Wearing my cynic's hat, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. The original "1001", replete as it is with typos and other inaccuracies in the transcription of tunes from live musicians, is ripe material for an enterprising editor/musicologist to get to work on, as it already has been over the years. Think of all the new copyrights (=money) being generated by such a venture.
Personally, I'd rather stick with the original, listen around, and make up my own mind about how a tune should be played.
'This is luxury you can afford by Cyril Lord —
Squash it, and it just springs back,
Wash it, and the colour stays fast,,
Give it the treatment, the family treatment,
Enkalon is made to last for years and years and years and years….
This is luxury you can afford by Cyril Lord!'
Or, as the Bonzos had it 'This is boredom you can afford by Cyril Bored'.
This new edition is hardly any more "comprehendible" than the old one, really. What can't you comprehend in the old one? Did the plot drag or something?
There was the version edited by Miles Krassen, which differs considerably in the presentation of the tunes, but that must have been around for about 30 years by now.
I've never possessed the 1001 Tunes. I've got Krassen's book - 1500, 1600 tunes? - but never used it much. The cats tend to regard the 1001 Tunes much more highly, I understand.
I may be maligning it but I seem to remember finding the Krassen book padded out with rather bland and confusingly notated tunes that did not entice me to learn them, in a whole lot of user-unfriendly keys. I wanted instant dots acquaintance with the Bothy Band repertoire and it didn't seem to be had there. Maybe the God of the Ears was frowning upon me for trying to steal the mojo by practising Dottism.
But the section with the complete (I think) compositions of O'Carolan is worth having.
The Krassen edition isn't the 1850 collection minus the airs. It's culled from various of the O'Neill collections. For a reference book for practical musicians, IMO, it's useless. It does have some academic qualities, but I'm not interested in those. Plus you have to do all sorts of additional work yourself on the collections from which the tunes come to be able to work out what the use is.
Should I say, the Krassen version claimed to be a reworked version of "O'Neill's Music of Ireland" - and he felt that the airs were "irrelevant". There may have been some tunes from the 1001 in it, and at least one tune that didn't appear in either, but it was essentially trying to be an 'updated' and 'improved' version of O'Neill's original "Music of Ireland".
"Should I say, the Krassen version claimed to be a reworked version of "O'Neill's Music of Ireland" - and he felt that the airs were 'irrelevant'."
Funny, that's not what he says in the book.
From the introduction: "The section on slow airs which is included in The Music of Ireland has been entirely omitted. It is the editor's sense that the slow airs as written by O'Neill are in almost every sense inferior setting which in no way convey the fine art of slow-air playing still to be found among traditional players in Ireland."
I'll say at this point that I brought the Krassen book into the thread just in case it was the book that the OP had heard about. I do not endorse or recommend it as a tune source in any way.
Just going back to the actual book and re-reading the introduction, it's not clear from that which collections have been used. The cover states that the book is " a newly revised & corrected collection of The Dance Music of Ireland", which should mean that it's taken not from the 1850 but from the 1001 Gems. The Introduction includes many references to "O’Neill’s books” and cites the two main collections, appearing in several places to imply that at both were used. (It seems to me that Waifs and Strays is also a source, of which more later.)
The numbers don't appear to add up. The cover page says it contains "over 1000 fiddle tunes". The introduction says that "From O’Neill’s original collection of 1100, approximately 920 have been selected.” In order to get to that number of 1100, you have to omit all the airs, all the O’Carolan tunes and all the marches. But he says he has included the O’Carolan tunes in full.
All of the above means that it's impossible to tell exactly where the tunes are from. What appears to be the case, if you compare (as I have done in the past, sad muppet that I am) what's in this book with the O'Neill's collections is that there is material from The Music of Ireland ("The 1850") The Dance Music of Ireland ("The 1001 Gems") and from Waifs and Strays of Gaelic Melody.
Every now and then over the years, Miles Krassen has posted in discussions like this. When he does, he generally points out that he didn't want to publish anything with "O'Neill's" in the title, because that wasn't what he was about, but he didn't have a choice.
Here's Krassen in his own words, posting to a past discussion of the book over on Chiff and Fipple:
"I certainly don't think my book is "the best" by any means. I do think it was a very well-intentioned addition to what was available in '76. Since then many excellent books have come out and Irish music has undergone a renaissance. I wanted my book, which by the way, lists "Miles Krassen" as author, not O'Neill, and is entitled, "O'Neill's Music of Ireland, Revised," to be a tribute to the great players I knew and the 78rpm recordings they loved. Had the publisher allowed me to write a book just focused on that goal, including maybe 50-60 settings, it might have been better. But the publisher wasn't interested in that. They just wanted to get a copyright for something called "O'Neill's," and that is the only book on Irish music they were willing to publish in '76."
Well, I don't have the book any more, but from what I remember, the tune titles do add up - they are in the order of the 1850 collection. I remember when the book came out, most people considered they had a revised copy of the 1850.
I don't even like the way Krassen ornaments the tunes. He claims that, on the whole, the transcriptions come from the way players of the day were playing them. I remember looking up "Julia Delaney", for example, - it didn't correspond to the way I'd heard it being played. O'Neill's version was different, but Krassen's wasn't an improvement.
The first tune in the Krassen edition is Doctor O'Neill. This is the first non-air in the 1850 collection. After that, the first few tunes in the Krassens book go as follows:
Walls of Liscarroll
Pipe on the Hob
When sick is it tea you want?
The Eaves Dropper (sic)
Saddle the Pony
The first few after Doctor O'Neill in the 1850 go as follows:
The King of the Pipers
Denis Delaney
The Walls of Liscarroll
The Pipe on the Hob
The Little Yellow Boy
It's not just that there are many more gaps than a ratio of 920 out of 1100 tunes would mean - there are different tunes as well.
While we're at it. I've got a real copy of Ryan's Mammoth Collection (another collection book) Published in 1885. I've noticed that many tunes are not (notated) the same as the later (especially the latest) editions. Has anybody got both the real (not reproduction) O'Neils and compared it with the new release?
O'Neills 1001
O'Neills 1001
Hello there!
Did I hear it through the grapevine that there is a new version of O'Neills? One that is actually comprehendible?
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by happy123
Re: O'Neills 1001
Wearing my cynic's hat, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. The original "1001", replete as it is with typos and other inaccuracies in the transcription of tunes from live musicians, is ripe material for an enterprising editor/musicologist to get to work on, as it already has been over the years. Think of all the new copyrights (=money) being generated by such a venture.
Personally, I'd rather stick with the original, listen around, and make up my own mind about how a tune should be played.
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Trevor Jennings
Re: O'Neills 1001
"1001, cleans a big big carpet,
for less than half a crown!"
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Johnny Jay
Re: O'Neills 1001
"1001, cleans a big big carpet,
for less than half a crown!"
"If it costs less than 8/6d, that's the one I'd recommend"
[Cyril Lord]
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
You'll wonder where your teeth all went
If you brush your teeth with Pepsodent
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Steve Shaw
Re: O'Neills 1001
Ah, but weejie,
'This is luxury you can afford by Cyril Lord —
Squash it, and it just springs back,
Wash it, and the colour stays fast,,
Give it the treatment, the family treatment,
Enkalon is made to last for years and years and years and years….
This is luxury you can afford by Cyril Lord!'
Or, as the Bonzos had it 'This is boredom you can afford by Cyril Bored'.
Remember, you only fit double glazing once.
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by MacCruiskeen
Re: O'Neills 1001
"Did I hear it through the grapevine that there is a new version of O'Neills? One that is actually comprehendible?"
How the hell do i know what you did or didn't hear?
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by palethinboy
Re: O'Neills 1001
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/15489 "New" if you think 1980 is new, I guess. Boy, those were the days. Stagflation, malaise, Iranian hostages, disco.
This new edition is hardly any more "comprehendible" than the old one, really. What can't you comprehend in the old one? Did the plot drag or something?
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Kevin Rietmann
Re: O'Neills 1001
Murray Mints, Murray Mints, too good to hurry mints.
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
.....spelt K-E-Y-N-S-H-A-M, Keynsham, Bristol.
No, nostalgia is definitely not what it used to be !
# Posted on January 25th 2012 by murfbox
Re: O'Neills 1001
There was the version edited by Miles Krassen, which differs considerably in the presentation of the tunes, but that must have been around for about 30 years by now.
# Posted on January 26th 2012 by DaveL35
Re: O'Neills 1001
"There was the version edited by Miles Krassen,"
Aye, but that was the 1850 version - and it left out the airs.
# Posted on January 26th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
I've never possessed the 1001 Tunes. I've got Krassen's book - 1500, 1600 tunes? - but never used it much. The cats tend to regard the 1001 Tunes much more highly, I understand.
I may be maligning it but I seem to remember finding the Krassen book padded out with rather bland and confusingly notated tunes that did not entice me to learn them, in a whole lot of user-unfriendly keys. I wanted instant dots acquaintance with the Bothy Band repertoire and it didn't seem to be had there. Maybe the God of the Ears was frowning upon me for trying to steal the mojo by practising Dottism.
But the section with the complete (I think) compositions of O'Carolan is worth having.
# Posted on January 26th 2012 by nicholas
Re: O'Neills 1001
The Carolan section is not the complete works. There are a fair few there though.
# Posted on January 26th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
Dottism
Sounds terribly schismatic
# Posted on January 26th 2012 by zippydw
Re: O'Neills 1001
The Krassen edition isn't the 1850 collection minus the airs. It's culled from various of the O'Neill collections. For a reference book for practical musicians, IMO, it's useless. It does have some academic qualities, but I'm not interested in those. Plus you have to do all sorts of additional work yourself on the collections from which the tunes come to be able to work out what the use is.
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: O'Neills 1001
"The Krassen edition isn't the 1850 collection minus the airs"
That's what it claims to be. It's why it's called "O'Neill's Music of Ireland".
In reality, it's a pile of poop.
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
Should I say, the Krassen version claimed to be a reworked version of "O'Neill's Music of Ireland" - and he felt that the airs were "irrelevant". There may have been some tunes from the 1001 in it, and at least one tune that didn't appear in either, but it was essentially trying to be an 'updated' and 'improved' version of O'Neill's original "Music of Ireland".
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
There's a pdf version of the 1850 edition here: http://www.guitarnut.com/folktablature/oneills/index.html
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Will Harmon
Re: O'Neills 1001
"Should I say, the Krassen version claimed to be a reworked version of "O'Neill's Music of Ireland" - and he felt that the airs were 'irrelevant'."
Funny, that's not what he says in the book.
From the introduction: "The section on slow airs which is included in The Music of Ireland has been entirely omitted. It is the editor's sense that the slow airs as written by O'Neill are in almost every sense inferior setting which in no way convey the fine art of slow-air playing still to be found among traditional players in Ireland."
Where do you get "irrelevant" from?
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: O'Neills 1001
"Where do you get "irrelevant" from?"
I didn't mean to use quotation marks - I was interpreting those words you so kindly reproduced.
It doesn't make the book any less a pile of poop.
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
You'll also find scans of the 1850 collection here:
http://source.pipers.ie/Gallery.aspx?id=472
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
I'll say at this point that I brought the Krassen book into the thread just in case it was the book that the OP had heard about. I do not endorse or recommend it as a tune source in any way.
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by DaveL35
Re: O'Neills 1001
It costs more than 8/6, so I don't recommend it.
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
Just going back to the actual book and re-reading the introduction, it's not clear from that which collections have been used. The cover states that the book is " a newly revised & corrected collection of The Dance Music of Ireland", which should mean that it's taken not from the 1850 but from the 1001 Gems. The Introduction includes many references to "O’Neill’s books” and cites the two main collections, appearing in several places to imply that at both were used. (It seems to me that Waifs and Strays is also a source, of which more later.)
The numbers don't appear to add up. The cover page says it contains "over 1000 fiddle tunes". The introduction says that "From O’Neill’s original collection of 1100, approximately 920 have been selected.” In order to get to that number of 1100, you have to omit all the airs, all the O’Carolan tunes and all the marches. But he says he has included the O’Carolan tunes in full.
All of the above means that it's impossible to tell exactly where the tunes are from. What appears to be the case, if you compare (as I have done in the past, sad muppet that I am) what's in this book with the O'Neill's collections is that there is material from The Music of Ireland ("The 1850") The Dance Music of Ireland ("The 1001 Gems") and from Waifs and Strays of Gaelic Melody.
Every now and then over the years, Miles Krassen has posted in discussions like this. When he does, he generally points out that he didn't want to publish anything with "O'Neill's" in the title, because that wasn't what he was about, but he didn't have a choice.
Here's Krassen in his own words, posting to a past discussion of the book over on Chiff and Fipple:
"I certainly don't think my book is "the best" by any means. I do think it was a very well-intentioned addition to what was available in '76. Since then many excellent books have come out and Irish music has undergone a renaissance. I wanted my book, which by the way, lists "Miles Krassen" as author, not O'Neill, and is entitled, "O'Neill's Music of Ireland, Revised," to be a tribute to the great players I knew and the 78rpm recordings they loved. Had the publisher allowed me to write a book just focused on that goal, including maybe 50-60 settings, it might have been better. But the publisher wasn't interested in that. They just wanted to get a copyright for something called "O'Neill's," and that is the only book on Irish music they were willing to publish in '76."
# Posted on January 27th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: O'Neills 1001
"The numbers don't appear to add up."
Well, I don't have the book any more, but from what I remember, the tune titles do add up - they are in the order of the 1850 collection. I remember when the book came out, most people considered they had a revised copy of the 1850.
I don't even like the way Krassen ornaments the tunes. He claims that, on the whole, the transcriptions come from the way players of the day were playing them. I remember looking up "Julia Delaney", for example, - it didn't correspond to the way I'd heard it being played. O'Neill's version was different, but Krassen's wasn't an improvement.
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
I agree with most of that. I don't like the thing at all.
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: O'Neills 1001
The first tune in the Krassen edition is Doctor O'Neill. This is the first non-air in the 1850 collection. After that, the first few tunes in the Krassens book go as follows:
Walls of Liscarroll
Pipe on the Hob
When sick is it tea you want?
The Eaves Dropper (sic)
Saddle the Pony
The first few after Doctor O'Neill in the 1850 go as follows:
The King of the Pipers
Denis Delaney
The Walls of Liscarroll
The Pipe on the Hob
The Little Yellow Boy
It's not just that there are many more gaps than a ratio of 920 out of 1100 tunes would mean - there are different tunes as well.
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: O'Neills 1001
Maybe I just remembered it wrong - whatever. It's not really worth considering.
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
I only consider in the context of another irritation with the book, in that it isn't an O'Neill's collection. It's a mish-mash.
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: O'Neills 1001
While we're at it. I've got a real copy of Ryan's Mammoth Collection (another collection book) Published in 1885. I've noticed that many tunes are not (notated) the same as the later (especially the latest) editions. Has anybody got both the real (not reproduction) O'Neils and compared it with the new release?
# Posted on January 29th 2012 by Fiddleshed
Re: O'Neills 1001
What is "the new release"?
The NPU scans are from the original Lyon & Healy edition.
# Posted on January 29th 2012 by Weejie
Re: O'Neills 1001
That is the 1850 book. The 1001 book appears to be Walton's, but mentions Regan Publishing, Chicago.
# Posted on January 29th 2012 by Weejie