at finding a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of."
I'd have said, "Hence my wonder and delight at finding a whole load of stuff I was simply unaware of."
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by ...
fascinating
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
i like what llig said. A lot. I agree totally.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you have a simple choice now. Do you want to play this music or just listen to it for enjoyment? In order to even sound vahuely like you're playing the music properly you have to listen to the detail while also listening to the whole, and if doing that spoils your enjoyment of the music, then you should stop playing. Don't waste your time fiddling about with band arrangements. These are for bands of musicians who have their sh1t together and who have spent years listening to the detail and becoming proficient players.
Here's some shocking news for you now: those tunes you think you know but are just now trying to work out ornamentation for - you *don't know them*. I know you can't possibly know them because if you did, you would never say that you were going back through trying to put ornamentation in. You're right, it's a facsimile. So now if you're fascinated enough with this music that you want to be able to play it yourself, it's time to sit down and learn your first tune and learn it well. A Liz Carroll album is as good a place to start as any. Listen to her and learn, but don't get depressed when you listen to the detail and realise that you were wrong in your whole way of approaching the music and that Michael was absolutely right (and selflessly spending time trying to help you even though he doesn't even know you - v. admirable). Just take a deep breath and enjoy the journey!
Or not... and just give up trying to play it. It's your choice.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's frustrating learning how much Experience is involved in this :/ I'm still coping with the fact it will take a multitude of years to learn the music well. The fact that i'm not Irish and will never be able to play the music like them. The fact that i can't even learn from an Irish teacher. But i won't let the facts hold me back. I'm learning this music. And i will do whatever it takes to make it sound as Irish as possible. Why? Cause, I like it because it's Irish. I like it for all of it's subtleties and nuances. The unique melodic progressions. Everything that makes it what it is. The less Irish it sounds, the less i enjoy it.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Fiddlelearner, never ever say to yourself, "I'm not Irish and will never be able to play the music like them". It's defeatest nonsense. Liz Carroll ain't Irish.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
...She... isn't?
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I remember a time when I realised that I didn't really know the tunes I thought I knew already. It came as a bit of a shock when it became clear that it was going to take me years to sound any good even playing one tune and that I was going to have to revisit tunes to make them sound better. Now I get that feeling regularly and I've realised it's just part of a never-ending process.
I don't like the music because it's Irish, though. I like it because it's good music and it's fun to play.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't completely agree with Dow -- I think it's fine to just dick about with the tunes and play them if you enjoy playing them. Many people do. You don't need to give up playing. Just accept that if that is your approach, you'll plateau at a different level than people who put the work and time into "listening to the detail."
And before anyone goes any further on *that* topic, you don't need to be Irish to play the bloody things. Do people find it psychologically easier to assign their deficiencies and frustrations to something they can't control, like whether or not they were born on a certain island in the North Atlantic, than something they can, like how actively and singlemindedly they pursue the study of the music, or even face their own issues with impatience (no one can play this stuff well after a year, or two, or even three), laziness, or whatever else may get in your way?
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
A caveat to my first paragraph....
The main problem, as I see it, to the "dicking about" approach, emerges when you want to play tunes with other people. Most of the musicians I meet who seem to fall into this category are not very adjustable players, for lack of a better word. They play the tunes the way they play them aren't tremendously proficient at adjusting to another player's swing, speed, and phrasing. If you're not able to listen closely enough to albums to hear the subtelties in someone's playing, you're not likely to be able to hear that in the playing the guy sitting next to you in the pub.
One of my session pet peeves are people who force me to change the swing and timing of a tune I started because they cannot play it even a slightly different way from the way they usually play it. This might not be you, Ian, but from what you say, it sounds as if you're not focusing very much or interested in microdynamocs and tiny shifts in swing and phrasing, and if only to be able to play with other people, it would be good focusing on this. Even if it's just a wee bit.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
That post is rife with typos. Oops.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Silver Spear, we'll have to agree to disagree. What you describe as "dicking about with the tunes", I would describe as "dicking around with notes". It's an important distinction.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're a harder man than me.
I'm okay with dicking about -- I dick about with quite lot of things (not the music, though). I don't see any reason to quit climbing and riding, say, just cause I'm not very good and not likely to get very good.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"If you're not able to listen closely enough to albums to hear the subtelties in someone's playing, you're not likely to be able to hear that in the playing the guy sitting next to you in the pub".
Yes because the guy sitting next to you knows the tune. He's watching your fingers going up and down wondering what you're doing, and wondering why you get any pleasure from sounding nowhere near authentic.
(I don't mean you personally, Emily)
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, the reason why I advocate quitting is because Ian admitted himself that when he listens more closely to the music, it takes away from his pleasure. Why carry on doing something that's non-compulsory if it's not pleasurable?
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I guess that's for Ian to answer -- why he likes playing trad music on the mandolin in the first place if he doesn't like close listening.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think he does like it, and I think he realises that he has to listen closely, but I think he's resisting because he realises what a big task it is. Perhaps he's scared of opening his mind because he thinks as soon as he unlocks the mysteries of the detail for himself, the magic will be lost and he won't want to play anymore. All I can say is, the mysteries never stop and the closer you get to the sound you want from yourself, the more rewarding it is.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
BTW, Ian, never lose sight of that "macro" view of the music you describe. That helps with overall phrasing and arrangements if you want to do that with bands down the track. But now it's time for "micro"...
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does>>
How on earth do you know that?! you don't . its a supposition, speak for yourself not the rest of humanity. cheers.
Dow ; As regards ornamentation, what ornaments do you suggest Ian uses on mandolin? cranns ?rolls? cuts? Surely you know that triplets are the main ornament for this instrument? That a great % of the ornaments in the lexicon are not physically available to banjo/mando ? Are you suggesting that the music is not 'authentic' without these ornaments? ! Utter Nonsense . It boils down to individual style, the particular instruments played and preferences nothing more. How pretentious would it be for a player to adopt ornaments so as to sound 'Irish' ? Are yous suggesting that Cape Breton Fiddlers, or Shetland, or Scots are not 'Authentic' because they play the tunes in a different style. ?
Get of yer high horse lads there are many ways to play the music and have fun, it might not be your way..... If you look down on players who dont ornament then ye haven't spent much time in Ireland thats for sure.
This music is approachable on many levels, the level you or I might feel appropriate to aspire towards is not for everyone . If a player and the listeners get pleasure from the music then what more do ye want!? To conform to someone's idea of what Irish music should sound like?! based on commercial recordings or what?
Fundamentally its dance music, if you can play a set of tunes, at pace, rhythmically strong, with no basic errors, and folk enjoy dancing to the music... job done.
You want more? great, but that doesn't make you any more superior than those who dont.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Wow, talk about putting words in people's mouths. From which part of your rectum did you pull that guff about Cape Breton and Shetland fiddlers?
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jig? Come up with some kind of bizarre reading of someone else's post? Never.....
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh dear Dr, Dow rather than engage in debate you stoop to insults and abuse . I would have thought better of you... Its strange, do you feel because your belief's are questioned that those questions constitute a personal attack and so respond in a pre emptive strike? Or what? My guess is that a few trolls will descend to join you in your abuse... Whatever.
My point was that the tunes are played in many styles and that they are all valid, whether you or I like listening is a different matter.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No, piobagusfidil, I don't want to engage you in debate. I came here to give some suggestions to Ian, and it was meant in a kind way. Sorry if it has come across the wrong way.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ah sure not to worry about it Dow, Its hard to communicate on a board like this without misunderstandings and misapprehensions , well thats my experience anyhow!
Fair enough it was meant in a good spirit, and good for you to make the effort. I just feel that there are many ways to approach the music and I cant abide the slagging that goes on here from a small select bunch of w*nkers who really dont appear to know as much as they think!
IMO As a newbie fiddler hes better off working on phrasing,lift and drive rather than attempting to incorporate ornaments at this stage. Once the flow is achieved then that is a good time to start with the odd cut/tap and of course they are entirely optional , re my point about Shetland fiddle etc.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Pot, my name is Kettle.
The initial question had nothing to do with your pet cause of incorporating ornaments at some later stage in one's playing, but rather how one should be listening to other players.
If Ian wants to learn Shetland fiddle, he's better off listening to session fiddle players in the manner Michael described above, eh?
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
listening to *Shetland fiddle players. Argh!
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jig is the master of quoting bits of stuff out of context. So lest he get further away with it, here's the full quote:
"So does having prior knowledge increase one's appreciation of the whole wood? Of course it does. But do I get something more out of it than someone without that knowledge who just wanders round the wood enjoying merely a wall of indecipherable bird song? No, not necessarily"
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Michael: YHBT. YHL. HAND
Emily, same again for you.
Jiggles only gets his jollies when you respond.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Don't understand your acronyms.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh, don't make me do this:
http://tinyurl.com/3qs2gwr
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
A few words on authenticity from Shannon Heaton ~
Matt and Shannon Heaton - Lao Dueng Duen (By the Light of the Full Moon)
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Ben Steen
I've barely touched my coffee
Good Morning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiX9EubRXmo
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Ben Steen
...
Great discussion by the way. I'd loved to stay, but the phone is ringing, it's not raining, & those steps won't build themselves.
Later,
Ben
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ah yes! Matt and Shannon! They (and a good friend of theirs) are the ones that really lit my fire for trad music! They came to a class while doing my masters. We had a great time, very intimate setting. I went old-time during that time, as that was what was in my own backyard, but have moved on to ITM in the last couple of years.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, what do I say now? You all raise so many points that I’d have to write a book to do them all justice. But thank you to those people who have tried to take a more sympathetic view. I’m sorry, I’ve made this as short as I can, i.e. not at all...
. I just am not convinced they are the be-all-and-end-all, except in a rather narcissistic sense. Situations vary: for example, unless I really am missing something, our session really isn’t at that level of sophistication. I hope I don’t do anyone a disservice by saying that. We’re just happy to have somewhere to meet and play tunes out here in the trad Outback. And the palpable excitement of those involved in the band is worth it for its own sake, however cr*p we end up being.
Folks, you are getting all of this out of proportion. For a start, I’m not rejecting any of the advice, just trying to sift through it – particularly where it doesn’t chime with my own experience or that of other people I talk to. I think it would be a good start to concede that the MB does start from a rather ‘specialised’ point on the spectrum, more than I realised.
Consider a few things:
1) I found out what I know about this music in *total* isolation from anyone else, until last summer. From a musical background where the only ‘proper’ music was the classical that I ‘failed’ at, I just listened to LP’s of the big bands - that’s all I had. No internet to help, for much of that time. Never even heard of LC or MH until 2010. Until September 2010, I knew *nobody* who was into this music, let alone who played it. Nobody, not a soul, to answer my questions, let alone play with. It all but killed my interest for a good while. That’s down to a combination of factors that don’t really matter here – but is it really surprising if I made mistakes?
2) Both the music and the mandolin ‘found me’ – it was not a conscious choice. I can only kick myself that I didn’t have the gumption to switch instrument years ago. But I DO know this music well *as appropriate for the mandolin*. I get invited to sessions, and seem to have established a reputation as a good player in these parts, as good as most other amateur trad players you will find. You can draw what conclusions you want about that. I also seemed to be accepted well enough in those Scottish sessions I played at. People comment how quickly I seem to pick up new musical skills. O.K., I’m blowing my own trumpet, but I’ve had enough of running myself down for a while. Dow, thanks for the advice, but I am aware of the argument that says I don’t ‘really’ know the tunes. Not quite: I just don’t know them as applied to the fiddle – and that is indeed a now big job to master.
3) I am not rejecting the advice, just trying to sift it, especially as much is contradictory to both what I think (on the back of a huge amount of effort) and what a lot of other music people I know, think. And yes, it does seem like a huge step backwards effectively to have to start again, but I am enjoying the fiddle very much.
4) My main issue here is not the advice per se, but the insistence from certain quarters that there is only One True Way. I asked for advice, Michael was good enough to provide help; I listened to the music both with and without his comments – and I heard some of what he mentioned. But I ended up thinking, “Fine, but for all its supposed perfection, it just doesn’t grab me”. Nul argument. There are three possible conclusions about this:
a) I am a complete numpty when listening to music
b) a good command of the niceties does not in itself lead to the desired emotional response
c) there are other things that make this music meaningful as well as an individual player’s level of refinement.
For me the jury is still out on this, but the insistence that only a) is correct is not exactly convincing – especially when both personal experience and others I know don’t agree. A music-teacher colleague reacted to Michael’s comments with a word I won’t repeat, though one that he will most certainly recognise, saying that he is conflating know-how with genuine interpretation. I don’t actually think that is true, because of Michael’s reluctance to do that exercise, but it still leaves me with the feeling that the insistence on there being only one true way is not all there is to it.
To illustrate, there is one point in a Full Set track, where the whole band is playing, then they all cut out and just the pipes and guitar carry on into a new tune. Wow! It’s like going off a ski-jump. Nothing to do with micro’s – but as exhilarating as... But at the other end of the spectrum, on the second tune here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7QC88RSoOk&feature=BFa&list=FL-PaDodMHjHY&index=9 All it takes is those slides in the A and quick top F#’s and A rolls in the B section to make me go weak at the knees. Literally. Yep, this bloke’s surely a numpty...
5) I keep getting conflicting messages here. On the one hand, I’m told ITM is now a global phenomenon, where other influences are welcomed (not least by people like LC) and the emphasis is on individual interpretation – but only, it seems, as long as you do it RIGHT. It doesn’t matter who you are playing the music, but if you choose to take another slant on it, that is WRONG. At the end of the day, all of those micro-variations are still just as much a matter of opinion as anything else, and so arguably is the decision to leave them out, should you so choose. Of course there is a consequence, but I just don’t buy the logic that says liberty is acceptable so long as you do as you are told.
6) My greater musical sense that differences of opinion are all part of all music, not matter what level or genre you operate in. Try asking opera buffs! To start condemning and over-ruling people in such an absolutist way is a sign of immaturity in the debate, not the opposite, therefore why would I trust it? It is of course reasonable to claim that a certain genre has specific characteristics which need to be understood and mastered, but not IMHO to say that there is only one valid way of doing so, or that some are more valid than others. To condemn diversity of opinion as ignorance seems like just part of the immaturity.
7) The veneration of LC, and the violent reaction to my innocent comments, only serves to reinforce my suspicions. She may be good, but she doesn’t speak to everyone. Who does? And to cite her as an example of how to do it ‘properly’ to one who doesn’t ‘get’ her just isn’t going to work. But it is not a sign of ignorance not to ‘get’ Liz Carroll – it may even be a sign of an ability to discriminate. I don’t even dislike her music particularly; I just find it short on some of the things I really enjoy about the music. And I still maintain that one of the reasons The White House audience reacted so dimly was that she was the wrong person for that audience, or at least she chose the wrong music. Don’t forget, many people can hardly tell one end of a jig from t’other. They didn’t seem to ‘get’ her either.
8) I am certainly not going to stop either the band or playing in general – I enjoy both far too much, whatever Dow’s worries on that front. I’m not going to promise you would like the sound, but bear in mind the context in which we will have to function – and maybe we will indeed plateau at a different level. We have a couple of s*it hot players, including one who has released ‘proper’ CD’s and played with some of the best – and the rest of us hope to learn a lot from him. What’s telling is that we are either good enough (or they are desperate enough) to be pretty keen to play with *us*.
9) Emily, I am trying to take in as much of all this new-found knowledge as I can. I am not rejecting micro-variations, who knows I probably have my own unconscious ones
10) Piobagus, many thanks for your comments – they are really reassuring right now. Point about the mandolin exactly what I was trying to say, but in fact I’ve been pleasantly surprised how quickly I’ve managed reasonable cuts and rolls on the fiddle. What’s more, I’m really sure that playing an instrument affects what you hear. The fiddle is a particularly dynamic instrument, so there’s a lot to consider, whereas my wife, learning GHB is encountering something far more proscribed – and yes, she has a very experienced teacher. What’s more, in any case, I tend towards Scottish fiddle style, which is ‘cleaner’ than Irish. I’m learning Irish because I like it too, partly because lessons are readily available, and partly because I guessed that it would be easier to adapt in one direction rather than the other.
11) Michael, I really do appreciate the advice you have given, but ‘disingenuous’: that’s a bit rich for such slight provocation, coming from someone who dishes as much dirt as you sometimes do
Sorry, I said it wasn’t short.
Ian
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Sit down and listen. And keep listening until you can hear it. And put the instrument down until you can hear it ... for as long as it takes.
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I can guess , he said' what a load of pretentious twaddle..'. am I close?
Thing is, the ears and brain have to be trained to hear whats happening. You cant just hear and identify things unless you have prior understanding, its just sound untill the brain can understand. We might hear the sounds but to be able to understand whats happening is another matter.
This is quite easily proven ; take a piece of Arabic music and tell us what's happening, reproduce it by ear. or Piobaireachd. just try it... Until you have an understanding of techniques used, how to approach a sound, how its made, how on earth is anyone going to decipher whats going on?!
Its a process. Someone who has been playing the music a while will obviously recognise stuff that is not apparent to the beginner. So a fiddler recognises a roll , they know how its made, how to make the sound etc subtleties that are not apparent to a others.
Of course there are other ways! Many many more and thank god for that otherwise wed be listening to llig clones and that is not an inspiring thought!
# Posted on May 16th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
At risk of repeating myself...
If you have any aspirations of playing this music really well some day -- not just dabbling along at it, but really making an effort to make it sound good -- you're going to have to suck it up and follow the advice given to you here by Michael, Dow, et. al.
There is no "equally valid" way of playing which does not involve paying close attention to the subtelties of phrasing, timing, ornamentation, swing, lift, etc. etc, and the techniques necessary to create all that. Sure, you can play tunes as a bunch of notes and not worry overmuch about all that stuff --loads of people do -- but there is no way it will sound as good as the playing of someone who expends more energy on the detail. Ever.
The scope for individual interpretation is *all* in the "micro-variations." That's the music, unless you're into band arrangements but that's a thoroughly modern phenomenon. Great players, such as Iain McLeod and Angus Grant in that clip you posted, have as much nuance and "micro-variation" to their playing as Liz Carroll. The elements that make Angus' fiddling sound different than Liz's are the weensie, subtle things. The point is that one should train their ear to hear that.
To reiterate, hearing the detail and not hearing the detail are not two equally valid methods of engaging with the music if you want to play it well.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To say otherwise is like looking at the difference between people who have a kind of basic sense of how to ride a horse and handle one and a good imagination for anthropomorphising equine behaviour and people who have developed a detailed understanding of horse body language, horse psychology, and spent years training themselves how to use their own bodies in a way horses can comprehend clearly, and saying, "Those are totally equally valid methods for being a horseman."
The former describes the vast majority of amateur horse owners but it doesn't make it as effective, useful, or valid a method for dealing with these animals as the latter.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
" The elements that make Angus' fiddling sound different than Liz's are the weensie, subtle things."
A vast difference between Liz Carroll's blend of Irish styles and Angus Grant's West Highland based style.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wyogal, Nice clip of Shannon Heaton and her thoughts on authenticity. Small world, I took lessons on guitar from Matt for a while, and would be a better player today if the long drive to Medford hadn't deterred me from continuing.
And TSS, you raise good points that build on the theme of authenticity--being authentic is not just throwing together a mishmash of styles because it is what comes easy, you have to learn the rules before you choose to bend or break them!
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by I ♥ Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm still trying to find the bit in the thread where anyone says there is "only one true way". Be honest now, did anyone REALLY say that?!
I'm starting to understand now that some people just want to dabble in the music. They don't seem to want to strive to be as good a musician as they can be and to try out different things in order to achieve that goal. I've never been that sort of person. I've always tried to take any critcism or advice on board, even if it wasn't palatable at the time, and then work on it for years until I was happy. That is, until I have another "a-ha I haven't given that enough attention" moment and I have to focus on something else. I don't think I really understand people who actually reject that kind of advice without giving it a chance. I'll just have to accept and understand that a lot of people are like that.
There are people like that here in Sydney - people who seem to have no wish to improve by constantly aiming to hone their listening skills. Those are the people who do not get invited to private sessions when skilled musicians visit Australia from Ireland. For other musicians who have devoted time to improving their listening skills, the dabblers' persistent dominance over sessions can be extremely annoying. Remember that it's not all about you. The other musicians have a right to be able to go to a session and enjoy playing the tunes that they've taken so much time to listen to and absorb. Dabblers have no right to spoil their fun.
If you want to be a dabbler, feel free to approach the music and do band arrangements in whatever way you please, but don't always expect to be welcomed to any session. And if you sense that others in the session are giving each other knowing smiles and glances, or tutting pointedly, or sighing lots, you'll know why.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No problem with learning techniques. Yes, since being taught how a roll works, I can hear them better. In fact I always could hear them, but couldn't work out how they were done. Llig, if I were to put the instrument down, it would reduce my ability to understand. I can *already* hear - it's just the technique that has been missing. Now that I am acquiring the techniques, progress is proving fairly strightforward - knowing what you are trying to achive has major benefits.
But knowing how to do rolls in itself doesn't guarantee a good result. Should we say it's necessary but not sufficient? That's my point about LC - if only for my ear.
And the point is, on the mandolin, much of what we have been talking about is nigh-on impossible.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hey Dr. I understand what you're saying about dabblers. I try to be humble, and not look down on anyone if they love music. Whether they are just a music lover, and can't sing or play instruments. Or whether they are just dabblers and don't try to get better. Or whether they're not obssessed like you and i. BUT, i feel that we all enjoy music A LOT more if we learn it and learn it well. Whether it be what we're hearing, or what we're playing. I don't enjoy it if i sound bad(and i doubt highly that anyone else enjoys it either.And i also enjoy listening to music that i'm familiar with. No song/tune, became my favorite the first time i heard it...
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
...To sum up my rambling, IMHO, The more we learn about the art of music, the more potential we have to enjoy it.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Fair play Dow and I commend you for your dedication . But how does on define a dabbler? someone who doesn't practice and advance every day religiously , doesn't play at home, sessions once or twice a week perhaps , has a full day job? Sounds like a dabbler to me. But after 20/30 yrs of this its still possible to attain a level of competence and play an instrument fairly well.
They are not driven in the way we are.
We dont all strive to be the best we can. The music serves different functions for us all.
Some of us have a compulsion to achieve in what ever field we have interest, some only want to earn a living and once they do that, aim achieved and they can maintain this level with little more effort.
As compulsive achievers we might look askance on these others, but they might be looking at us going 'feckin nutter' they want different things from their lives perhaps... A relationship , a job, a social life
They can still be a great addition to a session.. or not.... Depends on the session, could be a session of dabblers! Theres plenty of them.
Particularly on a forum like this you have to watch out for advice that is dodgy. How does one know as a beginner who to trust? Its simple... google and research your subject and it will become clear whos advice runs contrary to the general consensus of opinion internationally and the opinions of highly competent advanced musicians.
Thing is Ian has been playing a while now, he can see the discrepancies ignorance and bias displayed by some of the advisers, even though they might not see it them selves!
The music is like a /Mandelbrot set, the closer you get the more you see and the deeper layers and intricacies become apparent. Your perspective might be different , you might have good eyes, but the joy you get from your view does not mean that other , without your view, dont get joy from their perspective.
What do we play for, why do we play, what do we want from our music, everyone's answers will be different.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Weejie, surprisingly I know, but I'm not a total idiot. I know that the differences between Irish style and West Highland style are quite substantial, but my point was those substantial differences are made up of an aggregate of much smaller techniques, phrasing, and approaches. As Ian seemed to like Angus Grant's playing, I was commenting that if one wanted to figure out how he does what he does, one would have to apply the same close listening skills to him that Michael was telling Ian he should apply to Liz Carroll.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Wait, i just thought about how flawed my last statement may be, so i'll change the point of view. --Learning more about the art of music, does not take away from our potential to enjoy it. I enjoy a 1,5,6,4 chord progression just as much(if not more) than i did before i knew it was a 1,5,6,4. I think what really gives me joy is the increased knowledge. But that may be just me.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Why divide the world into just two? There are an infinite number of shades in between, for an infinite number of reasons. If I had free choice, I would be spending whole days playing the fiddle right now – but I need to earn a crust.; I'm hardly alone. Likewise, I have no wish to make a music widow of my wife like some people do. In fact, my ‘vocation’ is rather more important to me than that. Not to mention the fact that there are other fish to fry. But that doesn’t reduce me to a dabbler. I want to be as good as my circumstances will permit – if not better!
But to suggest that unless you’re brilliant you’re no good and should give up would be to put an awful lot of people out of an awful lot of enjoyment. And to look down on them for being such is IHMO unkind, to say the least. Not suggesting that you’re doing that, Dow. Just that the group on here seems to lose sight of the hugely varying circumstances we all have, which affects what we can realise and how fast.
In my case, I’m actually rather a perfectionist. My model-making is of the rivet-counter type – projects that take months and years to realise – but I am also aware that that is not all there is to it. I am on film and in print for arguing the pro-rivet counter case, but also pointing out that you need not to lose sight of the big picture of what you’re trying to create, otherwise the result is just obsessively clinical. Perhaps not surprisingly, I got a pasting from both sides for saying it. I seem to make a habit of it!
Rivets are necessary when they can be seen - they add to the overall impression – but there are also some rivets that cannot be seen on a model in its larger setting, and therefore add little. The addition of those is purely an intellectual exercise for those who enjoy such things. People who do enjoy that also seem to have a habit of shouting at those who don’t.
Same with the music – I want to do the right thing by the music, within the resources and constraints I operate within. It doesn’t seem very fair to criticise someone for being limited in that respect.
As for sessions, the whole point is, I *don’t* get that reception when I play, in fact quite the opposite, so I must be doing something right – at least within my own context. And if I did get the response you describe, I would be up and out of there pronto – I would not wish to play with such people. I’m quite able to judge if I’m out of my depth – hence my caution about playing at Bells.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
what's a music widow?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Pretty much everyone on this thread does things other than music. Dow has finished a PhD within the last few years, I'm working on one and doing way too many other things, Michael has a day job and a family, etc. The music can fit into other aspects of your life.
I am in no position to say that if you're not brilliant, you should give up. Except to myself, which I threaten to do on a fairly regular basis.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>what's a music widow
in this case a wife who never sees her husband because he's always out playing music. I know a few people for whom this is a real issue.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Oh. I figured that's what it was. That's sad :( I plan on marrying a musician(or some other type of creative artist) so i won't have that problem. But hopefully i could marry a Woman that loves music whether she's a musicians or not. That would be a blessing. There are some married couples that come out for our local session sometimes. I think it's awesome that a husband and wife can come together and play music. It's truly a beautiful thing.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
When I'm not working, our flat is like a music rehearsal studio these days - me in the back room on the fiddle/mando/zouk/goat and her in the front on her GHB chanter, soon to be the real thing. Then band practice every Tuesday evening, and CD's almost all the time in between. Just count our lucky stars we have tolerant neighbours.
)
But it's still too short a time.
(and in case anyone's wondering, the bottom just fell out of my timetable for a few weeks, now that the exam season's begun
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The downside being that when a relationship between session musicians goes tits up, it can all get very awkward.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jerone, I knew she was the one the first time I picked her up in the car, and she said "That'll be Christy Moore you're playing".
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, now you're contradicting yourself. In your post further up, you said:
"As I've said many times before, I am neither a trained nor in many ways experienced musician, I'm a long-standing dabbler - and perhaps that is the problem."
Then, when I used your own term "dabbler", you threw your hands up in horror, saying:
"...But that doesn’t reduce me to a dabbler. I want to be as good as my circumstances will permit – if not better!"
Just exactly which do you consider yourself to be? Dabbler or non-dabbler? Either way it's ok, but please be clear.
And before anyone goes into the whole "looking down on people" bullsh*t, people who are serious listeners and not dabblers CAN BE BEGINNERS. It's all about your approach to the music and willingness to learn. All I'm saying is, if you're a dabbler, don't come and spoil sessions frequented by non-dabblers in the presumption that you have a right to have fun wherever. They've put the hard yards in and enjoyed the progress they've made through close listening and honing of technique and general musicianship. They have a right to explore the music in a session with like-minded people - not with you, the dabbler. A non-dabbling beginner, on the other hand, is different. So long as that beginner has the right attitude they will be welcomed into most sessions and given playing time. Experienced players will even slow down a notch or two for them if they sense that the beginner is willing to listen and learn.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
She spoke your language aye?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Weejie, surprisingly I know, but I'm not a total idiot. I know that the differences between Irish style and West Highland style are quite substantial, but my point was those substantial differences are made up of an aggregate of much smaller techniques, phrasing, and approaches. As Ian seemed to like Angus Grant's playing, I was commenting that if one wanted to figure out how he does what he does, one would have to apply the same close listening skills to him that Michael was telling Ian he should apply to Liz Carroll. "
In other words, your previous statement was poorly phrased.
On the premise that you are now proposing, the difference between the playing of Angus Grant and Nigel Kennedy is an aggregate of 'smaller techniques'.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I am not a dabbler - or at least I do not consider myself to be. But then, one of the things this thread may be clarifying is that there is no one 'take' or benchmark for what we all think we are doing. Maybe the prevalent black-or-white outlook on that is responsible for a large amount of the discord on this forum.
What's more, the limitations of the inet make it nigh on impossible to clarify. For example, take Emily's point about time, my response is that no one can know other people's situation in this respect, so what's the point in commenting?: (For the record, Emily, the issue is how much of one's time is one's own. If a student asks why I haven't marked their work, the answer "because I was at a session" rightly carries no weight). I if go into necessary detail about why my time is limited, I will immediately lay myself open to cries of 'whingeing teacher', feeling sorry for himself etc.
I made the comment about dabbling at a point when, to be honest, I was feeling pretty beaten down by all this, and beginning to wonder whether I even knew myself any more.
I take most things I do seriously (too seriously, some would say); I ama ware of my shortcomings and am gradually doing what I can to address them - but clearly by the parameters of this group I am nothing but a dabbler.
You can compound the confusion by the fact that, working in a vacuum, you have nothing to benchmark yourself against. On the one hand, by only ever comparing myself to recordings of the pro's I have always felt inadequate about my ability, whereas now I'm actually getting out and playing, the response has been pretty different. What's right? Depends what you measure against.
I think the one salient point from this is the realisation for all of us that the contexts in which we are working are by no means the same. I made that point not long after I joined, but was left then with the feeling that no one really took it on board.
As for playing in sessions, well I am not going to argue the point about the frustrations of less experienced players, but from what you say, the ways they are dealt with are pretty unwholesome. And yes, I have encountered the problem myself, so I know it's not an easy one.
But who is to say what the 'right' attitude is? I come right back (yet) again to the prevalent assumption that some people have god-given right of judgement on these matters. And where people set out the options in such terms, my natural instinct is to be sceptical.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think this thread has run its course.
Weejie, I know exactly where you can shove my admittedly sloppy phrasing that was intended to make a point to someone who (a) wasn't you and (b) doesn't have your expertise on traditional music.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't mean to sound so cranky (except at Weejie. It does my head in when people go out of their way to just be a tool for the sake of it), but this entire thread reminds me of the zillions of people I've met in the horse world who will complain until the cows come home about how badly behaved their horse is. When you point out that the problems come from their entire approach to and understanding of horses, they do an about-face and say, "Oh, oh, he's fine and he's getting better and I don't have serious trouble with him."
Then stop complaining about your freakin' badly-mannered horse!
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
clearly a case of horses for courses.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Skull Duggeraigh Dubh
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I thought it was beer...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1JOFhfoAD4
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
" think this thread has run its course.
Weejie, I know exactly where you can shove my admittedly sloppy phrasing that was intended to make a point to someone who (a) wasn't you and (b) doesn't have your expertise on traditional music. "
I thionk you've missed the point entirely.
Where do you draw the line in "listening carefully"?
The difference in the palying of Angus Grant and Liz Carroll, like the difference between Angus Grant and Nigel Kennedy is not just one of 'subtlety' but a difference of genre. OK, there might be a similarity in two genres that play jigs and reels etc, which may put an Irish fiddler closer to a West Highland Scottish fiddler than a classical violinist, but in all cases the difference is much more than subtle - and because of that, I pointed out that there was a vast difference. If you don't consider the difference to be more than subtle, then, indeed, it is you who is not listening and whatever point you were trying to make is lost as a result.
So, perhaps you are being closer to an implement than I am. Your reaction is as immature as those in a huff because someone questions the goddess.
Liking and appreciating are two different things. You can appreciate all the subtlety and technical ability of a player - nay even understand what that player is getting at, but whether that player is playing in a style that hits an emotive spot is another thing altogether. They can go together but they don't necessarily go together. Ian might have problems when listening to Liz Carroll due to not understanding her playing (though he does seem to appreciate it) but even if he did 'understand' all the subtle nuances (even on aggregate), it doesn't mean that he is going to find it emotionally appealing. The analogy with rearing horses is not really valid. Such is music.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I can post westerns til the cows come home;
Rio Bravo ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IpEnsdXwFM
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Where's that "like" button?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>I am in no position to say that if you're not brilliant, you should give up. Except to myself, which I threaten to do on a fairly regular basis
Well then, you know how I feel. Too easy to assume everyone else on here plays like a pro. You sound O.K. to me: not exactly Liam O'Flynn - but who does, apart from Liam O'Flynn?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Weejie, you got me!
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
*Lesson plan for Ian*
Here's a thought, out of the blue. There's probably only one in a million chance of it happening; but it's almost guaranteed. Stop playing mandolin for 2-3 months. Turn your attention to fiddle. 1st day let your wife be a fiddle widow. (You can make up for it later). 2nd day play the fiddle for brief periods of time. 1st week take plenty of breathers. Play for longer periods of time each day or so. After 3 months you won't be great, but you will have put your musical attention on the fiddle.
In the long run I doubt your mandolin playing will have suffered.
However, your new band make think they are the widows. Let them know it's nothing permanent.
Cheers!
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
...
On the 1st day play fiddle nonstop. Best if you have the music room to yourself, no distraction, & play everything you have in your head. This is just a release. A kind of primal scream. The real playing (& work) begins once you've detoxed.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Maybe, just maybe, we are nearing closure.
1. Understanding is not the same as appreciating.
2. Appreciating is not the same as Liking.
3. The advice "just listen" presupposes that by doing so, everyone will hear the same thing.
4. ‘Hearing’ those things presupposes that by doing so you will like what you hear.
5. Liking what you hear presupposes that you have the knowledge/expertise to reproduce it.
None of it is certain: music is not that deterministic. My argument in a nutshell.
At least I’m doing something about the last one.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ben, you’re closer to part of the truth than you know.
I can’t do more without getting backache, but the stamina is growing rapidly.
I already am playing much more fiddle than mandolin right now: three to four hours last Saturday. It’s driving my wife to distraction
I’ve now been going like that for 10 weeks. I’m not great by any stretch of the imagination, but I sense that it is coming. At least I know what I’m trying to sound like, and the LH finger strength is already there. The OAIM lessons have given me the rudiments of technique that I just didn’t know before.
Excellent point about release. I have been playing far too fast just for the sheer hell of it, to push myself nearly to breaking point. I’ve got that out of the system and have now started working on things at a sensible pace. I can make some things sound quite reasonable, though I’m still only at the foot of the mountain, just quite a lot quicker than I was expecting.
But I can’t let the band go. It’s taken too long to get this far, and it’s already going to take at least the rest of the year to have anything respectable together.
I’ve decided to put my neck on the line. I’ve put three samples on YouTube, but they will only be there until Friday – I don’t want the whole world watching! These are not rehearsed in any way – I just pressed the red button.
Ignore the terrible PC recording quality. Ignore all the beginners’ problems – very poor tone, incomplete bow control, imprecise finger positions, slow speed (but probably still not as slow as I should have been going). I know all that and will work on it over time. Yesterday when I made them, I was experimenting with very short bowing. Listening to the resultant poor quality, I now know a little more about the tonal price you pay for that, and today I tried something different.
Just remember that until the end of February I had never played a fiddle. Ask yourself whether there is a decent, idiomatic player in the making, somewhere in there – and whether it is the work of someone who really has neither ear nor care for this music. There’s no need to make public comments if you don’t want, and I would rather you didn’t if they are rude. Not that I will be bothered – it’s an academic point I’m trying to make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HSsUnomjCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBMF2S42LYY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7JCd3UGNkI
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Let me know when you're ready to set the other instruments aside for a solid two months. But, if you're having backaches, you've started out wrong. There are 2 types of fiddlers' ~ those who are constantly in pain vs. those who sussed out how to play fiddle comfortably. You can usually see the difference. Go back to the basics.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's tension.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
...
"But I can’t let the band go." You don't need to. As I said, let them know it isn't permanent. If they love you they'll understand
.
But, the choice is entirely in your hands.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Cross-post
It always is, hence the distinction between the two type of players.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And it's getting progressively less as I adapt. The mandolin is a much harder instrument to play. There's just less to know. It also seems to encourage tension, whereas, of course, the fiddle needs the opposite. Took a while even to begin to get hat sorted.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Of course the just listen thing is a red herring.;
There is no such thing. If you are interested in how the brain and its ear work read Daniel Levitins book; this is your brain on music'. Very informative. [ Its a shame Danny is not here as he is our resident neuroscientist. Hard luck Danny! ]
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1997/11.13/HowYourBrainLis.html
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=124978
If you want to Improve on fiddle , play your scales, double stops arpeggios etc etc simple GDA scales along with a drone forget about tunes on the fiddle.
Look at Jerone , playing well after 6 month.. how did he achieve that... a year of violin lessons perhaps.. hey Fiddle learner, what did you get taught in that year ?............
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wow.
Didn't think this was appropriate, but maybe it is...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn8YubD01sk
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
10 weeks?!... well done Ian. I like your triplets in the D Landlady .. How about making those stand out a bit more... A lot better than I sounded after a few years IMO ! sigh...
your point wyogal?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, perhaps you should post a new discussion for the YouTubes. I'll leave it to fiddlers (& more experienced players) to comment in depth.
My initial impression is rather poor phrasing on "Drunken Landlady" & "Rose in Heather". Although, on the latter, it sounds as if you loosened up as you were more into the tune. Horse Keane's needs a stronger hornpipe rhythm, it's mechanical. Cooley's sounds like the one you have best in your head. You seemed most comfortable of all the tunes.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
you figure it out.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
LOL after 10 weeks you critique his playing!? LOL you do better after 10 weeks.
Figure it out wyogal? No , I cant be arsed playing silly games....
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ben, I don't think it warrants a new thread. I'm not after plaudits or anything - though constructive criticism is never unwelcome here. A lot of any credit should go to Majella Bartley's lessons.
Just to show I'm not afraid to put my money where my mouth is.
Thanks for the encouragement, all.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by ian stock
piobagusfidil, I have been corresponding with Mr. Stock on a regular basis. He wants a comprehensive critique. Beg pardon if I have somehow offended you.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Sounds good for 10 weeks, Ian. You have more balls than me. I wouldn't put a recording of myself within 10 miles of the Yella Board (though I have been known to send them to people via private email
).
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Putting stuff up is dangerous, that is for sure. On the recently deleted thread of infamy, somebody searched out a picture and made fun of Jon Kiparsky's appearance and pet cat. It makes you wonder.
But I really wish there were more recordings up by members. It would be instructive as to which members know what they are talking about, and which ones are talking out of their lower digestive tract.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by TaoCat
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes, that would be why I'd never put anything up. I like the possibility that people are deluded enough to believe, from my writing, that I don't actually suck. Why on earth would I divest them of that delusion?
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you're going to love this ... but thinking about "Drunken Landlady" had me wondering how Liz Carroll might play the tune. Well, I cannot find anywhere that she has recorded the tune. Here's a couple of others I did find;
practice chanter ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgqCAOLby50
Interesting that he says here's a hornpipe, I don't play it as a hornpipe, though listening to your recording (Ian) I did get a hint of hornpipe rhythm.
The Bothy ~ "The Morning Star, The Fishermans Lilt & The Drunken Landlady"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3oO6I56Guc
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well, TSS, you don't go around breezily dispensing musical dictates as though they were the absolute word of the ITM messiah, so I doubt you'd be judged that harshly. Plus I've heard you have some skill at the Irish octopus.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by TaoCat
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
All this talk of excluding 'dabblers' can go too far. One of the great things about sessions is that they are an opportunity for ordinary people to enjoy making music together, a rare commodity these days when so many people simply consume music passively by listening. Set the bar too high, and the session turns into an event only for the elite few, which destroys one of the big reasons that it is so special. On the other hand, set the bar too low, and no one has fun, as the music becomes plodding and painful.
As with so many things in life, somewhere in the middle of these two extremes is a happy medium where the music is good, and everyone enjoys the good time.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Al's exactly right. Plus, if the bar is set too high, you can't reach your drink.
# Posted on May 17th 2011 by TaoCat
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Good point, TaoCat!
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The single thing that jumps out at me about this thread is when Ian says the micro-dynamics are like counting rivets, whereas he prefers the macro-dynamics.
Then you'll be missing much of how this music is played by all the best practitioners. It's all about the micro. Dynamics, timing, twiddly bits. The smaller details you learn to hear, the more there is to appreciate. If that doesn't float your boat, then you might be better off in another genre.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, I don't want to go round it all yet again. I didn't say they aren't important. I just said that IMO there's no great benefit in concentrating on them at the expense of the bigger picture any more than there is the other way round.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will makes a good point. Not to say I can manage them myself, but it is in the nuances and subtle bits of this music that I find the beauty. Otherwise it is just Riverdance or Celtic Woman or midi tunes as far as I'm concerned.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by TaoCat
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, what is 'the bigger picture'?
If you strip away all embellishment, phrasing and the rest of it all you have left is a one dimensional outline that people can recognise as a representation of sorts of Irish music but which in fact an empty shell that is in fact lacking everything that gives Irish music it's content, soul or whatever you want to call it. You have nothing, in other words.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
To me it seems the difference between a mannequin and a real person. One is the representation, but let us not forget it is in the real person it is the quirks, the flaws and the thousand little individual nuances that we find love.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by TaoCat
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Dow, I am not a dabbler - or at least I do not consider myself to be."
Thanks for clarifying that. Ignore my advice about sessions then and turn your attention to what Will Harmon put so succinctly above. It's worth reiterating: "It's all about the micro. Dynamics, timing, twiddly bits. The smaller details you learn to hear, the more there is to appreciate. If that doesn't float your boat, then you might be better off in another genre".
Ian: "I am aware of my shortcomings and am gradually doing what I can to address them - but clearly by the parameters of this group I am nothing but a dabbler".
Ian, that's unfair. I only used the word "dabbler" because you used it yourself in reference to yourself.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I wasn't meaning to be unfair. Some people on here clearly think that.
But I don’t disagree with Will. As seen in our band practice yesterday, our new fiddler really has a command of the detail, and he’s put wings on us. But my initial comment about LC was that she seemed to have failed to connect to her audience. All the other contributory factors aside, at the end of the day, she failed to stop them dead in their tracks, despite being one of the best individual players that there is. Yet I have seen audiences go wild over people far less accomplished, simply because the players matched the music to the audience.
At the risk of repeating myself, to some extent LC fails (so far) with me for the same reason. Whereas I can understand the detail, and I do love the subtleties of this music, for me they are only fully effective when deployed as part of an engaging interpretation of the tunes in that bigger sense. They are not enough on their own. LC *seems* to be less interested in that, which is why I feel that her music is quite ‘samey’. Some of that is me, some of it her. I’m sure it doesn’t cost her sleep
I quite accept that that will be of less importance to people who are predominantly session players; I just don’t accept that it is *absolutely* wrong in musical terms. It’s a matter of emphasis. Personally, I find sessions less fulfilling than band rehearsals, the main reason being the opportunity to experiment with arranging; who’s to say that’s wrong either? In a way, the details are a ‘given’ in that situation, but even there it depends on the instruments in use and the tastes of the players. The proof of the pudding is that it is quite possible to derive deep fulfilment from the music in that and other ways, even if not everyone shares it.
I’m certainly excusing poor playing, but don’t forget we’re all specialists here, even me. What we get out of the music is not what everyone hears. Those of my friends and relatives who hear me labour under the deception that I’m a pretty good player. They don’t know why they are deceived – they have no knowledge of the music other than through me, and nothing specific to benchmark me against. But so far as they are concerned they are hearing something they like, and are even impressed by.
I have now circulated my LC CD round several of my colleagues. Without exception, they all decided her music ranged from 'uninteresting' to 'really boring' . Who’s to say they are ABSOLUTELY wrong? And they’re not all musical numpties either.
Much of the advice has been really helpful, but its failure to see/accept the other side of the coin is why I won’t roll over on this. What's more, even though it is calledThe Session, a wider acceptance of this diversity might make this group all the greater.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Incidentally, I'm still persevering with LC, but I can't say that better familiarity has yet shhofted my view greatly. IMHO, interesting detail, but not an interesting listening experience. I wouldn't want to play like that either.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>I’m certainly excusing poor playing
Certainly NOT excusing poor playing
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Nothing like a good old Freudian slip is there?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This thread has shown clearly that there are some things which people just have to discover by themselves. You can't always shortcut people's learning by pointing out what is a essentially a simple step they can take. It really has to come from them. In fact, with some people, making any observations can be detrimental and it can make them dig their heels in deeper in the absolute conviction that their instincts are right. After reading this thread, I want to make efforts on my own part in the future never to be like that.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, it's not a matter of digging heels in for its own sake. It's just that much of the opinion goes against general musical and wider common sense. Which is still not to disagree with the specifics of the music, nor to say that the discussion hasn't made me re-think some pretty big things - but ITM is not a little bubble entirely divorced from the wider human experience.
As for learning, there broadly are two ways of doing it, as I'm sure you're aware: inductive and deductive. The advice on here has largely focused on the latter; some people work better with the former.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're right, you can take the horse to water and all that but in fairness this discussion is clearly a continuation in Ian's quest of finding out what, in his own words, he is missing.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
x post
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
p.s. boy are you right about those other aspects of the learning curve. I struggle with it daily, don't forget. But I also know that initial rejection of an unfamilair notion is not infrequently just the first step to assimilating it.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I know enough about inductive and deductive learning being a teacher myself. It explains why Michael was so reluctant to give you specific examples of what to listen for in LC's playing. I'm sure he'd much rather you got it for yourself. But then he was pressured to give specific examples. Be serious now - how much individual attention and how many private e-mails would it take for Michael to actually ELICIT from you what particular aspects of the music you need to pay close attention to? It just wouldn't work. That sort of stuff only works in the classroom when you can get direct connections and instant feedback as well as pairwork and groupwork.
You as a teacher should recognise the signals people give off when they're trying sensitively to highlight a gap in a learner's knowledge and to push them through their Zone of Proximal Development. Now it's over to you. Enjoy the journey
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves."
That's so way off the mark. So many assumptions there...
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"It's just that much of the opinion goes against general musical and wider common sense."
*Who's* musical and common sense? So far, Ian, most of the responses you have gotten on this thread have been from experienced players, many of whom I have heard play in "meatspace" and know they're bloody good. Irish trad is a specialized genre and it all sounds "samey" to your average listener who has no great interest in it, even if they're a music major at Julliard. Most music which your average non-tradhead listens to, whether it's classical, rock'n'roll, whatever, seems primarily structured around macro-dynamics and arrangements, which, as many posters in this thread have oft-repeated, trad is not. My feeling is that the invention of trad bands was a measure of bringing trad music to this audience, making it something more accessible and comprehensible, which is great but even people who play in bands would acknowledge that's not where the heart of the music is.
My main point with this is that a poll of your colleagues, who presumably have no great familiarity with and passion for Irish music, isn't very convincing data. Your "poll" of people on this website, who do understand this music, has generated very different results. But you keep insisting that the opinions expressed here, challenging your premises which you doggedly keep arguing, go against "general musical and common sense." Then you look for reasons behind this disparity, which don't entail altering your fundamental premise, such as dismissing aforesaid advice as "session players" while you "prefer bands." Lots of people who play in sessions also play in bands. The majority of good players who post here have probably been in one at some point or another.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"This thread has also shown is that while highly focused special interest groups may well have incredibly absorbing, high level skills and knowledge, there is no breaching the wall that closes them off from wider life. The more you look intently inwards, the more you just see what you want to see, and the less clearly you see everything that is going on around you. I suppose that's all well and good while you are just talking amongst yourselves."
Um, what?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dow, I assumed you teach. Yes, I understand your points.
I had also read the deeper motives; they're not unwelcome.
Of course that last commment makes assumptions and generalisations, but this group nonetheless exhibits traits common with other similar groups I have known. One is the sense of self-reinforcement of a common consciousness. Another is the way they react to people who have the temerity to differ, and not just me.
I too have been misjudged here. I am not making any special claims whatsoever for those clips, but I hope they demonstrate that I at least have *some* awareness of what this music is all about - and the effect that changing instruments is already having.
Truth is rarely one-sided, and at least I'm prepared to acknowledge my limits.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I keep trying to find a more eloquent, clear manner of addressing your two previous posts, but I can't get beyond, "What?" Or maybe, "Eh?"
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"the way they react to people who have the temerity to differ"
I'm sorry you see it like that. I'm also sorry that you can't see why you aren't appreciating the brilliance in Liz Carroll's playing. I hope you do see it eventually. When you do, let us know, eh?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Aye, what he said.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So am I Dow, it's not what I was hoping to find here. I'm also sorry that people can't see that the difference of opinion here is nowhere near as wide as you all seem to think.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Seems to me that you asked for advice (How can I improve my playing) and you just don't like the answers (focus on the micro-dynamics, the small variations in timing and phrasing), because you're not interested in that aspect of it.
The good news is that your fiddle playing is coming along so even if you claim you're not interested in that stuff, you must be subconsciously picking it up to some degree. Although Like Will said, it still mystifies me how someone could not be interested in that stuff and be interested in Irish music. Oh well.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily, specialised groups of all sorts nearly always vanish up their own backsides talking to themselves about themselves as though the rest of the world didn't exist. You should see what it is like in professional circles - ANY profession, from what I hear. And you should see how baffled parents look when teachers start spouting teacher-speak at them.
Groups of all sorts tend to look inwards on their own focus, talk to other people who share the same world-view and forget that the rest of the world really doesn't share their inevitably distorted perspective. 'Fraid I seem to be one of them.
That is not a back-handed swipe at this group, but if you all can't see it that may be part of the problem. It's also true of (nearly) all such groups that I've ever seen - the price of specialisation. It's certainly true of model-making groups. But it doesn't give them a monopoly of the truth, even though they often think it does.
It's also why those bankers don't 'get' why the rest of the world hates them: they exist in their own little self-justifying world where everyone is just like them. They have lost all sight of the greater perspective on what they have done and how other people see it.
They also don't like it when someone pricks their awareness of it, but they usually react by dreaming up all kinds of self-justifying reasons why they should continue with their present behaviour. Yes, those bonuses are still being paid, we are still being told that they are 'necessary'. And yes I am aware that some will think that is exactly what I am doing myself.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware this was actually the Liz Carroll Fan Club I had joined, but I'm not going to say I like her music if I don't. Even that won't necessarily stop me listening and learning from it it just won't move me the way some music does. But if that means I need to leave, then please boot me. If I equally disliked all other good players, then you might have more of a point, but that just isn't so.
Look, at the end of the day, this is all about ENJOYING music. For some of us, it's about more than that. Me included - up to a point. I KNOW that I get deep fulfilment from this music, doing it just the way I do - not that it stops me from wanting to do better, and some of that involves what you have all been saying.
But it is just not possible to gainsay what is for me, a self-evident truth, that only *I* know what works for me.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thanks Emily, but I'm clearly still not getting through.
One last attempt for old time's sake; I have work to do. I have *no problem* with the answers, and I am working on the advice. Yes, I got frustrated when I couldn't hear so well what you were on about - but the main cure to that has been the OAIM lessons, not anyone telling me to "just listen".
I just don't think these answers here are any more complete in themselves than what seems to have become characterised as my opposing view.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Now I know I have truly wasted my time here. Emily, leave it
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Come back "Christian tunes"... all is forgiven.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Johnny Jay
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I hate the way that forums force people into ever more extreme positions than they probably ever intended.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hmmm, the softly softly approach clearly isn't working. Ian, if you don't get on board with the Liz Carroll thing soon then we'll have to hand the matter over to the heavy mob. They will install a massive sound system outside your flat and play Tommy Peoples tracks at you night and day.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by johndsamuels
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Better yet -- who has some old Dinny Delaney tapes?
No one is saying you *should* like Liz Carroll, unless you're totally missing the point of the last few hundred posts. We've moved on from Liz Carroll and what we've been arguing is, as far as I know, the importance -- or not -- of close, active listening in your own development as a trad musician. To whoever. To Liz, Angus Grant, Martin Hayes, anyone.
And are you really comparing thesession.org to the guys who caused the financial meltdown? Really?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, it looks like twice, you have asked for peoples opinions about something that they know nothing about. First your Wife, then your college friend. You know very well that in music, that is not the way to find out what's good and what's not. To learn what good music is, is to see what stands the test of time. This means in our own life as well. --I'll make a confession. When i first came to this website, i wasn't completely turned on by the musical sources that were given to me. But i did realize that my "pre-concieved notions" may have been wrong so i kept listening. When i listened through the Kevin Burke cd the first time through, i DID NOT LIKE IT. Ok, maybe a little, but not very much. But now aftter listening to it for a couple months, i absolutely love it. --This isn't the first time this happened with an unfamiliar genre of music. And just because your Wife and college friends don't like it, does not mean that you wont learn how to. --Also you`re on dangerous ground implying that you`re right and everyone else is wrong. You say that we`re not looking at your opinions when from this side it looks like you`re ignoring everyone elses opinions, and facts to back them up.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Also, what message board have you been reading where it's an insular group who all agree with each other and have the same narrow perspective? I'm pretty sure it hasn't been this one.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's getting a bit like advocating reading Ulysses without getting any of the references to the classic, literature and history. It's a damn good story innit?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
'classics'
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No Emily, I was just using an analogy I've been reading up on recently to try to explain why positions so easily become entrenched.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wilful-Blindness-Ignore-Obvious-Peril/dp/184737770X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1305729389&sr=8-1
I'm not missing the point. Tommy Peoples wouldn't be too bad, but I'd prefer Kevin Burke. Incidentally, I also prefer Kathryn Nicoll's playing (admittedly only based on a few small clips) to Angus Grant, at least as observed live with the Shoogles.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'm heading home now. Saltfishforty will be on the sound system.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Having sessioned with both of them, I'm not offering an opinion on that one on a public message board. ;)
What are we being "willfully blind" to?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It says that ian has been in the music game for about 30 years. That's a long time(to me anyway lol). How could someone that has been into an artistic lifestyle for so long not understand the signifcance of Nuance and Subtlety? I mean, yes the big picture is beautiful. But would it be as beautiful without all of the fine lines? The variations in color? The attention to detail set by the Artist?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian-I don't think you should force yourself to listen to LC. My goodness music shouldn't be such a chore! Set her aside for now. Come back to it later and you may find that you really enjoy her music in a year or so. Besides that, I'm having a hard time keeping up with what's going on in this thread!
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yeah fiddlelearner I agree it's the 'Nuance and Subtlety' (or useful lack of) that are the big picture, Esp. in this music.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hey wait a minute! Ian! If noone else has said this, i will, but i'm sure someone else has! The Nuances and Subtleties are important because(trumpet sounds*) They make the Big Picture Pop! They bring it to LIFE! The darker colors make the lighter colors BRIGHTER! The fine lines make the fluffy lines look fluffier! The different shades of blue make the color blue an interesting color! Opposite colors make each other stand out*purple, yellow**red, green* All the tinting and shading make for variation in depth which makes causes for realism! Every little bow stroke, every little change in color, every little line makes the picture what it is! A Work of True Art! Ya'll done got me excited!
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Thinking about it further, I would have loved to have been one of your students, Ian.
"Excuse me, sir, I don't understand why I failed this exam. I believe my answers are as equally valid as your so-called 'correct' ones. The fact that you disagree with me suggests that you're being willfully blind to alternative points of view, because teachers are such an insular, inward-looking group who only care about or are cognizant of their own perspective."
Bloody brilliant!
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I used to Listen to Liz, but then I was turned on to Tommy Potts, Bobby Casey, Paddy Canny, Martin Byrnes, Jimmy Powers. and many many more So I suggest these folk might be a bit more your cup of tea Ian? and if you others are not familiar with these players check them out !
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I don't see what the big deal is. If you don't like someone's music, that's your preference. You don't even need to say why - maybe you haven't pinned it down yet.
When I don't like a person, for example, I don't feel the need to externalise it, or ask for other's approval, even if they're very popular. If I don't like them, it may be just a gut instinct and that's that. The same applies to music.
As for Lake Effect, I have that CD. Not one I would play very often; however, if Liz was playing locally, I would be first in the queue to hear her play. She's wonderful live.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Conán McDonnell
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Did you read the whole discussion, Conan?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Emily,
quick-ish answer to your last point.
A lot of resistance to education is actually rooted in unnecessary coercion.
The first thing I do as a teacher, mostly but not exclusively with the older ones, is to create a culture of what you might call 'shared enquiry'. It can be a high risk strategy, but it suits my subjects, and you will have to take my word for it that (eventually) the students respond.
From the teacher's point of view, it invoves the admission that s/he does not always know 'right'. I have no problem saying to my students, "I don't know the answer to that, let's find out" Or with the older ones, "Let's consider the options". Then it is a matter of evaluating the evidence - that's where the teacherly guidance comes in. You'll have to believe me, in the long run, it works.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Em
Not really - just the first 20 or so posts and the last few; it all seemed to be getting a bit nit-picking at one stage.
Not that this is unusual; seems to me that some discussions are ostensibly excuses for people to flex their intellectual(?) muscles when all they end up doing is skewing the debate in a direction at odds with the original question.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Conán McDonnell
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Session.org discussions getting nitpicky? Never....
Somewhere in the middle it became more of a discussion of how to listen to music.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There's a lot to discover in Liz Carroll's playing; maybe for some people it's too much of an effort to try and not worth it in the end.
For example, I struggle to hear the "music" in Derek Bailey's playing. It's just not for me. Great technique, undoubtedly, and an incredibly personal style. But for everyone who actually "gets it" I'm sure there are as many who profess to and don't. I just don't see the point of spending your life hoping something grows on you.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Conán McDonnell
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I know how to listen I just open my ears .
For an opinion I open my brain .
As for Liz Carrol I met her in a session once great player nice personality , I found her even better in the session than on her albums
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by bazouki dave
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Some thoughts about recent points, said more in sorrow than anger:
1) I asked non-specialists their thoughts deliberately. They are not all music-ignoramuses, though. An alternative interpretation of the responses might be that such people retain a more balanced overview than those of us for whom ITM is of disproportionate importance. I include myself in that.
2) The common sense I refer to is not irrelevant, but largely drawn from my own experiences of trad around me over the years, isolated though I grant they have been until now.
3) The consensus on the MB is not as one-sided as is being made out. You are presumably not hearing the small but steady trickle of off-list back-voices that I am. I am not about to violate anyone’s anonymity by being more specific, but the fact that they don’t want to speak in public may be significant. And I am not in the habit of self-deceit by fabricating such claims.
4) It took one of those back-voices to pull into focus what my real misgivings are here. So I won’t take all the credit for this, but you may remember certain allusions I made a long time ago.
I could no more change genre than I could live on Mars. I was deeply drawn to this music in my youth, and nothing else will do. I can’t quite rationalise why on an emotional level, only an intellectual one. But it is the emotional side that is always my final arbiter, a form of love. And what really concerns me here is what is happening to this Music, if the voices on this list are to be believed.
I like it precisely because it is the music of ordinary people, many of whom were only ordinarily-skilled. I like it because it is friendly, and welcoming and unpretentious, and not in itself over-intellectualised. I like it in the modern sense because of the lack of affectation that means the trad equivalent of Michael Jackson is prepared to kip unpretentiously with one of my band mates when in the area, with not the slightest grandness to be seen.
I don’t see people sneered at because of their lack of ability; yes they can be frustrating, but a pub is a democratic place and unless there is a formal contract, just who is to say who has hegemony? I recently witnessed one poor old guy having his instrument put in tune by someone who could – and then we all carried on; that is as it should be.
I don’t see/hear about people ignored because they don’t meet muster, or where you feel you can’t play in a certain pub in case you’re not good enough or in case you say or do the wrong thing. I don’t see people unprepared to showcase their music for fear it will be ridiculed. (Just Why DON’T we see more examples of people’s work? It’s easily done, and actions speak louder than words. Yes, there are some honourable examples to that).
This music should not be placed on a pedestal where it becomes dimishingly accessible to ordinary people. There should not be hero-worship and a competitive hierarchy based on adherence to rules imposed by a self-appointed elite. People should be free to practice and enjoy this music in whatever way, at whatever standard that they can, without fear of judgement; that is the essence of folk music. Historically, it is a music that took second place to dancing, not the platform for egotistical, competition to see who knows best at the expense of the rest, of one-upmanship by those who think they are one up. My guess is that a lot of the old guys didn’t see it like that either.
When it comes to changing genre, maybe it is not *me* that needs to do that. If you really want all that you say you stand for, shift to Classical – that’s (regrettably) where you will find all the sniffy hierarchies you want, the cliques, the rarefied atmosphere, the intellectualisation, the veneration of genius, the worship of vanishingly small nuances by a tiny minority. And to be fair, some people who just get on with it.
Outwith this list, I have *never* heard a discussion about all of these niceties; the most common observation is “Blo*dy brilliant tune!” Three of the guys in the band are experienced, accomplished performers, one notably so, but there is not a drop of superiority in them; they are happy modestly to muck in with the rest. That, too, is as it should be.
If your trad world consists of all the things your messages have conveyed to me, then thanks, I’m glad I live in the trad outback, where we just get on with enjoying a good tune. I don’t want in on all that. You are trying to turn it into a quasi-classical discipline, which is exactly what I *don’t* want it to be. And the more you insist you are absolutely, unquestionably right (astonishing for such educated people who ought to understand all about Doubt – or – um - perhaps not...), the less convincing the whole edifice becomes. I’m not suggesting that your intentions are malicious, and I thank you for your help – but just stand back and look at the whole musical world you inhabit – hierarchies, back-biting, exclusion, elitism, name-calling. I’m not sure even all of you really like either, if the truth were told. Just maybe it takes an outsider to see all from all of the stuff you are saying without even *mentioning* Music. THAT’S why I’m not convinced.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, sorry to say it. You haven't a clue.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, if we do get a chance to have a tune while you're in Scotland (and not in Sandy Bells, cause I won't play there), you will realize that if even a sentence of the above post was directed at me or the people I enjoy playing tunes with, then you're being ridiculous.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I truly must be missing something. I'm reading everything, & I can certain understand where the truth is (& imho isn't) in what you're saying, Ian. But you're clearly frustrated & the criticisms aren't hitting the target. It's scattershot.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You and be both, Ben.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Baws...*you and me
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I feel I have to elaborate a bit on my previous post, I have had the dinner I was cooking while I quickly got that one in.
Ian, you are expressing a few notions about irish music there that are so way off the mark that it's hard to even begin to respond.
First get away from the ridiculous notion that this is music of ordinary people and therefore it should be simple. I can tell you from experience that the ordinary people I have experienced in Clare have among them the closest and sophisticated listeners I have ever come across. Some of the people playing highly complex and detailed music I have come across were exactly these 'ordinary people' uneducated maybe in many ways but highly intelligent and articulate people who knew their music inside and out.
Playing with these people chat between tunes often related to such and such player who had this or that turn or twist in a particular tune. And the extend of the detailed knowledge of a wide array of players these men (they were mostly men, a few women had it too though) carried around never failed to amaze me.
It isn't about putting music on a pedestal, or maybe it is. And so what. Ordinary as the people I am talking about were (and are) they were mad about music and it filled their lives, raised their hearts on dark days. Why not put it on a pedestal?
This music is like other arts the really dedicated practitioners know what it is about, they are the musical equivalent of writers of literature. Their music is full of references to other musicians, a little deliberate quote from so and so, in homage, or delighting in a beautiful turn of phrase or a particularly eloquent statement.
Ordinary people yes. Simple people, certainly not.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, what you call elitism, I think of as hard-won insider knowledge gained by impassioned experience.
And the only unfriendly reviews of someone else's playing I've ever seen on this board were aimed at self-proclaimed experts whose videos showed them to be far, far less capable than they wanted us to believe (and over ten years here, I can think of only a handful of these instances--I can name names if you want, so you can compare to those off-list murmurs you're hearing).
In fact, the mustard board is nearly always encouraging of other musicians. Look at the thread congratulating Patrick Murray's fleadh results, Jerone's learning curve, and all the kudos to Jim (FIDDLE4) for his many videos on YouTube. I see this as the norm on this forum.
Once again, it seems like your preconceptions are clouding the real picture, yet you seem intent on sticking to those mistaken preconceptions. Oh well.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You've very likely let the *anonymous* cat out of it's proverbial bag. If I'm right (& I'm inferring from what WH said) I wouldn't reject him entirely but I'd compare his notes against each & everyone of the contributors above before deciding on the whole picture.
Check your email, Ian
Ben
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Prof. I was not confusing 'ordinary' with 'uneducated'. Plenty of ordinary people are highly intelligent and well-educated. And from what I can perceive from a combination of visits, some friendships and more distant watching, yes, some Scots and Irish seem to have a deeper vein of empathy for the Arts (in the broadest sense) than we English seem, collectively, to have. So no surprise and certainly no criticism there.
‘Simple’ is no criticism either - even Llig mentioned the simple form of the music. That's its attraction. But all of those things are different, I think from over-intellectualising it. There's a world of difference between commenting on someone's twist on a tune and insisting that’s all there is to it.
Ben, there is no one cat – in fact a number of them. Most of them are not regular contributors on here, and no one has dished any dirt at all, just different, seemingly plausible arguments. A couple have said they don’t want to get caught in the crossfire, which is absolutely understandable to me. I think I have said enough on that already, I’m not about to blow people’s confidentiality.
All I would say is how the hell is Piggy in the Middle here meant to know who to believe? Especially when one lot talk sense so far as I can see it - and seem more prepared to concede the validity of plurality, and the other lot have the weight of numbers and possibly experience? I have neither the time nor the inclination to go digging deeper into that particular can of worms.
Emily, Ben and others, first of all, none of this is personal. Why would it be? I have never yet met you, and all of the discussions we have had have been sensible and civilised. How can I tell what your personal experiences are? Maybe one day I will find out. I sincerely hope for you that they are indeed positive, and I can see no reason why you would continue with them if they were not. But how can you tell what mine are either? I probably come across as a neurotic or ego-maniac.
Will, there may not be unfriendly reviews on here, but there is one hell of a lot of unfriendly language. If I were intent on sticking to my mistaken preconceptions, the easiest thing would have been to have walked away from all this ages ago.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think it’s safe to say Liz Carroll is an acquired taste…as is all traditional music…and Scotch whisky, for that matter, which goes to show that it’s often worth the effort to learn to like something that doesn’t immediately appeal.
Learning to like something can take a long time, however. I drank cognac for a couple of years before finding out about whisky. And years ago, when I discovered I loved Johnny Cunningham, I found out that one of Johnny’s favorite fiddlers was Martin Byrnes, so I went right out and bought a copy of Martin Byrnes’s LP. Big surprise to find I didn’t like it much---it’s very wild-sounding, especially compared with modern artists. And it wasn’t until a few years ago, when I started learning fiddle myself, that I went back to that Martin Byrnes cd and heard it in a whole new way. It’s my favorite cd in my whole music collection now.
So I think eventually, if you maintain an interest in traditional music, you’ll come upon Liz Carroll again and it will strike you differently.
What I do object to, however, is the tone and content of your original post. You said some pretty unkind things about an accomplished, well-respected, and well-loved musician, one who is living and breathing and might even end up reading what you wrote (probably not, she has better things to do, but you never know). You called her a “classical wannabe”, “self-indulgent”, “monotonous”, “her tunes don’t work as trad tunes”, etc. How insulting! Other posters have tried to point out that you’re factually wrong, and I would agree with them, but I’m more concerned with the idea that you would say that about another musician. Not nice.
Every musician has something to offer. It’s up to us to seek out the beauty in what we hear.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by kennedy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you are persistent. You're the last person I'd consider walking away from a row.
Personally I won't be happy until you have given up on Liz Carroll or alternatively meet her & sat down with the woman in session. One way or the other. This balancing on the precipice is too tense for my blood.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jeez Kennedy, those are tame comments on this board! They are his opinions which he is entitled to. We may not agree but he has the right to speak freely .
During free and open debate we can , if we choose, attempt to offer our views and opinions and discuss the matter. Whether he or we change our minds is a personal decision and entirely up to him/our selves. Peer pressure to make him conform to a majority opinion sucks.
I uploaded a Liz Carrol set here a few years ago after asking her. A member I greatly respect here made a number of comments that are similar to Ians. I think they are great tunes, he thinks they are not, to put it mildly ! thats life! we agree to differ.
The fact is that , as I pointed out, a lot of fiddle ornaments are not available to the mandolin... As a lot of pipe ornaments are not available to the fiddle. That doesn't make the fiddle a lesser instrument. It doesn't make fiddlers who cant hear what's going on in pipe music deaf and ignorant and worthy of pity and disdain!
Liz is a fiddler, a good fiddler, but she, Im sure, would rather not be deified , shes one of the lads when she sits in a session in Tulla or where ever and im sure she can recognise Ians opinions for what they are... opinions.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, re: unfriendly language, yes, you're doing it yourself, as kennedy points out in her post above. "Unfriendly" and critical is precisely how you started this whole thread.
You may not be intent on sticking to your preconceptions, but you certainly haven't shown any inclination to take other perspectives on board. Instead, you've argued every point and grown more antagonistic.
It might help to revisit your purpose here. Are you really out to learn why so many experienced traditional musicians hold Liz in high regard? Or are you here to defend your preconceptions?
What's funny to me is that the best responses to Ian's query have spotlit Liz's musical qualities of simplicity, openness, giving, and generosity, and then Ian calls us all a bunch of self-appointed elitists.
I think there's a short circuit somewhere....
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You might also consider that every single person who's chimed in on this thread clearly did so with the hope of giving you whatever insights they could offer. They've tried to be helpful. Your subsequent characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
piobagusfidil, I might be of the “opinion” that the big hairy wart on the end of your nose is in fact really ugly, but you won’t hear me saying anything about it, to you, or on an internet message board. Why would I say something that would hurt your feelings, that’s negative and unkind? Ian is free to have his opinions. I can certainly object to how he expresses them.
I just don’t see the point in bringing up someone’s name. For example, I love bluegrass music, but I can’t stand “newgrass” or anything that makes bluegrass sound like jazz, which has become popular over the years. I could easily name you at least a dozen musicians who, *in my opinion*, have besmirched the entire bluegrass tradition with their non-melodic improvisations and funny chords and showboat styles of playing. Ugh. Despise the stuff. But there’s no point, because they are fine musicians, and others like them, and it’s a matter of taste.
Just because you have an opinion of any kind, doesn’t mean that you should venture it on a public forum, especially if it’s negative and unkind to a living musician. That’s bad form. It’s the kind of thing that gives this website a bad reputation.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by kennedy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I would like to set the record straight about Liz Carroll and me
First of all, my OP was not intended in any way to be a personal criticism of her or indeed an artistic one. Just why would I presume to do that? I accept entirely that I used some words ill-advisedly and I immediately retracted them at that point. But I also assumed, apparently also ill-advisedly, that people would take them for what they were: the reactions of one listener. I assumed that by now, people ‘know’ me well enough to understand that never, at no point, do I claim to speak anything other than my own thoughts.
What I was not prepared for was what appeared from here to be a mistaken and disproportionate reaction. I still think it was. Eventually, someone was able to pin something more on why I ‘should’ change my views. To some extent it was useful, to some extent it answered nothing. I was referred to an interview with her, but in actual fact it revealed little that I thought I was going to find. I’m going to go round in yet another circle if I try to explain all that again.
Liz Carroll played in London not so long ago. Unfortunately I discovered too late and had a conflicting commitment, otherwise I would have gone. I will still go and see her if I get the chance; in the meantime I will be putting the CD in the shelf and come back to it at a later date. Once again, I’m plenty experienced enough to know how this can work. Even if I still don’t like the music, I will probably continue to listen to it occasionally for ‘educational’ purposes. But the insistence that she can do no wrong is daft, as I’m sure she would agree (how uncritical can you get?) – as is the fact that I don’t know what I’m talking about simply because I prefer different musicians and maybe look for slightly different things. As I said earlier, I hate the way forums distort simple points and make people sound extreme.
Will, yes I argue every point. Are you telling me that other people don't? It's called critical appraisal, at least I like to think so. It's the opposite of blindly accepting what you're told. In the long run it's productive. I wouldn't want you to think that all of this has gone in one are and out the other, I'm in the process of sifting and I've learned things. But a good pupil is not necessarily an uncritical one, in fact quite the opposite.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>Your subsequent characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless.
Guilty as charged to the latter; you're drawing conclusions about the former, except by *impression*. I can't argue with what your impression is, only whether it's the same as what I intended.
As I've said before, to the best of my abilities, I I try to maintain a polite and considered approach and always concede where it's seems appropriate to do so. I accept where I know I lack knowledge; 'unknown unknowns' are a problem for us all. I try to distinguish between fact and opinion. I never insult people personally, at least not intentionally. You know as well as I do how easy it is to misinterpet things online.
But I will argue stand up for my views to the extent that they seem reasonable from here - they are the result of as much thoght and cinviction as the next person's - and I'm not afraid to be unpopular as a result.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>characterizations of the crowd here come off as ungrateful and graceless
Actually, having just re-read that post, I think (hope) it was clear I wasn't having a go at the people here, maybe (some) of the mindset they (possibly) rub up against. I don't want to be on the receiving end of it.
I hope I'm wrong in my conclusions, but it was not me who described the social and musical hierarchies, the snide remarks, the indignation at supposed session-wreckers etc. that go on. I don't find the distinctions made between the 'right' and 'wrong' beginners particularly charitable, but then I've never witnessed them either.
But why pick up on the one negative point, rather than all of the positive points I made? I fall over myself to be consensual wherever I genuinely can, and it all normally gets overlooked. Ah well, that's life, I guess...
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>Are you really out to learn why so many experienced traditional musicians hold Liz in high regard? Or are you here to defend your preconceptions?
I'm sorry for multiple posts, but too much needs a response.
Will, why did I go out and buy an LC album? Why was I even thinking about her? Why would I have gone to see her had I found out in time? (you'll have to take my word on that one). Why on earth do you think I need to defend my preconceptions on here? I have happily existed with the music without needing to do that for several decades. Why have I *not* written LC off?
And as for attacking her in the OP, well I'm flattered that you give my opinions so much importance. Far more that I do myself. My, there are some thin skins round here.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, I was simply wondering if you were *still* in touch with your own intentions.
Again, you counter everything, with vehemence.
Um, this feels like a circular waste of time....
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No Will, not vehemence. Frustration, maybe.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
ian, did you read my post asking about subtlety and nuance?
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Frustration all round so. This is not going to go anywhere.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So you can either keep banging your frustrations against genuinely well-meaning people's perspectives and observations, believing in the notions you've brought to this, or you can choose to be more receptive to the insights offered here. It's up to you.
To me, you started off this thread on the wrong foot. Bit like wading into a hurling forum and criticizing some star hurler of being a wannabe footballer. Bound to rile the other members. And perhaps reveal of your lack of understanding of hurling.
So start over.
FWIW, when I listen to Liz Carroll's playing, I don't hear anything remotely "classical"--not in her technique, style, compositions, etc. Nothing classical about it. She's an Irish traditional musician, always has been, no ambitions to play anything else (unlike Martin Hayes, who has played more than his share of rock, jazz, Orange Blossom Special, and whatever pleased the bar patrons in Chicago back in the day). Yes, her tone is rich and full, but so is Oisin MacDiarmada's and today's Kevin Burke and Tommy Peoples and Brian Conway and James Kelly and.... Certainly Liz lets her fiddle sound like a fiddle, not too clean like a violin. Her playing often includes grit and chop and a bit of dirt. Mixed in with smoothness and clarity and focus. An amazing blend.
That said, there are Americanisms in Liz's original tunes, and sometimes (though not always) in her playing. She tends to emphasize the back beat a fair amount, but other Irish players do likewise. She also likes hitting two strings at once (for drones and doublestops), using the bow for percussion, and she's not beyond shuffle bowings (not unlike Cathal Hayden and Kevin Burke)--there's no disputing some influence from American fiddle music. I'm not sure why anyone would expect anything different from an American fiddler simply being herself.
In contrast to your analysis, what I hear in Liz's playing (I'll admit that I've heard her live a number of times) is remarkable playfulness with the nuances and micro-elements while never losing sight of the bigger picture and overall theme of a tune. The little stuff serves the whole tune. She's not afraid to trust her imagination and sense of the music. That may run to a more modern sensibility, especially in her own compositions, but it's also clearly, thoroughly grounded in the tradition. So when she plays Silver Spear, I hear the age-old tune, and am treated to variations (a well-placed downhill folded scale run in the B Part) and subtleties I've never heard anyone else put in there. That's the measure of a musician who has both the chops and the thousands of hours living in the tunes, building an understanding of the music by learning from her predecessors, and discovering her own musicality.
It's one thing to prefer a more consistently laid back player like Martin Hayes (but go listen to his version of The Crooked Road on Under the Moon), or a more spare player like Sean Smyth, or an insanely inventive player like John Carty. But panning Liz's playing as leaning toward classical or jazz, and being monotonous, focused on the internal structure at the expense of the whole tune--none of that makes actual sense. You might as well accuse Matt Molloy of playing too few notes or discount Tommy Peoples for sounding just like every other Irish fiddler. While we're at it, Cathal Hayden plays too slow, and Bobby Casey's repertoire was anemic....
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Come to think of it, I'd suggest that you take a break from Liz and go listen to all of Bobby Casey's recordings. Then treat yourself to a dose of Paddy Fahy. Then look up Jim Egan's album of Ed Reavy tunes (http://www.jimeagan.com/linernotes.cfm - you can listen to snippets of each track). And *then* come back to Liz and see if you're view of how she fits or doesn't fit into the tradition has changed.
# Posted on May 18th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
But Will, in the modern game it's an oft-heard and legitimate criticism that a star hurler (Ken McGrath and Seán Óg Ó'hAilpín say) is playing like a wannabe (GAA) footballer!
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by The Hurler on the Ditch
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you are starting to remind me of the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail, who suffered terrible wounds, but kept saying, "'Tis but a scratch", insisting he had "had worse", and after his arms were gone said, "It's just a flesh wound!", and finally after all his extremities were chopped off yelled, "Come back here you yellow bastards! I'll bite your legs off!"
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Haha Al!
If you didn't see it up top ian, here it is again. Aside from Liz Caroll, my problem is you talk all this talk about "seeing the big picture", and fail to realize that the nuances and subtleties are apart of the big picture.
It says that ian has been in the music game for about 30 years. That's a long time(to me anyway lol). How could someone that has been into an artistic lifestyle for so long not understand the significance of Nuance and Subtlety? I mean, yes the big picture is beautiful. But would it be as beautiful without all of the fine lines? The variations in color? The attention to detail set by the Artist?
Hey wait a minute! Ian! If noone else has said this, i will, but i'm sure someone else has! The Nuances and Subtleties are important because(trumpet sounds*) They make the Big Picture Pop!
They bring it to LIFE! The darker colors make the lighter colors BRIGHTER! The fine lines make the fluffy lines look fluffier! The different shades of blue make the color blue an interesting color! Opposite colors make each other stand out*purple, yellow**red, green* All the tinting and shading make for variation in depth which makes causes for realism!
Every little bow stroke, every little change in color, every little line makes the picture what it is! A Work of True Art! Ya'll done got me excited!
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So translation?
Dissonance emphasizes Consonance.(Dark colors vs. Bright colors
The little articulate melodic patterns make the rich harmonic patterns sound more full.(fine lines making the fluffy lines look fluffier
With instruments that can cover more than just the absolute pitches, you have a lot more sound to work with.(variations in color. *different shades of blue)
Little changes in rhythm, dynamics, and tempo make the music sound more real and alive.(Shade and Tint)
Every little flick of the finger(every little bow stroke).
Hopefully this opens your mind up a little bit about Nuance and Subtlety. It is very important because it is a HUGE part of the BIG picture.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, this has got *really* silly, all round. I would like to wrap it up if we can. I have no reason to doubt people’s good intentions. I can only hope that the same comes through in return. But ultimately on an internet forum there is no way of knowing beyond people’s track record (if you see it), and their say-so. If there is nothing else to go on, you need to return to first principles and judge arguments on the way they are constructed. That is why I spend a lot of time trying to ensure my posts are clear and fair. Clearly I still don’t always succeed. You have to give people a hell of a lot of latitude online – and then double it.
, but I like the idea. I try to practice it. Look at those above points: where is the rejection of all people have been saying?
Even now, that OP is being misinterpreted. Even when I realised that was so, and elaborated, people still carried on insisting that I was somehow personally attacking LC. It was the personal reaction of one insignificant individual to one CD, nothing more. But even in my posts of largely positive, consensual comments, people insisted on homing in on the ones they felt were negative. The frustration was with that, not the course of the discussion.
Likewise, people’s insistence that I wasn’t taking their comments on board – well, they can’t see what’s going on here, any more that I can see there. Those clips were an attempt to show that my playing is not as antithetical as people seem to think. They have already persuaded me that I needed to change instrument. That’s not insignificant!
I said repeatedly that I was not rejecting people’s advice – but no, this not the same as unconditional acceptance, which is what people seemed to want – some of it makes sense and some of it doesn’t. People here say they know what they are talking about, but they don’t exactly provide huge amounts of evidence. I am also told that some people who claim to know what they are talking about actually don’t. Well how am I to know what to believe? Especially when people construct weak arguments such as things being “factually incorrect” when they are either patently matters of interpretation/opinion or things which would require inside knowledge which they never provide. What am I meant to do? Just go on blind, unconditional faith and believe everything I am told? And what to do when it is contradictory either with other advice or with my own real-world experience? Are you really just expecting me to accept everything unquestioningly? I don’t expect that of my own students.
Your critique of LC at least provides something for me to go on – and you had the sense to couch it in terms of what *you* hear, not some kind of absolute truth. The classical bit was not only my reading of it – and anyway, big deal: I may be right, I may be not; maybe even LC herself doesn’t know. Nobody has yet provided anything where she says definitively, “I am not in the least bit influenced by classical technique” (note technique, not content), “not even subconsciously”. It’s all just supposition and debate. Bottom line, we learn that some fiddle players approach classical violinists in tonal quality. Great: suits me fine!
I have a bit of a dilemma now: would you go out and spend more cash on further recordings of someone you weren’t inclined to like? I might be more inclined to wait until I can see her live. Lake Effect is quite possibly not the whole picture (I did concede as much). In the meantime, I will put that CD on the shelf for future revisiting. And FWIW, I finally had a colleague who came back to me today saying that he liked that CD very much.
The reason I have kicked up a fuss here is simply that I see no reason to take people I have never met entirely at face value, just because they say I should - especially where no apparently ‘good’ reasoning is being employed or where it contradicts first-hand experience. That’s no insult – I wouldn’t expect you to do the same with me – in fact that is exactly how people have been dealing with what *I* had to say. Even though I try to be as plain and straightforward as possible, there’s no reason why you should take my word for it. Actions speak louder than words.
A lot of what has been said is now in the melting pot here. It’s not been rejected, it’s just being digested. What did you expect would happen?
• At present I still stick to my original critique of Lake Effect:
• lots of technical detail, some of which I may not be able to hear.
• Respect for a clearly excellent fiddle player.
• And a lack of emotional response to what she plays. You can’t order that last one!
Plus the other conclusions:
• Ornamentation, detail and interpretation clearly more important in this music than I understood, even though it is historically different in purpose from that which people now seem to be using it for
• The music needs ornamentation to be what it is: who could argue with that? Until I switched instrument I didn’t fully appreciate it because I had never really had to confront it. Work in progress on that one.
• The indispensability of micro-variation? Well, I’m prepared to consider the *possibility*, always was. But I’m not entirely convinced by this still/yet. Desirable maybe, but indispensable? It doesn’t fully add up either with my listening experience, my knowledge of my mates here or indeed a certain amount of logic regarding the subjectivity of interpretation in music. There something approaching a logical flaw to the argument that interpretive detail is essential and non-negotiable. How about the interpretation that leaves it out? Not so sure. Next step will be to ask my band-mates what their views are on this. That will help.
Someone once said that the mark of a mature mind is the ability to entertain a thought without necessarily accepting it. You can make up your own mind about the first bit in my case
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
• Ornamentation, detail and interpretation clearly more important in this music than I understood, even though it is historically different in purpose from that which people now seem to be using it for
-- Citation needed. Clarification also needed: the ornamentation is different in purpose or the music? Either is wrong though. Historically the music was used for dancing... *and* for listening... Same as now.
• The indispensability of micro-variation? Well, I’m prepared to consider the *possibility*, always was. But I’m not entirely convinced by this still/yet. Desirable maybe, but indispensable? It doesn’t fully add up either with my listening experience, my knowledge of my mates here or indeed a certain amount of logic regarding the subjectivity of interpretation in music. There something approaching a logical flaw to the argument that interpretive detail is essential and non-negotiable. How about the interpretation that leaves it out? Not so sure. Next step will be to ask my band-mates what their views are on this. That will help.
-- What are you listening to? Good players or mediocre? Who are your band mates? Good players or mediocre? Variation is indeed indispensable, in the sense that it's what good players listen to from other good players. But regardless, it's the attention to this level of detail that people are arguing with you about. You kept saying that you're only interested in larger scale things (like switching from an Eminor tune to a Gmajor), but that's the level of detail that mediocre musicians pay attention to. To be more than just mediocre, you need to pay attention to a smaller scale of detail.
BTW, I'm using this definition of mediocre: "Of only moderate quality" That is, not horrible, certainly can still be fun to play with, but not really good. Not good enough to play on stage, certainly. (Like... in a band.)
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well said, Nick.
Argh, back to trying to say insightful things about insane people in Inverness. Any of you verbose lot fancy having a go? LOL.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
<<that it's what good players listen to from other good players. >>
.
] its merely one persons preferences.
and of course if all you have is lots of rivets, but nothing much to hold together then you might well be challenged by an opinion that rivets are of little importance in the greater scheme of things.[ not that that applies to anyone here, does it?]
Well thats an opinion.. Perhaps if was framed; << good traditional Irish players>> it might be true , but its a rather sweeping statement, got any citations
But you raise an interesting point; who do we play for? ourselves, in which case your reactions reactions are irrelevant. Do we play for other trad musicians? or perhaps mass crowds of Spanish people who have never heard trad... the list is endless.
The great majority of people on this planet wouldn't recognise all the little rivets if it hit them in the face. What on earth is the point of putting your thousand and one rivets in if no one notices them, unless you play for your self and they matter to you. Or you play for an audience that does notice them.
But hey, its not about performance is it!?! in which case why on earth should anyone give a monkeys what the audience thinks?! he plays tunes with his mates. They enjoy it, Job done.
How does one define mediocre? in relation to what?! in relation to Say Paddy Keenen or Seamus Ennis I wonder how many pipers here are anything but mediocre....or fiddlers compared to Bobby Casey and Paddy Canny....
Its all a matter of degree.
There are many forms of music that dont revolve around ornaments and micro variations. Popular music for example, Rock music, Baroque music you name it.....
Mediocre musicians.... hmm , ok who here is not mediocre? In your opinion or the opinion of who....
You see its a value judgement, relative, basically meaningless without clear definitions.
Nico you make several unsupported statements masquerading as fact, which are merely your opinions.
I might agree, or disagree, but that's beside the point.
Personally I consider dance-ability drive lift, spirit, guts, Balls, to be far more important than anally 'rivet counting.' Of which pipers and fiddlers seem to be worse.
Its not a value judgement of others preferences, which we are all entitled to its merely what I value.
So for example I enjoy Slipknot, DK, and many other music. If you dont, that doesn't mean your ignorant and have bad taste in music.... [though I might think so
However if folk wish to create a hierarchy of ability in rivet counting, then of course rivet counting is important! and if you don't appreciate rivets , your a lesser being for it. Got that?
Ps there are countless mediocre players playing in bands, sessions etc all over the world, in fact the great majority of musicians are mediocre in relation to the geniuses at the top. We cant all be brilliant. Sure aspire to it, learn and progress. incorporates those rivets , if you feel like it.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, you remind me of a student of mine. He is Korean and is trying to learn English. At home in Korea he has always learnt English by doing repetitive grammar exercises in class so he gets good grades on written tests but is unable to speak and finds it difficult to string an intelligible sentence together.
The other day I caught this student writing out lists of words and translations into Korean, like a dictionary. I tried to explain to him that this was not going to improve his English because a lot of the words mean completely different things depending on the context and the words very rarely translated exactly anyway. I explained that it would be better to practise what he knew by speaking to people in class (he's usually silent). He told me that this was a waste of time and that he wasn't learning any vocab that way because the people in his class had a limited knowledge of English, so how could he learn from them? I tried to explain that language was all about communication and that the most important thing was having something to say in that language. Constructing sentences from dictionaries was only going to leave him with very unnatural-sounding English. He told me that he had always learnt best by writing things out and that he knew what was best for him. And thank you, but he preferred not to speak because he didn't enjoy it. Anyway, his test results spoke for themselves - he was better at English than his peers so he didn't NEED to practise, he pointed out.
In the end, I gave up. When he graduates, I wonder whether he'll realise that he has failed to achieve what he originally came to the school for.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Do you not know what "moderate" means? Maybe you know the word "average".
I'm sorry, but you put a lot of words into my post that I didn't say. To me the small details do in fact include things like lift and drive. Placing your notes so that you control the lift, the phrasing, the rhythm... that's all micro-details. I don't include guts, because they're 9m long... that's pretty big. and half the population doesn't have balls, so that can't be too important.
As far as " good players listen to from other good players" (duh, we're on thesession.org, of course I mean traditional... literacy isn't your strong suit is it?), actually I do have many citations. But in a lot of ways it's akin to name-dropping. Besides all the living musicians who have said something similar to that phrase, you might look up interviews with people like Patrick Kelly and Willie Clancy (to name two). Lots of citations. I'm really surprised someone who is a self-professed non-mediocre musician would argue it, in fact!
"The great majority of people on this planet wouldn't recognise all the little rivets if it hit them in the face."
And yet is it the great majority that defines what irish traditional music is, or is it defined from within (ie the practitioners of irish traditional music define who are their fellow practitioners and what constitutes traditional music and so on...)? It's a rhetorical question, because we both know that it's definied from within. This means the good players (not just the greats, those who you mention, but also people who are considered traditional by other traditional players) define who and what is good. Admittedly it results in fuzzy borders, and it also results in pockets of mediocre musicians self-defining their group as being "traditional" even if they wouldn't really be accepted by the larger community . This also explains your post script, by the way.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
you are dealing with an Asian construct there, Dr Dow.
without meaning to generalise, the culture demands demonstration of expansive memory for information, imho. '
"I tried to explain to him that this was not going to improve his English because a lot of the words mean completely different things depending on the context and the words very rarely translated exactly anyway. I explained that it would be better to practise what he knew by speaking to people in class (he's usually silent). " He won't know what the hell you are talking about, he doesn't come from that perspective.
In the end, it is probably about *why* he is learning English, does he want the grades or does he want to communicate in English.
I am trying to learn Thai, actually, and get a nice response from my friends about my pronunciation and apparent ability *which is miniscule*, but yes, it is about communicating what you want to communicate.
Chok dee. Good going.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Skull Duggeraigh Dubh
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well said piobagusfidil.
This is music for ordinary people, people in every street or village can do it, properly, fully and completely. Here's something posted today (not by me) in a completely different forum:
.............................................................................
This conversation happened between me and Martin Hayes after a concert several years ago:
Me: Love your playing, any advice for someone starting out?
Martin Hayes: No
Me (deflated): Oh...OK
MH: It's easy
Me: Sure for you maybe!
MH (laughing): No, really, if it weren't easy, I wouldn't do it!
............................................................................
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You're right, Skull, he doesn't come from that perspective, so he probably didn't understand what I was talking about. I get the same feeling from Ian. You can only point something out to someone in the hope that it will give them a different perspective, but if they just won't listen then you just have to shrug your shoulders and give up.
The only problem comes when that Korean student opens his mouth in class. He gets frustrated because the other students don't understand a frickin word he says.
He thinks it's because of their rubbish listening skills...
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bernie, the limits of mediocre musicians have never constrained the better proponents of this music. Let's not start dumbing it down for the sake of folks who can't really play. If you think it's Liz Carroll's technical abilities that set her apart, you're missing the point. Also, there's a difference between thinking this music is available to anyone vs. realizing that it takes effort and passion to learn to play it well. Sure, lots of folks dabble in it, and are happy with their own results. But they're not doing their local sessions any favors with their weak playing. If you'd like to be welcomed at most Irish sessions, you'll want to aim for a higher standard than dabbler or flailer.
I'm with Dr. Dow. Ian's attitude will hold him back far more than any mechanical difficulties with fiddle. That's a shame, but then some people are determined to learn the hard way. I sincerely hope he has time.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
P.S. That last post of Jig's (aka piobagusfidil) is as wide of the mark as anything he's ever posted here.
I feel sorry for anyone who *aspires* to mediocrity or accepts it as their ceiling. Find a different hobby. Or at least refrain from pushing your defeatist silliness on the rest of us.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I read an article on the web a few years ago, I wish I could find it again, it was about the psychology of learning and practicing this kind of music. The main point the author put across, far better than I can, is that it is good to enjoy your own playing for what it is at every stage of the learning process. He cautioned strongly against something I see people doing here all the time, that is, comparing themselves (and others) unfavourably against "the masters", as if virtuosity, elitism and mass adulation are what this is all about.
Will, I think you have an excellent understanding of how to play this music. But I don't think you understand so well why it is played.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Bernie 29
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
no nico your right , literacy isnt my strong point!
nor typing , Im saved by spell check!
Its interesting though your post because it raises a number of points; what do we play for, what is important to us.
definition of traditional... very broad indeed and who agrees on that definition? For example Shetland fiddling is very different to west Clare styles, to travellers styles etc but its all traditional. You might say that they are different things, I strongly disagree, they are different in some respects but still part of a continuum.
As regards who defines good and bad... ? The traditional community defines what is good and bad within the context of what the community considers important, fair enough. But thats purely subjective. For example a Clare stylist might well consider Donnegal style not even to be Irish music ! There are many facets to the music and promotion of one aspect to the detriment of another so as to fit in with preconceived ideas of what the music is....
Ive no idea what Will Harmon is on about, I certainly never suggested anyone aspire to being mediocre, though some people are quite happy to remain at that level, thats their prerogative and if they and their friends and audience are happy with that... good for them. and of course its all relative , who are you comparing to....
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Bernie, once again you're way wide of the mark.
There is no single reason why this music is played--it's as varied as the people who play it. Personally, I don't compare myself to others at all, but I enjoy learning on the fly when playing with other experienced traditional musicians. FWIW, I've never understood the notion of music as competition--contests and scoring, and ranking players. That just doesn't make sense to me.
So the claims here that some are "defiying" Liz Carroll are just silly. It's not about idolizing her at all. Just enjoying what she does with a tune.
Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I'll take that a little further.
Bernie, I play this music because I love it. I started our local session because to me this music is good craic that friends and neighbors can gather around. It's a catalyst for community and friendship. Even here in the back of beyond, far from Ireland, the music is as central to the Irish-American community as it is in Doolin or Gweedore. Young and old dance to our music, we play it at weddings and wakes, we celebrate special days with it and it carries us through the dog days of summer, the long nights of winter.
Finally, Bernie, I hope some day you come to recognize the hopeless irony of your posts here. You protest against what you perceive as elitism, yet you have the arrogance to suggest that you understand better than someone else why this music is played.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Hi Jig
"literacy isnt my strong point!"
Please try not to take this as being mean, because I'd like to give you some advice, and not be mean about it! You might want to keep this in mind when posting here.
Unfortunately, your post *did* imply that you were suggesting that people should (or do, and that we should welcome it) aspire to being mediocre... Since you say that's not what you intended, and two people (at least) with whom literacy *is* a strong point read it that way, then you should be aware that you need to work harder to make sure what you write actually means what you mean!
It seems like we're on the same page about a lot. For instance, your "a Clare stylist might well consider Donnegal style not even to be Irish music" is one of the scenarios I was implying when I said that "it results in fuzzy borders".
Please do yourself a favour, and like the handyman says, "measure twice, cut once"... in other words, re-read things a couple times before posting.
Back to your post:
"But thats purely subjective" -- Of course it is! But I think it's clear that the only definition of "traditional" (with respect to Irish music) that makes any sense is "that which is defined and accepted as traditional by the members or practitioners of the tradition who are accepted as being traditional"... or, more succinctly: "it's defined from within". Yes, it's subjective, but it's also a consensus...
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You want to give me advice! LOL, you use words that are clear , concise yet you dont appear to understand their meaning?! yet you consider yourself literate? consensus it most certainly is not. look it up.
To reiterate, I did not by any stretch of the imagination suggest that people should aspire to mediocrity! . if you suggest i did, then where is your supporting evidence? should be a simple cut and paste job there.
I pointed out quite succinctly that the very word mediocre is meaningless with out clarifying what comparison you are making. Yes its relative, and so relative to what?
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Actually, a consensus is exactly what it is:
Consensus
1.
majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month.
2.
general agreement or concord; harmony.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus definition 1b in this case.
You might also read the wikipedia article on consensus decision making to get a better understanding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making
I only tried to give you advice so that your posts here would be more useful and accurate to your feelings. I'm sorry you aren't able to take it onboard, but I won't be interacting with you anymore.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yes you gave me advice based upon your misunderstanding of clear written English.
You give a link to a dictionary definition ,? yet you quote something entirely different?!
Consensus requires unanimity as it clearly state in the dictionary you link to.
There is no unanimity therefore there is no consensus.
You are entirely mistaken. Democracy is NOT consensus decision making, it is the decision of a majority. You haven't even read your link.
I dont need to go to Wiki to know what consensus means. Just sayin like...
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus definition 1b in this case."
Did you even read the whole line? You should be aware that words sometimes mean more than one thing. Novel concept, I know. Obviously you *don't* understand what it means, or you wouldn't be arguing so viciously. I'm sorry that you are illiterate, but maybe you should fix that before posting online. "Just sayin"
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Also, just to clarify, I copy and pasted one definition (from dictionary.com), posted a link to another, and provided an encyclopedic link. It's good to have multiple citations that all agree...
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Alright, one last link, and then I'll leave you to have the last word:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus
Notably, read this section:
Consensus is not unanimity. Sometimes voluntary agreement of all interested editors proves impossible to achieve, and a majority decision must be taken. More than a simple numerical majority is generally required for major changes.
It's important to reiterate that consensus is *not* strictly synonymous with unanimity. Sometimes, but not always, consensus does result in unanimity.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Nico
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
There are no citations for that wiki article. you are mistaken. It even contradicts itself.
cōnsēnsus (“agreement, accordance, unanimity]
Its quite simple and obvious that there is no agreement as to what traditional IM is... Are C Lennons tunes trad? Is what Tommy Potts did traditional. What tunes are within the genre? which are out. ? Are the views of the Fleadh adjudicators reflecting a consensus opinion amongst trad players?
What defines the 'group'
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>There is no single reason why this music is played--it's as varied as the people who play it.
That is one of the most sensible things I’ve read in the whole of this darned epic.
I think the thing is, I do come from a different angle. For a start, I have no in-built loyalty to any particular music by dint of where I come from or who I descended from. I didn’t grow up in the music. I know I’m hardly alone in that, and it doesn’t mean the issue need be problem. You assured me some time ago that it is of no significance at all. But my angle is at least in part the product of how I came to this music, and where I’ve been since. What’s more, I am always going to sit on the fence between Scotland and Ireland, possibly a luxury afforded by ‘belonging’ to neither of them. That is bound to affect my own music. If anything, I prefer Scotland’s ‘cleaner’ style (not my word by the way).
Secondly, my angle is different because of what I want to do. I am beginning to appreciate just how this music *need* not only be played by bands – but it has always been irrevocably tied up for me with the aspiration to play in a band setting. That is by no means to say the band is more important than the music - you wouldn’t catch me playing any other music just for the sake of being in a band - but it has influenced what I listen to and for. But it was also the effect of this music as played by bands that got me into it in the first place, no matter how inauthentic that may be to some. There plenty of honourable examples of trad people dedicating their musical careers to working in bands. This, I think, is why LC’s music doesn’t appeal as much as some – she doesn’t seem greatly fussed with that side of things; even when I buy solo artists, I always pay some attention to the wider instrumentation they are suing – it’s just what interests me. I came here because I understood that a good band needs good individuals and I wanted to ensure I was as good as I could be. But being a great soloist is less important to me than being a competent band member.
I have also compromised by virtue of playing a number of instruments; again I’m hardly alone, even on MB. I have to spread my time and effort more thinly. Maybe not a good thing, and maybe in time the fiddle will change that. But there was method in my madness: apart from simply liking the sound of so many different instruments, it was a conscious decision, considering the lack of willing/able musicians, to be as versatile as possible so as to cover for whatever might end up being missing should a band be forthcoming. It is proving useful as anticipated. Yes I know all about Jack-of-all-trades.
In that sense, those niceties will perhaps never be as important to me as they are to the more single-minded single-instrument people: I’m also working on the mandolins, bouzouki, and hell, I quite like even beating the goat in moderation. I may be great at any of them, though the fiddle certainly is the most addictive at present, and I won’t be satisfied with less than the best I can achieve, within those and wider constraints.
Finally, with regard to the band: from what I am hearing, we are possibly the only band playing some form of performance trad for miles. There are a few ceilidh bands. That’s no excuse to be bad of course – but in terms of audiences, we will probably not cause too many ructions if we are not tip-top ultra-refined, and we might even bring pleasure to some. That’s important to me. There has already been some small interest in hiring us. I’m aware that that may be blasphemy to some, but I feel it’s a realistic appraisal of the possibilities for a bunch of 40/50-something blokes at this stage in time. It’s also the approach that a good number of Irishmen made famous careers out of: effectively being the first step into the real stuff for people who had never heard it before; that is most likely to be a similar in context to what we end up doing. Come back Ronnie Drew, all is forgiven.
I will continue to work at the music, and be mindful of what everyone has said – but at the end of the day “There is no single reason why the music is played”. It may not be your chosen way – but who’s to say it’s wrong?
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I may NOT be great at any of them
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
If it weren't for your epically long posts, I would have less procrastination opportunities.
I'm grateful for the small things.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I won't pretend I've ever been good at saying complicated things in three words. Brevity is not always a virtue. Just count your lucky stars you're NOT one of my students. They can't escape.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, I sincerely hope you have fun with your bandmates and enjoy the gigs you get at least as much as your audiences will enjoy the music.
For me, this discussion has never been about what anyone chooses to do with the music for their own enjoyment. That's wide open, no holds barred. And it reinforces why players the caliber of Liz Carroll and Martin Hayes are held in high regard for their stretching of the traditional envelope (when they choose to do so) as they explore their own creative imaginations.
Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so. Many traditional musicians have a sense of the tradition that spans 200 or 300 years at least, and the bulk of that has featured solo playing, and some duo or small groups (but not rehearsing bands) playing for dancing. Even ceili bands are a 20th century invention.
So the subtleties and variations that go a long way to defining what this music is are a result of the freedom of solo playing, not of blending into a band. In fact, bands (and large sessions) tend to discourage nuanced playing because it just gets lost in the sauce. You will likely stumble on a prejudice against ensemble playing among many (not all) traditional musicians, especially the better ones, even the ones who play in bands themselves.
Also consider looking for ways to set aside your "angle" on this music when you can. To genuinely learn something new, we often have to shuck off the old familiar patterns and understandings because they prevent us from seeing and hearing the new thing for what it is on its own sake. I know I benefitted greatly when I finally ditched the expectations I carried from bluegrass and old timey music as I dug deeper into Irish traditional music. And it goes beyond the music, to "getting" many aspects of culture that are peculiarly Irish. It doesn't matter where you come from. What matters is where you go.
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"I won't pretend I've ever been good at saying complicated things in three words. Brevity is not always a virtue. Just count your lucky stars you're NOT one of my students. They can't escape."
I just hit the 24,000 word mark. For just one chapter (there are a few other completed ones). I win the long-winded competition. :P
# Posted on May 19th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Good Lord, TSS, four chapters like that would give you enough words for a novel. Either you are getting paid by the word, or you are an academic!
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Keep up the good work, Emily - you'll be as verbose as me one day - just make sure you learn the nuances. Couple of years ago I was contracted to write a book with 100 000 word target. No trouble at all. You can probably see why
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"No trouble at all."
LOL, as a writer and editor, my guess is that your editor did not so readily agree with your assessment.
I'm 28,000 words into my next book. Working hard to keep it tight and clean.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
My thesis was over 80,000. But not 80,000 worth of crap like you lot, but 80,000 GOOD words. Every sentence was utterly profound
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Come on, Dow, "utterly profound"? isn't that a bit pleonastic?If they were all profound, no qualifier is needed. I can see how you spun it out to 80,000 words
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by RichardB
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Dude, when you get to such a high level of discussion, profundity is measurable!
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Big block quotes, and lots of them, help considerably.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
LOL keep them in small font but indent them heaps so they take up loads of space nonetheless. You got it, girl...
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And fat discursive footnotes.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
100 000 words *were* tight and clean. That was after I had cut it from 160 000.
So it's all come down to Mine is bigger than Yours. :-p
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
So you decided to repeat your point only 10 times instead of 16
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Dr. Dow
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
My OH had that same thought, reading this thread. LOL.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Is it safe to step inside?
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
Are you trying to tell me something, Dow?
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ian, are you O.K.?
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think Dow was trying to tell me something, Ben. I'm fine.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> I sincerely hope you have fun with your bandmates and enjoy the gigs you get at least as much as your audiences will enjoy the music.
Will, thanks for your good wishes. We live in hope.
>>Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so... Even ceili bands are a 20th century invention.
Yes, I know. And they haven’t always done the music a favour, I know that too. I recoil like the rest from some of the atrocities we see committed. But against that, there is always the old chestnut about the music evolving. It's also why I/we need to be as good as we can be, withour own context. I can assure all the guys agree on that.you,
>>In fact, bands (and large sessions) tend to discourage nuanced playing because it just gets lost in the sauce.
Yep, don’t disagree there either. Ironically, that was the basis for my reservations in the first place. There’s clearly the acoustic issue in there, but also the trade-off between quality and quantity. But in actual fact, what’s this? I prefer playing regularly with a small number of people whose playing you get to know, over a large, ill-disciplined session. The fact that you then go out and ‘perform’ is only part of the fun.
>>To genuinely learn something new, we often have to shuck off the old familiar patterns and understandings...
Yes, that is already happening. You can’t see what has happened to my CD collection since I started talking to people here. Not that there’s not a long way to go, but I will get there in my own time – wherever ‘there’ is.
Repetition score, Dow?
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I can assure all the guys agree on that.you,
I can assure you.
Too much editing.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
For me, the 2nd paragraph said it all.;)
Thanks Will.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ah people have played music together forever. What makes anyone think that historically folk playing Irish music did not?
Is it based upon historical evidence? or just another internet myth?
What evidence is there to support this assertion and in what period is this evidence based?
Folk like getting p*ssed and having wild crazy times dancing to bands/groups/sessions. What makes anyone believe that this is a modern phenomena?
Yes of course as an art form , solo playing is quite possibly the pinnacle of the art. But music serves a social function, it brings people together to dance , show off their steps, their new tunes etc etc acts as a focal point for communal gatherings.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Jig, I'm sorry you don't seem to understand the difference between a band and a session, or a band and a house party. Ian is talking about a rehearsing, gigging band. My comments were in reference to that.
Go read The Northern Fiddler for historical accounts of how one or two musicians would play for crossroad dances and house dances. Go read Hammy Hamilton's Ph.D. dissertation for a thorough explication of the relatively recent history of sessions. Just because *you* are unaware of the research doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Sure, trot out your old painting showing a group of musicians playing for a house dance way back when. That in no way proves anything about the existence of *bands* in this music.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
No will, despite your protestations there is a great deal of supposition employed in any Historical field. The fact is we simply don't know.
Yes the works you mention , based upon research are valid to the extent that they show that at certain times and places particular situations existed. But no more than that. Your statement above is simply an assumption, not fact. Opinion masquerading as fact. best be clear about that eh?
In one village they might not employ any ornaments and a whole bunch of lads might play together, as a band. Im not saying they did, or didnt, we dont know.
If your suggesting that the painting of piper, fluter and drummer playing together for the dance is not based upon historical fact, what else in the painting indicates that to be true?
Anyhow how on earth do you know whether those lads played together regularly? or rehearsed tunes together etc etc, you dont, its merely an assumption. We dont know. you dont know, your imagining things to be true when there is no evidence to support your assumption.
You could be right, you could be wrong.
Im not. trying to prove the existence of bands. Im not the one who made a categorical statement based on a couple of pieces of work., you are. If youd like to support your assertion with some evidence .....and of course there is none, after all how can one prove something non existence in this field?
We can make suppositions, assert beliefs , make statements that to the best of our knowledge something was true at a particular time and place, but no more than that. Certainly not blanket statements encompassing the last several hundred years! its a ridiculous assertion.
Ireland has been through many many changes over the last thousand years. , over the last 15 yrs! 50 yrs , 100 years 200 years . A study of Irish history that encompasses such a wide field is a lifetimes work and more . A PHD and a book do not history make.
People have been playing music together for time immemorial . To assert that these activities, uniquely ,did not occur historically in Ireland is, shall we say... unsubstantiated.
# Posted on May 20th 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will, you may be tempted to reply to pigobagful, but I doubt it will do any good. How can you change the mind of a person who lives in a world where scholarly research and historical analysis produces mere "supposition?" After all, when he doesn't agree with it, it is simply "unsubstantiated."
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Al, no worries. This is no supposition. Jig's own history here has amply substantiated his neolithic mindset.... Besides, the argument's always the same.
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>where scholarly research and historical analysis produces mere "supposition?"
Hmm. Be that as it may, I think it would be equally mistaken to assume that it produces only certainty. How often has History been re-written?
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Very true Ian, if you study the History of Ireland, from an Irish perspective, Im particularly interested in Medieval History, then the view is extremely different to that purveyed by the British establishment.
It seems that there is very little understanding displayed here, vague references to a thesis and a book appear to amount to the complete argument.
Im well aware that there is very little certainty in History, particularly in relation to politics.
Look at modern events..Just the last century to understand that History if often a complete concoction of fantasy designed to promote an agenda. Look at the twin towers.. The scientific evidence is overwhelming, absolute proof that they were demolished in a controlled demolition. According to the laws of physics, let alone the mass of evidence. , yet the common perception is one where the officially promoted conspiracy theory has credence as though it were fact.!!?
Getting back to the particular issue in hand. . There is, of course, no proof whatsoever to support an assertion that Irish musicians historically did not play together in groups, bands or whatever you might like to call them. The supposition is fanciful and unsubstantiated. The entire argument comes down to a small group of acquaintances attempting to insinuate that they are right and Im a loony! LOL abuse does not constitute an argument, it is an admission of failure and ignorance.
As it happens there is an awful lot of historical evidence going back many hundreds of years to suggest that Irish musicians played together in many forms of music and plenty of statements that they did so, such as Johnny Dunn ;banjo, Dick Stephenson ;piper, and fiddler; one of Bob Thompson's son touring Ireland in the 1880s. or G Leech and J Cummings playing together etc etc
People sing together , they play music together they dance together they pray together .
Its only common sense to realise that if the crowd is large and noisy then either the musicians need to play very loud instruments, or join together in a group, or both! Of course its also fun!
So then perhaps a definition of 'band' is in order.
>> a group of two or more musicians who perform instrumental or vocal music.
<<a group of people formed because of a common belief or purpose>>
a group of musicians playing>>
a group of musicians >>
So really there is factual, literary, photographic and pictorial evidence that bands have been present in Ireland throughout History.
There is a wealth of iconographic evidence pointing towards ensemble playing in Medieval Europe , what on earth makes anyone think that somehow Ireland was an exception?
Now heres an interesting detail of painting , post 15. and 18 dated 1832, Ireland.
http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=7552
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
jeez.
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
paf wrote - So really there is factual, literary, photographic and pictorial evidence that bands have been present in Ireland throughout History.
What even before the invention of the camera or the printing press?
You don't understand the concept of historicity, young man.
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by The Rollicking Boy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Not so pictures are drawn and painted... iconography
but I do have rplenty of old photos of pipers etc from the turn of last century and into the 19th C.
well now don't you think your making an assumption there, If Im referred to as 'young man' its by the over 60's.
literary.. well Im sure you can figure that out.
Photography was first invented, that we know of in 1000AD, but no Im not saying we have photos of trad musicians from then!
As to young man...
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
you see its not hard to disprove Wills statement, not hard at all. Only one piece of evidence is required and there is plenty. piper and fiddler the Hannafin brother... Hannafin and Touhy why John McFadden and Sgt James Early...
The Dublin Pipers Band[UP], the Delacy family band.....
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Photography was invented in 1000 AD?
You're not very good on history either, are you, young man?
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by The Rollicking Boy
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
historical suppositories.........hmmmmmmmmm
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
FWIW, Jig's reference to the Delacy Family Band points to a photograph from 1913. The "band" in question is four war pipes (not uilleann), two whistles, and a drum.
# Posted on May 21st 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
The pinhole camera goes back to Leonardo Da Vinci, see the Turin shroud for the first photographic print. but anyhow if this is questionable [though demonstrated] then try 1827 ...
The UP was in reference to the Dublin pipers band, see the coma.
The band in question... The one that didn't exist according to Will .!......hmm . facts, photographs, history....
.. Rollicking boy.. wouldn't be a glove puppet by any chance....anyhow perhaps old man , your not a member recently suspended... .. in which case perhaps you'd like to actually back up your assertions with information? A nameless face less somebody who makes no positive contribution ? Perhaps you might offer some factual historical information or do you actually know anything at all about the subject ?
Maybe youd like to answer a few questions? or ask some to demonstrate that your not a 16yr old pretending to be something your not. ? If your an expert im sure you can ask difficult questions.. and answer them...
Im quite happy to back up everything I say here with facts and evidence , are you?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
That's where these things get derailed. What, or who, was the glove puppet?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
I'm flattered ~
http://www.thesession.org/sessions/display/2714
"Auburn Benjamin Steen, flugelhorn - known as 'Chico' to his friends and 'that loser' to his other friends - could graduate to an absolute waste of space but lacks the integrity"
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
pigobagsful, WIll is not saying that never in Irish history did more than one player play at the same time until recently. If you look carefully at what he was saying, he qualified what he was saying, referring to formally organized bands, playing the particular brand of dance music that we talk about on the Mustard Board. You are arguing against something no one said (and not for the first time, I might add)...
(And is the 'glove puppet' connected in any way to the person on the grassy knoll that long ago day in Dallas? I sense a another conspiracy involving the Mustard Board 'in crowd.')
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Cheers, Al. I'm not too concerned about who the poster is. Mostly it's funny.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yep, I'll go with funny...
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Look Al, of course will didnt say that. He said this;
. ]come on there's only one guy with an attitude and mouth to match those comments on bens link posting regularly here, but suspended. Answers on a postcard .....
>>
Do bear in mind, though, that bands in this music are a recent phenomenon--only cropping up in the last 60 years or so.<<
Which of course as I pointed out is not true. Thats all, just correcting the misinformation , no more. Shame he has to be so unpleasant, in his reply while being wrong , but sure whats new there!
Rollocking boy.... [how i want to insert a B instead of the R
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
see the coma.... be the coma
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's not Geoff, Jig. We kissed & made up ages ago.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
wyogal, Are you trying to become comatose yourself, or wishing it upon someone else? In either case, I am sure the pain would diminsh...
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
nah, the first was a quote from a previous post... added the last part myself. It makes about as much sense as most of this thread. ;p
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
T he point about the Band history is that folk have always played together. That although its High Art, its also approachable by all, the old boy scratching away, in the pub the young virtuoso , those annoying kids who play so fast and those old blokes who play so slow... it can be played on fiddle banjo box pipes by kids etc there is a session and place for everyone.
Band have always been a part of music scenes , it defies belief, and the evidence, to suggest otherwise. Of course there are players who wouldn't countenance playing in a session or with others., or for dancers, but those are the exceptions. IME
Although my taste doesn't stretch these days to bands these days , I listen to solo fiddlers , pipers and whistlers, I recognise that they have their part to play and that they serve a social function .
Ensemble playing is completely different to solo playing, chalk and cheese. It requires some different skills that are every bit as valid.A bunch of virtuoso players dont necessarily make a good band and a bunch of so so players can kick ass.
Although the advice in this thread is directed at Ian, me thinks he has made a few points that a few of the 'pros' here could well do with reflecting on, unless of course they are so good that they know everything! In which case lets here them! and see if we agree with their assessment.
@Ben; I didnt say it was.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Here's your photo of the Pipers' Club ~
http://www.pipers.ie/home/Resources_History%20Pipes.htm
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
...
http://www.pipers.ie/images/gallery/art/DublinPC.jpg
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
What pipers club are you talking about Ben?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It is spelled comma. O.K.?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
no sh*t
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
That was for jig, wiseacre.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ok ok! but sure ye knew what I meant !
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
o.k. (how do you get the winky?)
and if you think we know what you mean, why keep going on and on and on and on and on and on.................??????????
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
; - ) =
8 - ) =
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I always like the simple ;) But if you really don't know it's a coma w/dot above, hyphen, & closed parenthesis.
; - )
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
And try
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Which colon, hyphen, P
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Showoff!
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well whadda ya know!
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Atahualpa Quigley
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
piobagusfidil--you said "Look at modern events..Just the last century to understand that History if often a complete concoction of fantasy designed to promote an agenda. Look at the twin towers.. The scientific evidence is overwhelming, absolute proof that they were demolished in a controlled demolition. According to the laws of physics, let alone the mass of evidence. , yet the common perception is one where the officially promoted conspiracy theory has credence as though it were fact.!!?"
If this is evidence of your 'understanding' of history than you are a clown. The editors of Popular Mechanics debunked all that crap point by point. Look in to it..... doesn't help your case at all.....do you believe everything you hear? Goodness that was a bad example! And I enjoy the way you fight, with passion, for your opinions here but damn......that's idiocy
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by shanty
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
8-P
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
hmmmmm.....
historical suppositories, colons.... where's the a$$ button?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>> there is a session and place for everyone.
>>Ensemble playing is completely different to solo playing...It requires some different skills that are every bit as valid.A bunch of virtuoso players dont necessarily make a good band
As this thread heads resolutely westwards, there is surely a very good point in there, which takes me back to its heady early days, and what I originally wanted to say - when I hadn't even realised how far-sighted the addition "handle with care" to the title was to prove to be...
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Cheers ian, I started gigging as a bass player at 14, my son has been doing the same recently.
Hes a lot better at that age than I was !! 
Christy Barry , Anton Warde because Im fairly adept within that context but its the solo playing that interests me and like the guys above say, if you want to play solo in front of guys like Johnny Purcell, Jim Wenham,Eugene Lamb, Micky Dunn etc and receive complements afterwards you do need to spend time and effort listening for the detail and incorporating it in your playing. I strongly recommend you come over to Ireland and check out Willie week for some in-detail pointers. All the talk and listening in the world wont help particularly unless you know what your listening for.
I get to gig with guys like [name drop warning]
If you just wanna play a few tunes with your mates in a bar then its not so essential IMO.
@ shanty, objects do not free fall the path of greatest resistance. Try it.
Those are the laws of physics in operation. The facts are overwhelming, dont rely on the editors of a popular magazine for your debunking, do it yourself. No i dont believe everything I hear, I believe things based on the overwhelming evidence put forward by the professional architects who design and work on these building every day. Let alone the evidence amassed by other scientists. I dont see this forum as a place for this kind of debate, but just as above there are reams of undeniable facts to support my assertion. Now where are your facts ? answers on a postcard.....,.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
>>unless you know what your listening for
Well I think I'm not too bad on that, at least for my current abilities.
What is really pleasing is that I *can* hear where the rolls, cuts etc 'want' to go. The finger flexibility is mostly already there, and I'm pleased with the speed of progress now the actual procedure has been clarified by Majella.
Lots still to do of course - but the exercise has been worth it already, in as much as I have a clearer idea about how much of my previous deficiency was down to me, and how much to my choice of instrument.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Instrument choice. I know I played mandolin and Banjo as my main instruments , and occasionally sill do, for 15 years befor I was really taken with the fiddle and even then I still 'sang' in the style Id developed over those years.
Of course living on the road the only music I listened to , basically, was the music we played,, there were no recording devices etc or cassette recordings to pore over . It was a style forged around the Yog Iron .
Im glad to say that from mixing and playing with Christy Barry and Padraig Kelleher that I was able to imbibe some of their stylistic flourishes and I feel Ive improved greatly since, with the help of my friends.
So I feel holistic development is the way to go, taking things as they come, doing your best with the limited resources available and building up from solid foundations of rhythm and lift.
Playing in a band, or solo, for dancers is IMO an important part of this music and is to be recommended above having a few finger flourishes. all the rolls and cuts wont matter a jot if ye aint got rhythm.
Pipers playing for pipers can get away with rhythmic errors because we know how bloody hard it is, but that wont cut the ice with dancers who only know whether it works for them, or it doesnt.
Enjoy.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
"Pipers playing for pipers can get away with rhythmic errors because we know how bloody hard it is, but that wont cut the ice with dancers who only know whether it works for them, or it doesnt."
Long ago, when I played with a group of dancers, I was talking one evening to the Highland piper before he was about to play for some Highland dancing. "You watch", he said, "and see how much of a headache it is playing for the dancers. I have to compensate for all their mistakes". The following evening, I was talking with one of the dancers. "You watch", she said, "and see how we have to make up for the mistakes the piper makes". They were both right, though there weren't really all that many mistakes from either the piper or the dancers.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Weejie
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Pipers playing for pipers don't get away with poor rhythm. It's not particularly hard to do it right either.
That was you playing Christy Barry's jigs and The lark in the Mornign on the whistle at the Doran weekend wasn't it Will?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Lark in the morning? jeez no I dont play that on the whistle. Christy Barry set... yep my new tunes on an instrument I occasionally pick up. Which ishy its not in my screen name
As regards pipers getting away with poor rhythm... Well Robby Hannon is one of the best, yet even he can feck up, in public, on film. and still be considered by some to be the best technician. Seamus Ennis can do the same, in public, on film and on a released recording and still be considered one of the greats, both of which I whole heartedly agree with, they are.
But were I dancing a 2 hand reel to that playing It would feck up the footwork. Right or wrong IYO?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
... which is why ....even.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Garret Barry's version of The Lark in the morning.
Had the impression it was you.
Poor rhythm is never OK, by the way. Mistakes are a different thing.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ok, fair enough and I agree, perhaps I put it poorly . But still my point is that a mistake that interrupts the rhythm can still have a result that can throw others off , were they dancing or playing along, that would likely be frowned upon by musicians not conversant with the difficulties inherent in public performance playing a wild beast like the UP!
One of the reasons I admire Robby so much, apart from his amazing Album![ get it everyone!] is that he goes for it, hes willing to take risks and plays like hes on fire! I like that.
The set I play is as Christy plays it, the 4 tunes, I dont actually know the names of them so perhaps I was then?
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
You know Will, I too admire your passion and your eagerness to proffer helpful advice here. We're not so different in those respects.
). It often just leads to a general conflagration.
Sometimes, Like Robby's playing, you post like you're on fire.
But this forum is a different environment than a music session. Being on fire isn't usually such a good thing here (I can speak from personal experience on this
Look, I'm trying to be diplomatic about this, but it's bound to sting. I'm genuinely sorry for that. My hope here is that a little reality check (similar to what another member recently gave me) might help you participate and contribute here with a lot less friction.
We're all doing the best we can with this music. Just like you, when we offer advice here, it's based on our own experience and what we've learned from other brilliant players. And it behooves all of us to keep the strength of our opinions in check a bit. Even great players like James Kelly, Kevin Burke, and Christy Barry aren't so sure of themselves to think theirs is the only way.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's a bit of nonsense to call the pipes a wild beast. They're not more difficult than any other instrument to play well. It's a lame excuse to be honest.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Well fair play Will, but still , trying to be diplomatic about what? what stings?
anyhow good on you for your Post and heres to friendship [ or at least tolerance .] 
Look Will, like you, Im just myself and Im sure we have lots in common! Like being stubborn SOB's
Im not a diplomat, I have my strengths and weaknesses like everyone. I certainly dont mean to cause any trouble but I will stand my ground . I do not take kindly to abuse directed at me, or anyone else and I will speak up where I feel justice is not being done.
I certainly dont consider 'my way' to be the only way, but it is A way and everyone has the right to speak, and learn from each other.
But like Ian, Im not obliged to take on board any advice unless it ties in with my own experiences, and like you Im free to proffer advice that I consider to be valid.
We can agree to disagree on issues and maintain Harmony, but I dont roll over for Anyone, Im happy to learn from anyone and everyone but they have to demonstrate they know what they are talking about, and despite all the bull that gets thrown at me here, I do, and where I dont, I am happy to acknowledge my ignorance.
As regards reality checks... I already have a fair grasp of reality.
Sláinte
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Ok it was just playful nonsense , I actually originally wrote '; '' 'riding a wild beast' but edited it to 'play,' I nearly edited out the wild beast too but WTF.
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by piobagusfidil
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I am sure, pigobagsful, that your 'fair grasp of reality' is second only to your grasp of history. You said above, "...perhaps I put it poorly..." One of the few times I think you were guilty of understatement...
# Posted on May 22nd 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
IMHO the music teacher colleague probably missed an excellent commentary on listening.
If I'm not mistaken this should be the original bit;
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/27514/comments#comment584872
May 13th 2011 by llig leahcim
I even responded ~
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/27514/comments#comment584872
May 15th 2011 by Ben Steen
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by Ben Steen
Handle with Care!
correction:
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/27514/comments#comment584509
May 13th 2011 by llig leahcim
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Will this thread *never* die?
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by ian stock
R.I.P.
Interesting reflection. Makes me wonder if the original inspiration was for basically a wannabe discussion.
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
It's.........alive!!!!!!
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Handle with <*^*>
This is my take on the whole ordeal ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-io-kZKl_BI
# Posted on May 24th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Yep ... same as it ever was
# Posted on May 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
I think it's kind of fitting that Llig has the last word on this thread.
Oops, sorry Llig!
# Posted on May 26th 2011 by ian stock
Re: Liz Carroll, Full Set and personal preferences. Handle with Care!
Liz Carroll is like Paddy Fahey; they have both carved out their own territory in Irish trad music. You can criticize them for their uniqueness if you like, but they are both powerful influences and have made remarkable contributions to the music.
# Posted on October 6th 2011 by Phantom Button