This has been a thought that has been puzzling me since a discussion a little while back hereabouts. It stems from the talk about 5-string fiddles, 5-string violas, octave violins etc.
It's occurred to me since that discussion that quite a lot of people who think that they're really into things 'traditional' in fact do their utmost to break with tradition, sometimes, or maybe even mostly, with no particularly good reason.
5-string fiddles is just one example. There are loads of others. For instance, what's the point of low whistles? Or whistles in B, or F or something like that? Why do people mostly now prefer the non-traditional keyless flutes to the more conventional (more traditional) keyed variety? Why are bodhráns now made either enormous or tiny? Do we really have to have so-called 'mandolins' now that don't even look like mandolins and are totally deafening? Etc etc
I'm not really counting bringing in 'foreign' instruments in this little puzzlement of mine - that's going to happen in any case. But I don't get the need to invent completely new ones in order to somehow appear 'traditional'. It seems perverse to me.
And I'm not trying to preach either. I'm genuinely interested. So put me right - what's it all about, traddies?
Wide-bore concert pitch pipes? Invented by the Taylor brothers to be heard on the Vaudeville Circuit but the instrument is "meant" to have a narrow bore and be in keys like B or C.
Before anyone actually asks or answers to a question, be aware:
-Fiddles with anywhere between 1 and 8 playable strings have been around at least the 1500s or thereabouts, not to mention sympathetic strings. It was a big thing in the Renaissance era.
-Concert pitch instruments were not common until the codification of concert pitch; until then, whistles were probably made in B, F, and whatever else key they happened to be in when you rolled tin around a wooden fipple. Pipes didn't see D until close to the 20th century.
-Keyless flutes are far more traditional, as they are in fact the older system. They're played in Irish music because, when the keyed flute was (fairly recently) developed, orchestra musicians ditched their keyless ones, making them cheaper and more available for non-professionals. But for that matter, in "traditional" terms there used to be a fairly ambiguous sense of what a flute was, and anything from a whistle to a flute to a piccollo to a fife could probably be called any of those things and get away with it.
-Drums, again, were probably made any number of sizes, as long as they were easy to produce. But I'm sure they were obnoxious no matter what :P
Tuneable bodhrans....but how far do you want to go back to equate traditional? I don't think it's time stamped and it is always changing. That's traditional.....
Agree with Danjo, most of EB's premises in the OP are mistaken.
5 string fiddles aren't a "new" invention.
Keyed flutes? Most of the folks who used keyed simple system flutes in the old days wrapped the keys closed and just played the open holes, effectively making them "keyless."
"-Keyless flutes are far more traditional, as they are in fact the older system. They're played in Irish music because, when the keyed flute was (fairly recently) developed, orchestra musicians ditched their keyless ones, making them cheaper and more available for non-professionals."
OK. That's not my understanding. I thought that Irish musicians really got into the flute when orchestral musicians ditched their simple system, *keyed* flutes in favour of Boehm system, making the keyed flutes more plentiful and cheaper. I'm sure it was much later than you're implying, Danjo ...
But maybe not ...
5-string fiddles in the design they are now pretty much *are* a new invention in my understanding. Renaissance stuff seems not too relevant to me, not only because the instruments weren't remotely like their modern forms (5-string viol, viola d'amore etc vs 5-string fiddle based on a Guarneri fiddle design), but also because not too much of the instrumentation of Irish trad (just taking that one for now) stems from Renaissance instruments. It's fiddles - modern, 4-stringed form -, flutes - simple system, keyed, later giving way to a newly modified hybrid form of keyless flute which I seem to recall being American in origin, not that it matters, and pipes. Pretty much all late 18c to 19c stuff.
Hmmm ... I thought I answered that last one. My answer was a bit tongue-in-cheek though, so maybe it was considered too flippant and somehow discourteous ...
Anyway, I've come across them increasingly frequently - they're not citterns, they're billed as being mandolins, but made more along the lines of a small cittern, and some of them are loud indeed. I'm not keen personally - takes away the charm of the delicate mandolin sound. A different beast altogether.
EB - As far as flutes go, I think it's probably closest to what you, myself, and Will Harmon all said together. Classical musicians played simple system flutes; some of them probably had keys; Irish musicians were already playing keyless wind instruments, and probably played their newly-acquired keyed instruments as though keyless. The overall point is, the keyless style, and accompanying keyless instruments, were traditionally the most...traditional.
Fiddles now - I'll admit, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek myself. I only meant to point out that the idea and execution of many-stringed fiddles was not at all recent, regardless of whether they ever became popular in Irish traditional music. I would be willing to speculate, at the very least, that if 5-or-more fiddles made it to Ireland - and as the island does have some history of classical music, I wouldn't be too surprised - people would have ended up playing them without too much concern. I'm merely reminded of Packie Russell of Doolin, whose concertina was bought for him by the pub where he played. It was upwards of forty or forty-five buttons! He certainly didn't use all of them, but he also certainly didn't turn down a somewhat odd instrument which happened to fall into his lap (literally).
Prof - I'm with Jack Campin. Call it a historical foible, but I don't consider the Irish pipes to be distinct from the pastoral pipes at least until o'Farrell's tutor - 1804 or 5, thereabouts? I was mistaken in using the ambiguous term "pipes", now that it comes down to it. But in any case I would remain firm in my original point - that pitch requirements were very flexible, and that making instruments in what we now think of as "odd keys" was the mainstream practice by sheer happenstance. It's not as important that Kenna made sets in D as it is that most pipes would have been in the B-flat to D range, and not bang-on to any semitone in there; whereas today, most pipes are probably D sets (although I'd be happy to be wrong about that), despite the increasing interest in flat sets.
Y'know, I nearly consider Irish Music to have two sides to it. The Traditional Side, and the Modern Side. It's very difficult to keep tradition to it's original state, especially in this situation where there are so many instruments. It is expected that people are going to want to experiment with new instruments and stuff. You can't change that. People consider it more of a Genre more than a regular Tradition now I suppose... :P I myself don't mind, I stick with traditional tunes and I don't really play much modern stuff (Although I would know some modern stuff but I don't like playing them) and about the only Different instrument I play is the Mandolin. Everything else I play is Trad all the way!!
And one more thing I forgot to say, I'd also like to know what DaveL35 asked about those deafening mandolins. I'd like to see that because I can only hear mine because I'm a strong player, lol.
Yeah, and if we didn't break with tradition, we'd still be labouring away fruitlessly on multi-string viol-like instruments instead of beautiful, functional, four-string fiddles.
I think "tradition" in Irish music is what the majority of players consider and accept as "traditional" over a period of time. And I would say that that period of time is probably not much greater than the generation defining it. Thus every generation redefines the "tradition".
"Classical musicians played simple system flutes; some of them probably had keys; Irish musicians were already playing keyless wind instruments, and probably played their newly-acquired keyed instruments as though keyless. The overall point is, the keyless style, and accompanying keyless instruments, were traditionally the most...traditional."
I suspect that the most important educational institution in the history of Irish flute playing, and the largest source of flutes, was the British Army. And they used keys (not heavily, but they were available and called for in the military music of the second half of the 19th century).
Mechanical failure tends to de-evolve keyed flutes into keyless ones plugged up with whatever gunk was available, and a flute that had been with an Irish regiment to India and back was likely to be fairly beat-up by the time its player got discharged with it.
"but I don't consider the Irish pipes to be distinct from the pastoral pipes at least until o'Farrell's tutor - 1804 or 5, thereabouts?"
Why date it from a tutor? Especially when the tutor describes pipes that were being built by Egan at least three decades before the publication.
There is a James Kenna set (pitched around A 440) described in this article which is certainly on the 'union' side of 'pastoral' by all accounts, and appears to be an early Kenna set, possibly 1770s:
According to Geoff Wooff, some of James Kenna's early ( c.1770)chanters were pitched as high as E flat, with similarities to pastoral chanters. This is relevant to the claim that "pipes didn't see D until close to the 20th century", whether it was commonplace or not.
I date it from the tutor because, as I recall, o'Farrell describes the instrument as being newly-made or newly-perfected or something. I can see him suggesting as much with a 30-year advance, but as I was unaware of that actual full set from the 1770s, I had never given a huge amount of thought to how early a margin I was willing to give to that statement. I always just went generally by the tutor.
As for the pitch issue, that set described above is quite noteworthy in its construction and fullness as union pipes rather than pastoral pipes. And although they are close to A440, the author specifically says that was most likely a coincidence, since A440 was not a reference pitch at the time. I will happily admit that I was wrong in being ignorant of early chanters that were in what we would call modern concert pitch. But relevant to the original poster's question, which suggested that building instruments in keys other than concert D were less rooted in traditional practice, the point I was trying to make (and which I believe we do all agree upon) is that instruments of all types were 'traditionally' made in a number of pitches, pipes being the exemplary piece.
Why break with tradition? Once you suck the marrow out of a doe's thigh bone, if you cut the holes in the right place, and make them the right size, you have the perfect instrument to play in honor of the gods who live in the hearts of trees...
...this is much more acceptable than the use of a buck's bones, which produce a horribly low-pitched tone that is an abomination to the gods. I don't understand why the youngsters, with their newfangled woven robes, insist on doing this. What is the world coming to?
No-one with half a brain sticks with "tradition" for the sake of it. You stick to "tradition" because it appeals to you, because it provides sources of inspiration, because it embodies generations of trial and error. All your examples are just meaningless. Who cares about instrumentation?! Either you can play irish music with a given instrument or you can't (or you can but it's just giant waste of time - which in turn would be innovation for innovation's sake - which makes just as little sense).
danjo: you're making stuff up in regards to the flutes being keyless traditionally. the type of flute traditionally played in irish music always had keys. you can decide that it didn't, without evidence, but you have no basis for this assertion.
the flutes played traditionally in irish music were 8-key simple system flutes from the late classical to romantic eras. these flutes ALWAYS had keys. the barogue flute is this type of flute's immediate ancestor, and it had one key for Eb.
without keys, the flute played in irish music is not fully chromatic. this is why it is a modern invention--irish musicians don't tend to play chromatically. the original, 8-key flutes, however, HAD to be chromatic, because they were classical instruments. with the increasing size of orchestras, the baroque flute was too quiet, so they widened the bores, which necessitated keys. the wider bore brought bigger holes, which made vented chromatics impossible.
you are imagining that the irish found a mythical shipload of keyless, handmade english flutes that were discarded after the invention of the boehm flute. these flutes did NOT exist. the keyless, baroque flutes were long gone by this time, and have never been played in irish music. therefore, the only flutes available were the 8-key simple system.
when people started making copies of these flutes in the 70's, they decided the keys were unnecessary. most session musicians back then were just plugging the keys, because they did not know how to fix them when they needed routine maintenance. so, again... the keyless flute in irish music is definitely not as traditional as the keyed flute. but, it is uniquely irish, here to stay, and just fine.
why break with tradition? well, sometimes it just happens (it fooled you, anyways).
'Tradition' comes from the same root as 'trade' and has nothing to do with history. It refers to that which is passed around among people. It has always been modern, and people have always (I should imagine) experimented with their instruments. What sounds good stays, and what sounds bad goes.
Keyless flutes with the bore and tonality of the 8 key simple system flute are a modern invention. Prior to the 8 key simple system flute, key less flutes were quiet, with small holes and not really suitable for this style of music (Baroque flute). And even they usually had an eflat key.
The keyless flute is with us because the ITM style evolved with the ethic of generally fitting the key of the music to the available instruments in the simplest way possible. (As opposed to demanding that the instruments cope with whatever key the music happens to be written in.) And they are cheaper and lighter and more can be made by a maker in a given time.
The keyless flute is now solidly part of the tradition. But it hasn't always been.
I'll recap, even though the point has already been made.
My point was that pipes saw D well before the 20th century, some of the earliest examples, from the second half of the 18th century, of the Irish pipes were small, high (equivalent of today's D and E flat) pitched instruments.
Pipes specifically advertised as 'Irish' pipes started to appear around 1750. 'Union' pipes as a name was to come a few decades later. Examples of instruments that early, by 'John' Egan and James Kenna, survive to this day.
"I date it from the tutor because, as I recall, o'Farrell describes the instrument as being newly-made or newly-perfected or something."
At that time, the pipes were evolving as they continued to be beyond the publication. They would constantly be "newly perfected". Geoghegan called the pastoral pipes "new" around 1745, owing to the extended range of the chanter. I'm not sure what you mean by "full set" relating to O'Farrell's tutor, as the bass regulator wasn't firmly established in sets until after he published his book, although they are a distinctive feature of later Irish pipes compared to pastoral sets. The main distinction to be drawn before the bass regulator was added would surely be the lack of foot joint, with the chanter being stopped on the knee. These chanters existed well before 1804.
I think the important thing to remember is that we are talking about traditional music, not early music.
Early Music is concerned with recreating music of the past as accurately as possible. In early music authenticity is king, both in instrument construction and playing technique.
But tradition is a living thing, it evolves. We are not trying to recreate the past, we are simply using music from the past as the foundations on which to build music that appeals to modern tastes. And on that basis it is quite right that people should be experimenting with different instruments.
Breaking her silence for only the second time this week, Zen Master Carly advises: "Stay with tradition 38% of the time, stray from tradition 46% of the time."
Daiv - in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a keyed woodwind arrives prior to a keyless one? I'm only half-remembering here, but I think it's in Fintan Vallely's flute/whistle book that some archaeologically significant woodwinds are discussed. They certainly didn't have keys. I will maintain that any woodwinds, and the styles for playing them, in Ireland prior to the introduction of those British instruments, were keyless: pipe chanters, whistles, any other Baroque instruments lingering in the country, etc. And it seems to make sense to me that the tradition developed without keyed woodwinds, because that explains prior aversion to playing with the keys: like Will Harmon suggested, older players wrapping down the keys they had anyway; it remains the fact that most tunes, and older players who happen to play newer tunes, tend not to use accidentals that would require keys. If the Irish musical tradition were based on a chromatic flute, don't you think there would have been more tunes which reflected its provenance?
Weejie - in this case, I think of a full set at least as having finally chanter, drones AND regulators, although the addition of a foot joint is probably something I should take better stock of. Like I said earlier, I'm not up on specific examples of early pipes; I've only read articles discussing conclusions based on them, and talked to pipers about it, so it's entirely plausible I'm simply mis- or under-informed. Was the "newly-perfected" idea just a selling point for o'Farrell? He seems to suggest that it is now easier to play a wider range of music, better, with the current state of the pipes as opposed to previous efforts. I would feel a bit let down with o'F if he was just tooting his own regulator to sell copies of his tutor! :P
"in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a keyed woodwind arrives prior to a keyless one?"
in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a mobile phone system is widely used prior to a traditional copper wire phone system?
If each nation developed their own flute and phone technology, you'd expect them to recapitulate all of the steps of technological development. However, if someone else has already developed the technology, it's plausible to suppose that it would be more economically feasible to adopt the newer technology. It won't always be true, but it's plausible.
And in the case of flutes, my understanding was that at the time when Boehm flutes won the key-system war, most of the flutes played by amateur flute players were wooden flutes keyed on some system, so we could assume that those would be the ones which would be made available when the Boehm flutes were adopted.
That being said, it would be also reasonable to assume that local players who got hold of discarded keyed wooden flutes would be already familiar with unkeyed whistles and pipes, and would therefore play the tunes as they knew them, without making significant use of the keys. These players might well have stripped the keys off their flutes or secured them with a bit of twine, especially as the pads and springs wore out.
"You're free to play any instrument you like so long as the tune, it's rhythm, & twiddly bits are danceable."
I don't agree with that. Most of the best sessions I've been in (not that sessions are the be-all and end-all, but just sayin') consist of music which is very far from being "danceable". It's playing and listening music, rather than anything that anyone could conceivably dance to. In fact, as often happens at festivals and things and sometimes happens elsewhere, when someone asks for, say, a reel to dance to, I've often been the one who is "volunteered" to do it. And it sounds very different from the reels played in the non-dancing part of the session.
To all those saying that these 'old players' stripped the keys off or fastened them somehow, have a look at some of the old photos of flute players around the turn of the 19c/20c. IIRC (and I found a couple the other day, so I believe that I do) they're playing keyed flutes and they look in bloody good nick to me. (The flutes and the players )
Mind, I'm not saying that it didn't happen. But I'm not convinced that it would have ever been the norm.
Could we say, "potentially danceable"? The point being that it should retain the feel of dance music, and if the dance rhythms are lost we do lose, I think, any claim to be playing "traditional" music. So hornpipes are not just a variety or reel, and slides are not a sort of deformed jig: if you've lost that, then you've lost the music. (and having lost that is usually a symptom of having listened too much with the eyes, which is to say, having broken from any reasonable source of "tradition" in favor of printed texts)
Hmmm. I suppose it's maybe a matter of degree. Not only in great sessions, but on everyone's favourite CDs, a lot of the music will be a fair old distance away from being even potentially danceable. It is of a different kind, IMO. I'm lucky enough to have played for enough dancers to be able to play for dancers (if you see what I mean). It sounds different.
I totally agree with that "hornpipes are not just a variety of reel" stuff. One of my bugbears. I like reely reels and hornpipey hornpipes. And slidey slides, for that matter. Not to mention jiggy jigs ...
And figgy pudding. And chocolatey Claires... oh, hang on, that's something else entirely.
" totally agree with that "hornpipes are not just a variety of reel" stuff"
In that case I think we agree on everything of substance, just terminological distinctions remain.
So what if the owner of one of the "so-called 'mandolins' ... that don't even look like mandolins and are totally deafening" played reely reels, jiggy jigs etc for dancers ?
It would be referred to the International Sessions Authority for adjudication. If found guilty, the offending party might be subject to sever penalties, as specified in the International Sessions Code, section XVI (D)
Hmm , yes OK. Going back to the OP then. So far as the flutes are concerned the keyless ones are more affordable. And for the bodhrans maybe its that modern players *can* afford something more than a skin nailed over a seive frame.
"And for the bodhrans maybe its that modern players *can* afford something more than a skin nailed over a seive frame."
And that creates a market: by coming up with inane options for a very simple drum, builders have come up with ways to create a ladder of pricing options, and to get their customers to locate themselves up the ladder as much as they are able. So the would-be-bongo-banger says "Oh, I can get tuning widgets on it? I'll pay a bit more for that" when no bodhran player had ever previously thought "this simple hand-tensioned frame drum would be so much better if I could adjust the skin tension".
Don't get me wrong, though, I love it when Johnny Boom-Boom spends more time fiddling with his drum head than he does playing. It means I spend less time listening to his wallop.
Not sure Jon, I had invented tuning ring (in my head) before I ever saw someone (on stage) with a tuneable (mid 80's) . They can be frustratiing even for the users you know. Boing boing or slap slap.
Read your response, ethical & I might agree with you. Unfortunately I very much enjoy playing a tune someone can dance with. It's my own private tradition.
Yeah, I admit it - it's best for me when there actually *is* someone dancing. But hey, most of the time, it's just not like that, and you have to find ways to enjoy that too, I find.
"Weejie - in this case, I think of a full set at least as having finally chanter, drones AND regulators,"
Then I'm at a loss as to why you think O'Farrell's 1804 tutor is the definitive start of the Irish pipe breakaway from the pastoral pipes. O'Farrell's description is that of a keyless chanter and a single regulator - even though Séamas Ó Casaide noted that Timothy Kenna was advertising his "new improved pipes" with "additional keys" on the chanter and two regulators two years before O'Farrell published his tutor. As I said earlier, O'Farrell's description matches the pipes that were being built c.1760 by Egan of Dublin (this has been pointed out several times in articles).
Oh, and that first illustration in the article indicated, although describing the drum played by one of the musicians as a bodhran, it is plainly a tambourine, with clearly visible illustrated jingles.......
Actually, Pete, I was referring to the practice of tuning the bodhran with a blowtorch. If the skin is too floppy, you can actually use a blowtorch to tighten it up. Works great.
There's a trick to if, of course: you keep the torch moving, so no one spot actuallly ignites, it just warms up overall. If you're a little on the cowardly side, I've seen people use a blow dryer for the same purpose, but I've also seen one guy blow out the electrics in the pub, plugging a hair dryer into the same circuit with the sound system.
@danjo: archeologists have also found long, brass instruments from prehistoric ireland. are you arguing that this means that we should be using them today?
i don't think fintan vallely is arguing that keyless flutes are more traditional, but that those are the earliest examples offlutes in ireland. i believe the history of flutes in irish music (as we play it today) is much newer than the instruments he describes. if there was a history of keyless flutes in irish music, that tradition was lost, just as the metal-stringed harping tradition was lost (though we still have the music they played).
david50's article asserts my point... although it is true that at some point in irish history there were flute-like instruments, the tradition that we have inherited only began with the influx of german/english 8-key flutes.
here is an excerpt from page 20: "In the case of the flute we at least have a starting point, in that the type of instrument we are concerned with, the conical-bore simple-system flute, makes a definitive appearance in continental Europe at the end of the seventeenth century, and so its appearance in Ireland before the beginning of the eighteenth century is unlikely."
so, if a tradition is broken, you cannot claim something is traditional. if i show up to an irish music session with a 5 foot long brass horn that rests on the ground, i cannot tell them that "it is traditional." sure, it's historical, and sure, it could be irish, but tradition and instruments found in the dirt are not the same thing.
Many traditional drums from all over the world have some method of tuning. And miltary side drums; I guess it saves on having to pack the hair dryer when on the march. With a one sided drum it can be an internal ring so why not do it ? All that splashing with water or warming by the fire is a hassle.
Not sure exactly when, but steel E strings appear to have been introduced towards the end of the 19th century, and I would imagine the fine adjuster would have appeared not long after. I've had fiddles come in for repair with pretty old adjusters fitted and I seem to recall seeing them advertised in catalogues from the 1920s.
The article by Samuel Colin Hamilton linked to above makes some good points but perpetuates an odd historical amnesia. He identifies military flute playing exclusively with Protestantism and and mainly in the North. But the British Army recruited Catholics as well, and all over the country. (I get a bit personally miffed about this, as my great-grandfather was a typical boy from Mayo who joined the Army at 14 and learned to play the flute in Afghanistan, ending up in Glasgow by which time he had picked up the melodeon as well - he may have been a feckwit for joining up, but I don't appreciate revisionist historians telling me he didn't exist).
From a Wikipedia article: "Irish volunteers formed the backbone of recruitment to the British Army for more than two centuries until Irish independence. At one point during the 19th century 42 percent of soldiers in the British Army were Irish born, which meant there were more Irish soldiers in the army than English." (Hardly an obscure phenomenon known only to sociologists: see how many Irish characters feature in Kipling's Indian Army stories).
Which meant that a lot of musical influences flowed both ways between Ireland and the Army.
Re-read the article, Jack. I think you'll find that Mr Hamilton is arguing the same as you. He goes to some lengths to explain the military associations as being ones having an effect throughout Ireland and pretty much directly states that it's unfortunate that this is not investigated more, and that the reason why it's sometimes dismissed is because of the (modern) association of such uses with Unionism.
One-up-manship, curiosity, just taking a fancy to an instrument because one likes how it looks, feels, or how that individual thinks it makes them look? It's the one they have, found or could afford? One they built themselves or bought from a neighbor. Some people just have the fanciest thing they can possibly afford. All sorts of reasons, and instruments. I've seen the old black and whites with people playing tin fiddles, and these things with megaphones coming out the side. I think it's just human nature to mess with things. Above you've all proven how you love to contemplate all the instruments and their bits, and how you feel about them etc. Human nature I guess that's traditional. That and yer differring opinions. Not sure if somebody already posted this sentiment above.
Why break with tradition?
Why break with tradition?
This has been a thought that has been puzzling me since a discussion a little while back hereabouts. It stems from the talk about 5-string fiddles, 5-string violas, octave violins etc.
It's occurred to me since that discussion that quite a lot of people who think that they're really into things 'traditional' in fact do their utmost to break with tradition, sometimes, or maybe even mostly, with no particularly good reason.
5-string fiddles is just one example. There are loads of others. For instance, what's the point of low whistles? Or whistles in B, or F or something like that? Why do people mostly now prefer the non-traditional keyless flutes to the more conventional (more traditional) keyed variety? Why are bodhráns now made either enormous or tiny? Do we really have to have so-called 'mandolins' now that don't even look like mandolins and are totally deafening? Etc etc
I'm not really counting bringing in 'foreign' instruments in this little puzzlement of mine - that's going to happen in any case. But I don't get the need to invent completely new ones in order to somehow appear 'traditional'. It seems perverse to me.
And I'm not trying to preach either. I'm genuinely interested. So put me right - what's it all about, traddies?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
what's the question?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by timmy!
Re: Why break with tradition?
Wide-bore concert pitch pipes? Invented by the Taylor brothers to be heard on the Vaudeville Circuit but the instrument is "meant" to have a narrow bore and be in keys like B or C.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Why break with tradition?
Before anyone actually asks or answers to a question, be aware:
-Fiddles with anywhere between 1 and 8 playable strings have been around at least the 1500s or thereabouts, not to mention sympathetic strings. It was a big thing in the Renaissance era.
-Concert pitch instruments were not common until the codification of concert pitch; until then, whistles were probably made in B, F, and whatever else key they happened to be in when you rolled tin around a wooden fipple. Pipes didn't see D until close to the 20th century.
-Keyless flutes are far more traditional, as they are in fact the older system. They're played in Irish music because, when the keyed flute was (fairly recently) developed, orchestra musicians ditched their keyless ones, making them cheaper and more available for non-professionals. But for that matter, in "traditional" terms there used to be a fairly ambiguous sense of what a flute was, and anything from a whistle to a flute to a piccollo to a fife could probably be called any of those things and get away with it.
-Drums, again, were probably made any number of sizes, as long as they were easy to produce. But I'm sure they were obnoxious no matter what :P
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Danjo
Re: Why break with tradition?
Tuneable bodhrans....but how far do you want to go back to equate traditional? I don't think it's time stamped and it is always changing. That's traditional.....
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by shanty
Re: Why break with tradition?
Agree with Danjo, most of EB's premises in the OP are mistaken.
5 string fiddles aren't a "new" invention.
Keyed flutes? Most of the folks who used keyed simple system flutes in the old days wrapped the keys closed and just played the open holes, effectively making them "keyless."
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Will Harmon
Re: Why break with tradition?
"-Keyless flutes are far more traditional, as they are in fact the older system. They're played in Irish music because, when the keyed flute was (fairly recently) developed, orchestra musicians ditched their keyless ones, making them cheaper and more available for non-professionals."
OK. That's not my understanding. I thought that Irish musicians really got into the flute when orchestral musicians ditched their simple system, *keyed* flutes in favour of Boehm system, making the keyed flutes more plentiful and cheaper. I'm sure it was much later than you're implying, Danjo ...
But maybe not ...
5-string fiddles in the design they are now pretty much *are* a new invention in my understanding. Renaissance stuff seems not too relevant to me, not only because the instruments weren't remotely like their modern forms (5-string viol, viola d'amore etc vs 5-string fiddle based on a Guarneri fiddle design), but also because not too much of the instrumentation of Irish trad (just taking that one for now) stems from Renaissance instruments. It's fiddles - modern, 4-stringed form -, flutes - simple system, keyed, later giving way to a newly modified hybrid form of keyless flute which I seem to recall being American in origin, not that it matters, and pipes. Pretty much all late 18c to 19c stuff.
Isn't it?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Can you please tell me where I can get one of these 'deafening' mandolins?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by DaveL35
Re: Why break with tradition?
Hmmm ... I thought I answered that last one. My answer was a bit tongue-in-cheek though, so maybe it was considered too flippant and somehow discourteous ...
Anyway, I've come across them increasingly frequently - they're not citterns, they're billed as being mandolins, but made more along the lines of a small cittern, and some of them are loud indeed. I'm not keen personally - takes away the charm of the delicate mandolin sound. A different beast altogether.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
'Pipes didn't see D until close to the 20th century.'
They didn't become wide bore concert pitch.
By mid 18th century Kenna made pipes equivalent to modern D and E flat.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Why break with tradition?
Once more the question arises what "tradition" is. Anyone?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by kuec
Re: Why break with tradition?
"By mid 18th century Kenna made pipes equivalent to modern D and E flat."
By mid 18th century the uillean pipes didn't exist, so what kind of pipe are you talking about and why is it relevant?
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Jack Campin
Re: Why break with tradition?
EB - As far as flutes go, I think it's probably closest to what you, myself, and Will Harmon all said together. Classical musicians played simple system flutes; some of them probably had keys; Irish musicians were already playing keyless wind instruments, and probably played their newly-acquired keyed instruments as though keyless. The overall point is, the keyless style, and accompanying keyless instruments, were traditionally the most...traditional.
Fiddles now - I'll admit, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek myself. I only meant to point out that the idea and execution of many-stringed fiddles was not at all recent, regardless of whether they ever became popular in Irish traditional music. I would be willing to speculate, at the very least, that if 5-or-more fiddles made it to Ireland - and as the island does have some history of classical music, I wouldn't be too surprised - people would have ended up playing them without too much concern. I'm merely reminded of Packie Russell of Doolin, whose concertina was bought for him by the pub where he played. It was upwards of forty or forty-five buttons! He certainly didn't use all of them, but he also certainly didn't turn down a somewhat odd instrument which happened to fall into his lap (literally).
Prof - I'm with Jack Campin. Call it a historical foible, but I don't consider the Irish pipes to be distinct from the pastoral pipes at least until o'Farrell's tutor - 1804 or 5, thereabouts? I was mistaken in using the ambiguous term "pipes", now that it comes down to it. But in any case I would remain firm in my original point - that pitch requirements were very flexible, and that making instruments in what we now think of as "odd keys" was the mainstream practice by sheer happenstance. It's not as important that Kenna made sets in D as it is that most pipes would have been in the B-flat to D range, and not bang-on to any semitone in there; whereas today, most pipes are probably D sets (although I'd be happy to be wrong about that), despite the increasing interest in flat sets.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Danjo
Re: Why break with tradition?
Y'know, I nearly consider Irish Music to have two sides to it. The Traditional Side, and the Modern Side. It's very difficult to keep tradition to it's original state, especially in this situation where there are so many instruments. It is expected that people are going to want to experiment with new instruments and stuff. You can't change that. People consider it more of a Genre more than a regular Tradition now I suppose... :P I myself don't mind, I stick with traditional tunes and I don't really play much modern stuff (Although I would know some modern stuff but I don't like playing them) and about the only Different instrument I play is the Mandolin. Everything else I play is Trad all the way!!
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Patrick Murray
Re: Why break with tradition?
And one more thing I forgot to say, I'd also like to know what DaveL35 asked about those deafening mandolins. I'd like to see that because I can only hear mine because I'm a strong player, lol.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Patrick Murray
Re: Why break with tradition?
If we didn't break with tradition we would all still be beating rhythms out on hollow logs.
What a pity that would be to miss out on all these sweet tunes.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by y-nought
Re: Why break with tradition?
Yeah, and if we didn't break with tradition, we'd still be labouring away fruitlessly on multi-string viol-like instruments instead of beautiful, functional, four-string fiddles.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
I think "tradition" in Irish music is what the majority of players consider and accept as "traditional" over a period of time. And I would say that that period of time is probably not much greater than the generation defining it. Thus every generation redefines the "tradition".
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by shanty
Re: Why break with tradition?
"Classical musicians played simple system flutes; some of them probably had keys; Irish musicians were already playing keyless wind instruments, and probably played their newly-acquired keyed instruments as though keyless. The overall point is, the keyless style, and accompanying keyless instruments, were traditionally the most...traditional."
I suspect that the most important educational institution in the history of Irish flute playing, and the largest source of flutes, was the British Army. And they used keys (not heavily, but they were available and called for in the military music of the second half of the 19th century).
Mechanical failure tends to de-evolve keyed flutes into keyless ones plugged up with whatever gunk was available, and a flute that had been with an Irish regiment to India and back was likely to be fairly beat-up by the time its player got discharged with it.
# Posted on August 31st 2011 by Jack Campin
Re: Why break with tradition?
"but I don't consider the Irish pipes to be distinct from the pastoral pipes at least until o'Farrell's tutor - 1804 or 5, thereabouts?"
Why date it from a tutor? Especially when the tutor describes pipes that were being built by Egan at least three decades before the publication.
There is a James Kenna set (pitched around A 440) described in this article which is certainly on the 'union' side of 'pastoral' by all accounts, and appears to be an early Kenna set, possibly 1770s:
http://www.seanreidsociety.org/SRSJ3/3.17/A%20National%20Treasure.pdf
According to Geoff Wooff, some of James Kenna's early ( c.1770)chanters were pitched as high as E flat, with similarities to pastoral chanters. This is relevant to the claim that "pipes didn't see D until close to the 20th century", whether it was commonplace or not.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Weejie
Re: Why break with tradition?
Found the article relating to James Kenna - seems it was 1760s - mid 18th century:
http://www.seanreidsociety.org/SRSJ2/chanter%20design.pdf
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Weejie
Re: Why break with tradition?
I date it from the tutor because, as I recall, o'Farrell describes the instrument as being newly-made or newly-perfected or something. I can see him suggesting as much with a 30-year advance, but as I was unaware of that actual full set from the 1770s, I had never given a huge amount of thought to how early a margin I was willing to give to that statement. I always just went generally by the tutor.
As for the pitch issue, that set described above is quite noteworthy in its construction and fullness as union pipes rather than pastoral pipes. And although they are close to A440, the author specifically says that was most likely a coincidence, since A440 was not a reference pitch at the time. I will happily admit that I was wrong in being ignorant of early chanters that were in what we would call modern concert pitch. But relevant to the original poster's question, which suggested that building instruments in keys other than concert D were less rooted in traditional practice, the point I was trying to make (and which I believe we do all agree upon) is that instruments of all types were 'traditionally' made in a number of pitches, pipes being the exemplary piece.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Danjo
Re: Why break with tradition?
Why break with tradition? Once you suck the marrow out of a doe's thigh bone, if you cut the holes in the right place, and make them the right size, you have the perfect instrument to play in honor of the gods who live in the hearts of trees...
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Why break with tradition?
...this is much more acceptable than the use of a buck's bones, which produce a horribly low-pitched tone that is an abomination to the gods. I don't understand why the youngsters, with their newfangled woven robes, insist on doing this. What is the world coming to?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by AlBrown
Re: Why break with tradition?
No-one with half a brain sticks with "tradition" for the sake of it. You stick to "tradition" because it appeals to you, because it provides sources of inspiration, because it embodies generations of trial and error. All your examples are just meaningless. Who cares about instrumentation?! Either you can play irish music with a given instrument or you can't (or you can but it's just giant waste of time - which in turn would be innovation for innovation's sake - which makes just as little sense).
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Tirno
Re: Why break with tradition?
danjo: you're making stuff up in regards to the flutes being keyless traditionally. the type of flute traditionally played in irish music always had keys. you can decide that it didn't, without evidence, but you have no basis for this assertion.
the flutes played traditionally in irish music were 8-key simple system flutes from the late classical to romantic eras. these flutes ALWAYS had keys. the barogue flute is this type of flute's immediate ancestor, and it had one key for Eb.
without keys, the flute played in irish music is not fully chromatic. this is why it is a modern invention--irish musicians don't tend to play chromatically. the original, 8-key flutes, however, HAD to be chromatic, because they were classical instruments. with the increasing size of orchestras, the baroque flute was too quiet, so they widened the bores, which necessitated keys. the wider bore brought bigger holes, which made vented chromatics impossible.
you are imagining that the irish found a mythical shipload of keyless, handmade english flutes that were discarded after the invention of the boehm flute. these flutes did NOT exist. the keyless, baroque flutes were long gone by this time, and have never been played in irish music. therefore, the only flutes available were the 8-key simple system.
when people started making copies of these flutes in the 70's, they decided the keys were unnecessary. most session musicians back then were just plugging the keys, because they did not know how to fix them when they needed routine maintenance. so, again... the keyless flute in irish music is definitely not as traditional as the keyed flute. but, it is uniquely irish, here to stay, and just fine.
why break with tradition? well, sometimes it just happens (it fooled you, anyways).
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by daiv
Re: Why break with tradition?
'Tradition' comes from the same root as 'trade' and has nothing to do with history. It refers to that which is passed around among people. It has always been modern, and people have always (I should imagine) experimented with their instruments. What sounds good stays, and what sounds bad goes.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by gam
Re: Why break with tradition?
Keyless flutes with the bore and tonality of the 8 key simple system flute are a modern invention. Prior to the 8 key simple system flute, key less flutes were quiet, with small holes and not really suitable for this style of music (Baroque flute). And even they usually had an eflat key.
The keyless flute is with us because the ITM style evolved with the ethic of generally fitting the key of the music to the available instruments in the simplest way possible. (As opposed to demanding that the instruments cope with whatever key the music happens to be written in.) And they are cheaper and lighter and more can be made by a maker in a given time.
The keyless flute is now solidly part of the tradition. But it hasn't always been.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Crackpot
Re: Why break with tradition?
"and what sounds bad goes"
If only...
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Whiddler
Re: Why break with tradition?
Not only an Eb key but a D# key as well, often as not by the mid-18c.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
I'll recap, even though the point has already been made.
My point was that pipes saw D well before the 20th century, some of the earliest examples, from the second half of the 18th century, of the Irish pipes were small, high (equivalent of today's D and E flat) pitched instruments.
Pipes specifically advertised as 'Irish' pipes started to appear around 1750. 'Union' pipes as a name was to come a few decades later. Examples of instruments that early, by 'John' Egan and James Kenna, survive to this day.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Why break with tradition?
Ah! A good old fashioned "traditional" Mustard board bunfight. {pulls chair up and opens the popcorn}.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Uill Wind
Re: Why break with tradition?
"I date it from the tutor because, as I recall, o'Farrell describes the instrument as being newly-made or newly-perfected or something."
At that time, the pipes were evolving as they continued to be beyond the publication. They would constantly be "newly perfected". Geoghegan called the pastoral pipes "new" around 1745, owing to the extended range of the chanter. I'm not sure what you mean by "full set" relating to O'Farrell's tutor, as the bass regulator wasn't firmly established in sets until after he published his book, although they are a distinctive feature of later Irish pipes compared to pastoral sets. The main distinction to be drawn before the bass regulator was added would surely be the lack of foot joint, with the chanter being stopped on the knee. These chanters existed well before 1804.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Weejie
Re: Why break with tradition?
I think the important thing to remember is that we are talking about traditional music, not early music.
Early Music is concerned with recreating music of the past as accurately as possible. In early music authenticity is king, both in instrument construction and playing technique.
But tradition is a living thing, it evolves. We are not trying to recreate the past, we are simply using music from the past as the foundations on which to build music that appeals to modern tastes. And on that basis it is quite right that people should be experimenting with different instruments.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by skreech
Re: Why break with tradition?
Darn, can't find the "like" button....
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Wyogal
Re: Why break with tradition?
Traditional music is the music that sounds like I think it ought to sound.
Now all of you kids get off of my lawn!
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
You're free to play any instrument you like so long as the tune, it's rhythm, & twiddly bits are danceable.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Batgirl has left the GPL ;)
Re: Why break with tradition?
You mean, like English trad ?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
digital button boxes
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by zippydw
Re: Why break with tradition?
Breaking her silence for only the second time this week, Zen Master Carly advises: "Stay with tradition 38% of the time, stray from tradition 46% of the time."
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by NEW Pure Drop® Ear Canal Oil
Re: Why break with tradition?
Daiv - in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a keyed woodwind arrives prior to a keyless one? I'm only half-remembering here, but I think it's in Fintan Vallely's flute/whistle book that some archaeologically significant woodwinds are discussed. They certainly didn't have keys. I will maintain that any woodwinds, and the styles for playing them, in Ireland prior to the introduction of those British instruments, were keyless: pipe chanters, whistles, any other Baroque instruments lingering in the country, etc. And it seems to make sense to me that the tradition developed without keyed woodwinds, because that explains prior aversion to playing with the keys: like Will Harmon suggested, older players wrapping down the keys they had anyway; it remains the fact that most tunes, and older players who happen to play newer tunes, tend not to use accidentals that would require keys. If the Irish musical tradition were based on a chromatic flute, don't you think there would have been more tunes which reflected its provenance?
Weejie - in this case, I think of a full set at least as having finally chanter, drones AND regulators, although the addition of a foot joint is probably something I should take better stock of. Like I said earlier, I'm not up on specific examples of early pipes; I've only read articles discussing conclusions based on them, and talked to pipers about it, so it's entirely plausible I'm simply mis- or under-informed. Was the "newly-perfected" idea just a selling point for o'Farrell? He seems to suggest that it is now easier to play a wider range of music, better, with the current state of the pipes as opposed to previous efforts. I would feel a bit let down with o'F if he was just tooting his own regulator to sell copies of his tutor! :P
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Danjo
Re: Why break with tradition?
"in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a keyed woodwind arrives prior to a keyless one?"
in ANY nation, wouldn't you agree that it is highly unlikely that a mobile phone system is widely used prior to a traditional copper wire phone system?
If each nation developed their own flute and phone technology, you'd expect them to recapitulate all of the steps of technological development. However, if someone else has already developed the technology, it's plausible to suppose that it would be more economically feasible to adopt the newer technology. It won't always be true, but it's plausible.
And in the case of flutes, my understanding was that at the time when Boehm flutes won the key-system war, most of the flutes played by amateur flute players were wooden flutes keyed on some system, so we could assume that those would be the ones which would be made available when the Boehm flutes were adopted.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
That being said, it would be also reasonable to assume that local players who got hold of discarded keyed wooden flutes would be already familiar with unkeyed whistles and pipes, and would therefore play the tunes as they knew them, without making significant use of the keys. These players might well have stripped the keys off their flutes or secured them with a bit of twine, especially as the pads and springs wore out.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
"You're free to play any instrument you like so long as the tune, it's rhythm, & twiddly bits are danceable."
I don't agree with that. Most of the best sessions I've been in (not that sessions are the be-all and end-all, but just sayin') consist of music which is very far from being "danceable". It's playing and listening music, rather than anything that anyone could conceivably dance to. In fact, as often happens at festivals and things and sometimes happens elsewhere, when someone asks for, say, a reel to dance to, I've often been the one who is "volunteered" to do it. And it sounds very different from the reels played in the non-dancing part of the session.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
To all those saying that these 'old players' stripped the keys off or fastened them somehow, have a look at some of the old photos of flute players around the turn of the 19c/20c. IIRC (and I found a couple the other day, so I believe that I do) they're playing keyed flutes and they look in bloody good nick to me. (The flutes and the players
)
Mind, I'm not saying that it didn't happen. But I'm not convinced that it would have ever been the norm.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Could we say, "potentially danceable"? The point being that it should retain the feel of dance music, and if the dance rhythms are lost we do lose, I think, any claim to be playing "traditional" music. So hornpipes are not just a variety or reel, and slides are not a sort of deformed jig: if you've lost that, then you've lost the music. (and having lost that is usually a symptom of having listened too much with the eyes, which is to say, having broken from any reasonable source of "tradition" in favor of printed texts)
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
Hmmm. I suppose it's maybe a matter of degree. Not only in great sessions, but on everyone's favourite CDs, a lot of the music will be a fair old distance away from being even potentially danceable. It is of a different kind, IMO. I'm lucky enough to have played for enough dancers to be able to play for dancers (if you see what I mean). It sounds different.
I totally agree with that "hornpipes are not just a variety of reel" stuff. One of my bugbears. I like reely reels and hornpipey hornpipes. And slidey slides, for that matter. Not to mention jiggy jigs ...
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
And figgy pudding. And chocolatey Claires... oh, hang on, that's something else entirely.
" totally agree with that "hornpipes are not just a variety of reel" stuff"
In that case I think we agree on everything of substance, just terminological distinctions remain.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
So what if the owner of one of the "so-called 'mandolins' ... that don't even look like mandolins and are totally deafening" played reely reels, jiggy jigs etc for dancers ?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
It would be referred to the International Sessions Authority for adjudication. If found guilty, the offending party might be subject to sever penalties, as specified in the International Sessions Code, section XVI (D)
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
Sever penalties???!?! That's a bit severe, isn't it? Mind you, hanging's too good for some of 'em ...
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
What I meant was, if it did the job and was audible what's the problem ? Isn't playing dance tunes as listening music more controversial ?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
I don't think so. Playing dance tunes as listening music has been done for so long - maybe always? - that I don't think it's controversial at all.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Hmm , yes OK. Going back to the OP then. So far as the flutes are concerned the keyless ones are more affordable. And for the bodhrans maybe its that modern players *can* afford something more than a skin nailed over a seive frame.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
Just remembered on of my favourite pics: www.bfs.org.uk/pan/historyoftheirishflute.pdf
second page, keyless flute. About 1842.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
http://www.bfs.org.uk/pan/historyoftheirishflute.pdf
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
"And for the bodhrans maybe its that modern players *can* afford something more than a skin nailed over a seive frame."
And that creates a market: by coming up with inane options for a very simple drum, builders have come up with ways to create a ladder of pricing options, and to get their customers to locate themselves up the ladder as much as they are able. So the would-be-bongo-banger says "Oh, I can get tuning widgets on it? I'll pay a bit more for that" when no bodhran player had ever previously thought "this simple hand-tensioned frame drum would be so much better if I could adjust the skin tension".
Don't get me wrong, though, I love it when Johnny Boom-Boom spends more time fiddling with his drum head than he does playing. It means I spend less time listening to his wallop.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
Nice link, David. And great picture. I like the last sentence of that article:
"To my knowledge, every single existing photograph showing players from the early years of the twentieth century, shows them with German flutes."
By which I take it that he means like the one John McKenna played.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Not sure Jon, I had invented tuning ring (in my head) before I ever saw someone (on stage) with a tuneable (mid 80's) . They can be frustratiing even for the users you know. Boing boing or slap slap.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
A real bodhran player uses a blowtorch.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
Read your response, ethical & I might agree with you. Unfortunately I very much enjoy playing a tune someone can dance with. It's my own private tradition.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Batgirl has left the GPL ;)
"Potentially danceable", eh. Is that anything like being a little pregnant?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Batgirl has left the GPL ;)
Re: Why break with tradition?
Yeah, I admit it - it's best for me when there actually *is* someone dancing. But hey, most of the time, it's just not like that, and you have to find ways to enjoy that too, I find.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Fair play, Ben Hall. It's a rich tradition!
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Batgirl has left the GPL ;)
Re: Why break with tradition?
"Weejie - in this case, I think of a full set at least as having finally chanter, drones AND regulators,"
Then I'm at a loss as to why you think O'Farrell's 1804 tutor is the definitive start of the Irish pipe breakaway from the pastoral pipes. O'Farrell's description is that of a keyless chanter and a single regulator - even though Séamas Ó Casaide noted that Timothy Kenna was advertising his "new improved pipes" with "additional keys" on the chanter and two regulators two years before O'Farrell published his tutor. As I said earlier, O'Farrell's description matches the pipes that were being built c.1760 by Egan of Dublin (this has been pointed out several times in articles).
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Weejie
Re: Why break with tradition?
As advised by Seamus Ennis "You play the bodhran with a penknife." !
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Why break with tradition?
Oh, and that first illustration in the article indicated, although describing the drum played by one of the musicians as a bodhran, it is plainly a tambourine, with clearly visible illustrated jingles.......
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Why break with tradition?
That flute looks home-made to me. It almost looks like a piece of warped bamboo, but that doesn't seem very likely does it?
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
Actually, Pete, I was referring to the practice of tuning the bodhran with a blowtorch. If the skin is too floppy, you can actually use a blowtorch to tighten it up. Works great.
There's a trick to if, of course: you keep the torch moving, so no one spot actuallly ignites, it just warms up overall. If you're a little on the cowardly side, I've seen people use a blow dryer for the same purpose, but I've also seen one guy blow out the electrics in the pub, plugging a hair dryer into the same circuit with the sound system.
# Posted on September 1st 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Why break with tradition?
"Then I'm at a loss as to why you think O'Farrell's 1804 tutor is the definitive start of the Irish pipe breakaway from the pastoral pipes."
Well, I'll use 1760 from now on, now that I know more about what sets are extant from the period. Thanks!
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by Danjo
Re: Why break with tradition?
@ ethical blend His left eye looks home-made as well. Maybe he had a bit of bamboo going spare.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by gam
Re: Why break with tradition?
@danjo: archeologists have also found long, brass instruments from prehistoric ireland. are you arguing that this means that we should be using them today?
i don't think fintan vallely is arguing that keyless flutes are more traditional, but that those are the earliest examples offlutes in ireland. i believe the history of flutes in irish music (as we play it today) is much newer than the instruments he describes. if there was a history of keyless flutes in irish music, that tradition was lost, just as the metal-stringed harping tradition was lost (though we still have the music they played).
david50's article asserts my point... although it is true that at some point in irish history there were flute-like instruments, the tradition that we have inherited only began with the influx of german/english 8-key flutes.
here is an excerpt from page 20: "In the case of the flute we at least have a starting point, in that the type of instrument we are concerned with, the conical-bore simple-system flute, makes a definitive appearance in continental Europe at the end of the seventeenth century, and so its appearance in Ireland before the beginning of the eighteenth century is unlikely."
so, if a tradition is broken, you cannot claim something is traditional. if i show up to an irish music session with a 5 foot long brass horn that rests on the ground, i cannot tell them that "it is traditional." sure, it's historical, and sure, it could be irish, but tradition and instruments found in the dirt are not the same thing.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by daiv
Re: Why break with tradition?
Many traditional drums from all over the world have some method of tuning. And miltary side drums; I guess it saves on having to pack the hair dryer when on the march. With a one sided drum it can be an internal ring so why not do it ? All that splashing with water or warming by the fire is a hassle.
When did fine tuners on fiddles come in ?
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by David50
Re: Why break with tradition?
"When did fine tuners on fiddles come in ?"
Not sure exactly when, but steel E strings appear to have been introduced towards the end of the 19th century, and I would imagine the fine adjuster would have appeared not long after. I've had fiddles come in for repair with pretty old adjusters fitted and I seem to recall seeing them advertised in catalogues from the 1920s.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by Weejie
Re: Why break with tradition?
The article by Samuel Colin Hamilton linked to above makes some good points but perpetuates an odd historical amnesia. He identifies military flute playing exclusively with Protestantism and and mainly in the North. But the British Army recruited Catholics as well, and all over the country. (I get a bit personally miffed about this, as my great-grandfather was a typical boy from Mayo who joined the Army at 14 and learned to play the flute in Afghanistan, ending up in Glasgow by which time he had picked up the melodeon as well - he may have been a feckwit for joining up, but I don't appreciate revisionist historians telling me he didn't exist).
From a Wikipedia article: "Irish volunteers formed the backbone of recruitment to the British Army for more than two centuries until Irish independence. At one point during the 19th century 42 percent of soldiers in the British Army were Irish born, which meant there were more Irish soldiers in the army than English." (Hardly an obscure phenomenon known only to sociologists: see how many Irish characters feature in Kipling's Indian Army stories).
Which meant that a lot of musical influences flowed both ways between Ireland and the Army.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by Jack Campin
Re: Why break with tradition?
Re-read the article, Jack. I think you'll find that Mr Hamilton is arguing the same as you. He goes to some lengths to explain the military associations as being ones having an effect throughout Ireland and pretty much directly states that it's unfortunate that this is not investigated more, and that the reason why it's sometimes dismissed is because of the (modern) association of such uses with Unionism.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by ethical blend
Re: Why break with tradition?
digital pipes
and digital bodhran come to think of it
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by zippydw
Re: Why break with tradition?
G/D boxes that suddenly stop working when you try and play outside those keys, unlike C/G anglos.
# Posted on September 2nd 2011 by geoffwright
Re: Why break with tradition?
One-up-manship, curiosity, just taking a fancy to an instrument because one likes how it looks, feels, or how that individual thinks it makes them look? It's the one they have, found or could afford? One they built themselves or bought from a neighbor. Some people just have the fanciest thing they can possibly afford. All sorts of reasons, and instruments. I've seen the old black and whites with people playing tin fiddles, and these things with megaphones coming out the side. I think it's just human nature to mess with things. Above you've all proven how you love to contemplate all the instruments and their bits, and how you feel about them etc. Human nature I guess that's traditional. That and yer differring opinions. Not sure if somebody already posted this sentiment above.
# Posted on September 5th 2011 by SandyBottoms