Hello to the discussors. As a regular rural pub session goer I note that whenever a 'singer' begins a tune (uncalled for or not) be it haunting sean nos, turgid old ballad, or a country version of 'Desparado', all kinds of hushing, shushing and 'bitta quiet mow' starts up. Whatever the provenance or quality of the singer and song, they receive the kind of attention and quiet that an instrumentalist can only dream of. Does anyone have an explanation for this? Please don't just tell me its tradition...history is one thing, masochism is another.
I think it's just being polite. Its like if you start a tune and some git takes over playing faster/slower/louder/different, that's not nice and it's not polite and neither is talking loudly through someone singing whatever their standard.
Well, okay, I won't *just* tell you it's the tradition. *grin*
Singers in Ireland have a special place, historically speaking. If you can't afford an instrument, what's left is the voice. You can pass on all sorts of things, disseminate information, take a stand, mock a stand, and communicate more clearly with a song. Tunes connect with the gut, yes, but songs are much clearer in their connection to the brain.
Back in the mists of slightly overheated imagination and vaguely romantic time, the bards were the singers, and they were also often law-sayers as well.
This has carried over. While Irish people enjoy the music (well, some of the time), they don't bring the same qualities of respect in regard to it as they do the songs and the singers.
With the tunes, you're there having fun for yourself, mainly, and any enjoyment shared with your listeners is almost incidental. (I personally don't dream of attention and quiet at a session, far from. YMMV, of course. Just please don't start Mark and Jack up again on performance vs. sessions, I beg of you. *grin*)
But songs are a much more respected form of sharing communication through music in Ireland, usually, and anyone willing to put themselves into that place is given due respect.
It can still be annoying when some git who's been bellowing so loudly over the tunes that you can't hear the people you're playing with starts a song and everyone goes shhhhh! to the musicians
Whu? Performance vs. sessions? Well... I have a few things to say about that.
Heh heh
To answer the shushing question -- It's really very simple; you can't hear a singer if people are talking. Most people want to enjoy the story and melody of a song, but even one person talking can seriously impair your ability to enjoy a song. If punters fail to shush – singers can’t sing -- and they won't try anymore. This is why you find the ITM enthusiasts assisting in quieting down folks who might not be aware that a song is about to be sung.
I suppose one of the things is it takes alot of guts to get up upfront of people and sing, especially when those people probably know the song. At least when you play a tune if anything goes wrong you can blame the instrument...not that I've ever done that *grins sheepishly* but a singer can't do that.
My friend Cath (singer) is mortified if anyone goes shush! when she starts a song. She reckons that if a singer is good enough then people will immediately stop what they are doing and listen - and she is the proof of the pudding - they ALWAYS do. If the majority of people in the bar or whatever stop talking to listen to a singer, I reckon it is fine to give the one at the the bar who is so drunk or self-absorbed that they carry on making a racket a nudge or a quiet shush - but the general shushing that goes on when some mediocre warbler who's spent the last week in front of the mirror practicing the 24 verses of their latest dirge is insulting to the musicians, and has nothing to do with 'communicating a tradition'. Same goes for slow airs and listening peices, which are also 'performances within the context of the session', if you have something musical to say, people on the whole will listen. Again, I'm certainly not against the necessary quietening down of drunks, but definitely against the ritualistic over-reverence towards singers. I can sing, but I don't consider singing to be one of my great strengths(!) so I would only sing in a session if there really was 'something I wanted to say'. I certainly wouldn't expect people to force other people to listen to me!
I think it's the kind of thing that's reminiscent of the folk clubs which had an emphasis on singing and songs...I can remember the "shutting up for the singing" happening often when the turn-up floor singers started, and at the time I just cringed and let them get on with it...having said that, Ottery (sorry couldn't resist!!!) made a good point when he said that if the singer is good, then he/she will get people's attention anyway. Same thing with a person playing a musical instrument, really.
One (dire) solution is to have the singer miked up. But then the singer needs to be good as all the artefacts are magnified, disproportionately so, in my view. Such is the case at a local melee of which I am erstwhile subscriber.
Sean Nos? I've only heard a few sean nos singers and their volume has been tremendous. The voice of them just seems to fill the whole pub, not in an opera-singer style piercing way, the voice just fills the pub. You have to witness it to know what I'm wittering on about *this time*. Quite remarkable. People automatically just shut up. You don't come across too many in SE London though.
Good god, there's a singer who works the bar at Celtic Crossroads in Chicago, name of John, damn good bartender and a fine singer, and way hey, let me tell you, the guy can sing loud...
I used to, a loooooong time ago, take my guitar to the Unicorn in Toronto on Thursday nights and accompany the tunes to the best of my ability, and when there was a break or a lull, I would start singing, while accompanying myself with the guitar. I was told to shush many times. It took me awhile to "get it". I didn't understand about the singings. I didn't understand about the warm energy that was created as the more fluent musicians to noodle into the singer's key and provide an evolving accompaniment. I didn't realize both singing and playing guitar at the same time was kind of "sewing-it-all-up" and leaving no room for anything. So I then began to learn the tunes on the mandolin, and pretty much quit singing in sessions. My ego was actualkly quite bruised....
but you know, i am a bit thick in general because one day, also a loooooong time ago, when a new neighbour who was being friendly asked me out to something called "karaoke" because she knew I liked music, I thickly brought along my guitar! (I blush to think of some of the dumb things I have done in the past, and still do in the present, and probably always will do...)
anyway, to make a long story longer.. I have risen to sing again, (haha -a little-) at sessions and I support my song starts with single string melody playing on the banjo.. not loud but as close as possible to trace my vocalnuances pauses etc. I don't play extra notes, or little banjocurls, or fills at the ends of lines, I just try to shadow my voice As a technique it is an exercise in sparseness which gives me the support I need while it gives lots of space for other players to add their take on the song. People seem to like it, which is a great relief! I got this idea from fiddlers who sing and play at the same time...Eliza Carthy, Bruce Molsky, oh, there's many many..
Most recently coyotebanjo linked me up with a link to the late Joe Burke (the banjo player from new york) saying Joe used this technique too.. I have ordered his cd and really look forward to hearing it...
Re: miking the singer...in a way this is what the banjo singlenoteplaying is doing for my voice.. it's sort of helping it project, echoing it. You can't really tell what part of the tone is vocal and what part is instrumental because my playing is naturally in sync with my with my vocal phrasing.
Er, slow ballads don't wurk two gudd... I gotta sing at at least 60wpm....
Milord, I'm not sure about miking the singer with an amp an' stuff, (but then I protested electric pianos a while back too) I feel the only instrument that improves with miking,is the harmonica. Most modern harp players are quite in tune with their electronic aids.........Whew , just to get WAY off topic, could I perhaps just mention the murphy bros. harmonica playings? I don't think they used microphones? surely not..
no no.. sessions and electronics.. no no .. if you gotta mike it, your gathering is too large: time to splinter off,time to regroup into smaller units....
My experience has been that someone, (usually a host,) at a session will invite someone to sing a song or play a slow air. Other musicians will echo the request and call for quiet. If the punters are familiar with ITM they usually sush with little effort. Only people that could care less or have had little experience in a pub setting where ITM is happening need any further insistance.
Here's a bit of a theoretical slant on the singer business. There seems to be some evidence that voice communicates with one side of the brain and tunes go into the other side which is more developed in musicians. The average punter is always going to be more engaged by the song as the weaker side doesn't have to do all the work of listening. I won't go into this in any more depth for fear I put ye all to sleep.
BUT, here's another little snippet: in a concert situation it is much easier to entertain a wider audience with song than tunes and certainly a whole concert of tunes is a bit of a handful for many punters. What softens the blow is to have a bit of good funny banter to entertain the other side (of the brain) in between tunes - Kevin Crawford does this well for Lunasa. Tell them a creative story (could be a lie) about the tune so that they can hold that thought while listening. Of course this is all a bit impossible and irrelevant in the Session situation.
odono,, it relevant in a session, just as in life. A session is trying to bring Music closer to Life (trying to get music AWAY from hollywood or Bollywood or Magnifiqiue STAR STATUS Fame, or Oscars, Emmys, Grammys or Cannes Festivals. Sessions, I think, are trying to(besides trying to get like-minded people together)intergrate Life and Music, trying to dissolve the Pro-Amateur scene into the miasma from whence it emerged one sticky day in the past, trying to put music, and people -regular folks who day-job regular jobs - together.
your idea about right and left brain, ie being attuned as a player/singer to the listener's state of mind is of course about performing.. which returns us to the idea that players/singers are indeed performers from the non-players non-singers perspective.. bUt here's the catch.. ANYONE can sing>> You dont need an instrument, you don't need technique, you only need passion, buckets of it, and, of course, a serious workout with the lyrics of some songs or other. I mean god help you if you just, um, try it for the sake of it, you will crumple under the heat, forget your tune, lose your lyrics, get self conscious, feel stupid, wish you were never born, if you start something but then find don't have enough passion to ride through the rough spots and take you to the end....
umm, meaning,, if passion runs short you can always use technique as a back up..
pant pant.. never wrote so much ..,,whew
ah.. it's the variety.. and singers are a varied bunch,, you get the well-crafted ones, and all manner of peolple..humourous, broad, deep, historical, sad, wise, it's the variety that keeps the ear tuned, and the listener engaged. And what better way to produce variety than to make sure the field is open to al? Everyone should feel in their own moment to be able to bite time and take the plunge and add their two cents and add to the WHOLE that way (peace&love, bros).. WE ARE ALL CHarActers..we each have something interesting and entertaining parts to add to the picture.. and you know what?
All those "pros, the "alphas" that drop-in to or lead all those session long for and desire a NEW moment of inspiration, some class act to emerge out of the ho hum humdrum, to inspire them, make them see music differently somehow..
hey Jack, hold the cameras, I ain't finished yet,, Wait! wait,, your lights are distracting me,, cue stage left/ what ? what/ where/ uh what's that hook? is that Bo-Peeps shepherd stick? haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllppp!!!!
The scene was a pub in Glasgow some years ago. This guy stands up and addresses the bar - "Bestuforder, please, ladiesangemmun. There's a wumman here gaunae try an' gie's a song......"
OK you've got me. As a mere singer I have been lurking for months but I just had to register and join in with the discussion.
I have only been singing in mixed sessions for about 6 months or so. Previously I stuck to small folk clubs where I had the quiet, small audiences that I needed - being desperately nervous. I find that it does me good singing against a certain amount of pub chatter as it helps me to learn to ignore it. Sometimes the musicians even get worked up on my behalf about the noise. And sometimes, magically the pub goes quiet and they all stop and listen.
It would be tempting to say that a really good singer will cause everyone to shut-up and listen anyway, without any of the censorious hushing, but there is so little respect for music in some places that some folk won't even shut up gabbin' when the rest of the bar has gone deathly quiet. But I've seen singers command such attention a few times and it's anamazing experience. One of my (non-musical) pals wandered into a bar once and ordered a pint and crisps just as such a singer was starting up, and said later "I wuz feart to open ma crisps!"
That's the point I'm trying to make. If you start a song or play a slow tune, and after a few bars, you realise the whole place has gone deathly quiet, it's absolutely magical - and I think, inspires you to put your whole heart into what you are trying to put across.
Singers do deserve respect but I've noticed that in more formal/circle type sessions(which I normally try to avoid)they don't give the same "order" to musicians when it's their turn for a tune. Now, I normally wouldn't worry about people talking as I played but, in this type of situation, the same rules should apply to all.
I've also noticed that where there a few musicians who happen to play a set of tunes together, the singers count this as "one turn" ie we've all had our tune and it's the singer's turn again. So, you could end up with having 5 songs for every set of tunes. Now I and other musicians often get crafty and position ourselves at opposite corners of these circles just so that we each "get a turn". The downside of this, though, is that we're more likely to choose more obscure material and the true "session feel" is lost.
Yes, the answer is to avoid these kind of sessions.
John J has mentioned what I think the real question was meant to be - why don't the same rules apply to all? It's tradition, yes, but where did that tradition come from?
A searingly beautiful solo from an instrumentalist who has practiced 10 or 20 hours a week for 10 or 20 years *might* get everyones attention. It's even happened to me (not that I am in that class). But a dismal rendition of Tie a Yellow Ribbon with half the verses forgotten, sung in a key that slides a tone or two either side of where it started will evoke the censorious cries of "Shush-its-a-song" and the dirty looks. The fact that it annoys me is not very interesting - it's clear that it *is* a tradition. But why?
At the opposite extreme, I have "invaded" singers-only sessions before now with a box, sung 2 verses of a song unaccompanied, launched into some tunes, then sang the last verse and lived to tell the tale.
Does anyone else find that
1) Non-instrumentalist singers can be the people who talk loudest during tunes
2) The best singers in the room are often amongst the people who don't sing at the session
Same here Geoff - joined a circle of death, which I was under the impression was a "Normal" session, played two setson the box, one after the other (which is illegal, apparently), got shouted and swore at by an irate old geezer. Then a few days later my name came up on a thread at the mudcat cafe and they were still assasinating my character. The thread then got so acrimonious and sweary that it got deleted - and that's virtually unheard of over there.
But you're right about the non instrumentalist "singers" talking the loudest - this is also in inverse proportion to their talent.
I must admit I quite relished the experience. On the virtual virtuoso thread I notice John J just posted a quote from desiderata about not comparing yourself to others - but I have to say, from the people *I* know who are mudcatters, or at least the gang who were slagging me off on that mudcat thread, their comments were water off a duck's back, as their level of musical talent was total crap.
(Sorry for comparing!)
Danny ... you do the vilifiers a service in your last post that they do not warrant. Apart from Sheila of Ken&Sheila Inc., who did weigh in with a few comments, having taken umbrage at some of your more, ahem, "colourful" acronyms, the rest of the sniping crew reminded me of a very black kettle - yea, blacker even than the black gateway to Hell's black innermost pit - calling a shiny kettle - just out of the box - black. To suggest that they have even the tiniest modicum of musical talent is to treat them to a long, cool draught of the milk of human kindness. Those people do not - even - possess zero musical talent. Instead they possess negative musical talent in that their talent is to reduce an otherwise potentially quite musical experience to a series of stop-start, bumbling, "inappropriate" quasi-musical "episodes" (let's not grace with the titles song or tune). Odious, nasty, lazy people with no regard or respect for - or indeed, I suspect, concept at all of - the sheer hours that people have put in to "learning the grip".
Not convinced by the ' a good singer will command order' argument and certainly my experience doesn't offer any support for that.
The words of a song need to be heard in order to appreciate it so shush it has to be. On the other hand a load of musicians can 'usually' make themselves heard over the din.
Taking up Jack's point as well - a singer IS performing and needs the attention.
For Gawd's sake the singers usually only take up about 1% of the session and it's not too much to ask for a wee bit of quiet for 5 minutes.
There is also the question of the 'bad' singer who has a really cracking song. I know a couple of oul boys who have voices like broken coke bottles getting ground up under a door BUT who have some mighty [and very funny] songs that deserve to be listened to and frankly their 'voices' would never command order without the assistance of a volunteer fear an tí to hush the crowd.
Well I guess I WAS feeling a bit jaundiced towards singers and 'shushers' when I made the comments about them standing on their own two feet. The thread reminded me of a recent session when I had this fellow bellowing over the tunes all night, until he decided to sing a song, whereapon much shushing ensued and musicians were getting dirty looks for the sound they made by putting their fiddles down on the table! What made it even more galling is that he's a brilliant singer(!)
And while I'm standing with my hands up, I'll admit that citing Cath as an example is a little unfair on other singers, as she has a much better ability to project her voice than most other singers I've heard. (And a better voice to project(!)
shutting up for the singing
shutting up for the singing
Hello to the discussors. As a regular rural pub session goer I note that whenever a 'singer' begins a tune (uncalled for or not) be it haunting sean nos, turgid old ballad, or a country version of 'Desparado', all kinds of hushing, shushing and 'bitta quiet mow' starts up. Whatever the provenance or quality of the singer and song, they receive the kind of attention and quiet that an instrumentalist can only dream of. Does anyone have an explanation for this? Please don't just tell me its tradition...history is one thing, masochism is another.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by sensibleB
Re: shutting up for the singing
Yeah, I wish I'd get that kind of treatment for my bodhràn solo.
Joe
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Joe Quinn
Re: shutting up for the singing
I think it's just being polite. Its like if you start a tune and some git takes over playing faster/slower/louder/different, that's not nice and it's not polite and neither is talking loudly through someone singing whatever their standard.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by goldfrog
Re: shutting up for the singing
Well, okay, I won't *just* tell you it's the tradition. *grin*
Singers in Ireland have a special place, historically speaking. If you can't afford an instrument, what's left is the voice. You can pass on all sorts of things, disseminate information, take a stand, mock a stand, and communicate more clearly with a song. Tunes connect with the gut, yes, but songs are much clearer in their connection to the brain.
Back in the mists of slightly overheated imagination and vaguely romantic time, the bards were the singers, and they were also often law-sayers as well.
This has carried over. While Irish people enjoy the music (well, some of the time), they don't bring the same qualities of respect in regard to it as they do the songs and the singers.
With the tunes, you're there having fun for yourself, mainly, and any enjoyment shared with your listeners is almost incidental. (I personally don't dream of attention and quiet at a session, far from. YMMV, of course. Just please don't start Mark and Jack up again on performance vs. sessions, I beg of you. *grin*)
But songs are a much more respected form of sharing communication through music in Ireland, usually, and anyone willing to put themselves into that place is given due respect.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: shutting up for the singing
It can still be annoying when some git who's been bellowing so loudly over the tunes that you can't hear the people you're playing with starts a song and everyone goes shhhhh! to the musicians
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
Whu? Performance vs. sessions? Well... I have a few things to say about that.
Heh heh
To answer the shushing question -- It's really very simple; you can't hear a singer if people are talking. Most people want to enjoy the story and melody of a song, but even one person talking can seriously impair your ability to enjoy a song. If punters fail to shush – singers can’t sing -- and they won't try anymore. This is why you find the ITM enthusiasts assisting in quieting down folks who might not be aware that a song is about to be sung.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Phantom Button
Re: shutting up for the singing
I suppose one of the things is it takes alot of guts to get up upfront of people and sing, especially when those people probably know the song. At least when you play a tune if anything goes wrong you can blame the instrument...not that I've ever done that *grins sheepishly* but a singer can't do that.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Folkie Junkie
Re: shutting up for the singing
Oh yeah... "dang, this thing just won't hold a tune today..." *grin* You mean, like that? LOL
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: shutting up for the singing
hmm...that sounds familiar...
Lol
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Folkie Junkie
Re: shutting up for the singing
My friend Cath (singer) is mortified if anyone goes shush! when she starts a song. She reckons that if a singer is good enough then people will immediately stop what they are doing and listen - and she is the proof of the pudding - they ALWAYS do. If the majority of people in the bar or whatever stop talking to listen to a singer, I reckon it is fine to give the one at the the bar who is so drunk or self-absorbed that they carry on making a racket a nudge or a quiet shush - but the general shushing that goes on when some mediocre warbler who's spent the last week in front of the mirror practicing the 24 verses of their latest dirge is insulting to the musicians, and has nothing to do with 'communicating a tradition'. Same goes for slow airs and listening peices, which are also 'performances within the context of the session', if you have something musical to say, people on the whole will listen. Again, I'm certainly not against the necessary quietening down of drunks, but definitely against the ritualistic over-reverence towards singers. I can sing, but I don't consider singing to be one of my great strengths(!) so I would only sing in a session if there really was 'something I wanted to say'. I certainly wouldn't expect people to force other people to listen to me!
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
Normally I don't sing but when I do I don't sing normally.
Joe
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Joe Quinn
Re: shutting up for the singing
I think it's the kind of thing that's reminiscent of the folk clubs which had an emphasis on singing and songs...I can remember the "shutting up for the singing" happening often when the turn-up floor singers started, and at the time I just cringed and let them get on with it...having said that, Ottery (sorry couldn't resist!!!) made a good point when he said that if the singer is good, then he/she will get people's attention anyway. Same thing with a person playing a musical instrument, really.
Jim
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Worldfiddler
Re: shutting up for the singing
...the "sorry couldn't resist" shouldn't have been there!!
Jim
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Worldfiddler
Re: shutting up for the singing
It's ok Jim, I can put up with people who can't resist me - you don't have to go into denial..
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
One (dire) solution is to have the singer miked up. But then the singer needs to be good as all the artefacts are magnified, disproportionately so, in my view. Such is the case at a local melee of which I am erstwhile subscriber.
Sean Nos? I've only heard a few sean nos singers and their volume has been tremendous. The voice of them just seems to fill the whole pub, not in an opera-singer style piercing way, the voice just fills the pub. You have to witness it to know what I'm wittering on about *this time*. Quite remarkable. People automatically just shut up. You don't come across too many in SE London though.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: shutting up for the singing
Good god, there's a singer who works the bar at Celtic Crossroads in Chicago, name of John, damn good bartender and a fine singer, and way hey, let me tell you, the guy can sing loud...
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: shutting up for the singing
I used to, a loooooong time ago, take my guitar to the Unicorn in Toronto on Thursday nights and accompany the tunes to the best of my ability, and when there was a break or a lull, I would start singing, while accompanying myself with the guitar. I was told to shush many times. It took me awhile to "get it". I didn't understand about the singings. I didn't understand about the warm energy that was created as the more fluent musicians to noodle into the singer's key and provide an evolving accompaniment. I didn't realize both singing and playing guitar at the same time was kind of "sewing-it-all-up" and leaving no room for anything. So I then began to learn the tunes on the mandolin, and pretty much quit singing in sessions. My ego was actualkly quite bruised....
but you know, i am a bit thick in general because one day, also a loooooong time ago, when a new neighbour who was being friendly asked me out to something called "karaoke" because she knew I liked music, I thickly brought along my guitar! (I blush to think of some of the dumb things I have done in the past, and still do in the present, and probably always will do...)
anyway, to make a long story longer.. I have risen to sing again, (haha -a little-) at sessions and I support my song starts with single string melody playing on the banjo.. not loud but as close as possible to trace my vocalnuances pauses etc. I don't play extra notes, or little banjocurls, or fills at the ends of lines, I just try to shadow my voice As a technique it is an exercise in sparseness which gives me the support I need while it gives lots of space for other players to add their take on the song. People seem to like it, which is a great relief! I got this idea from fiddlers who sing and play at the same time...Eliza Carthy, Bruce Molsky, oh, there's many many..
Most recently coyotebanjo linked me up with a link to the late Joe Burke (the banjo player from new york) saying Joe used this technique too.. I have ordered his cd and really look forward to hearing it...
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by vboyd100
Re: shutting up for the singing
Re: miking the singer...in a way this is what the banjo singlenoteplaying is doing for my voice.. it's sort of helping it project, echoing it. You can't really tell what part of the tone is vocal and what part is instrumental because my playing is naturally in sync with my with my vocal phrasing.
Er, slow ballads don't wurk two gudd... I gotta sing at at least 60wpm....
Milord, I'm not sure about miking the singer with an amp an' stuff, (but then I protested electric pianos a while back too) I feel the only instrument that improves with miking,is the harmonica. Most modern harp players are quite in tune with their electronic aids.........Whew , just to get WAY off topic, could I perhaps just mention the murphy bros. harmonica playings? I don't think they used microphones? surely not..
no no.. sessions and electronics.. no no .. if you gotta mike it, your gathering is too large: time to splinter off,time to regroup into smaller units....
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by vboyd100
Re: shutting up for the singing
My experience has been that someone, (usually a host,) at a session will invite someone to sing a song or play a slow air. Other musicians will echo the request and call for quiet. If the punters are familiar with ITM they usually sush with little effort. Only people that could care less or have had little experience in a pub setting where ITM is happening need any further insistance.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Phantom Button
Re: shutting up for the singing
Here's a bit of a theoretical slant on the singer business. There seems to be some evidence that voice communicates with one side of the brain and tunes go into the other side which is more developed in musicians. The average punter is always going to be more engaged by the song as the weaker side doesn't have to do all the work of listening. I won't go into this in any more depth for fear I put ye all to sleep.
BUT, here's another little snippet: in a concert situation it is much easier to entertain a wider audience with song than tunes and certainly a whole concert of tunes is a bit of a handful for many punters. What softens the blow is to have a bit of good funny banter to entertain the other side (of the brain) in between tunes - Kevin Crawford does this well for Lunasa. Tell them a creative story (could be a lie) about the tune so that they can hold that thought while listening. Of course this is all a bit impossible and irrelevant in the Session situation.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Donough
Re: shutting up for the singing
odono,, it relevant in a session, just as in life. A session is trying to bring Music closer to Life (trying to get music AWAY from hollywood or Bollywood or Magnifiqiue STAR STATUS Fame, or Oscars, Emmys, Grammys or Cannes Festivals. Sessions, I think, are trying to(besides trying to get like-minded people together)intergrate Life and Music, trying to dissolve the Pro-Amateur scene into the miasma from whence it emerged one sticky day in the past, trying to put music, and people -regular folks who day-job regular jobs - together.
your idea about right and left brain, ie being attuned as a player/singer to the listener's state of mind is of course about performing.. which returns us to the idea that players/singers are indeed performers from the non-players non-singers perspective.. bUt here's the catch.. ANYONE can sing>> You dont need an instrument, you don't need technique, you only need passion, buckets of it, and, of course, a serious workout with the lyrics of some songs or other. I mean god help you if you just, um, try it for the sake of it, you will crumple under the heat, forget your tune, lose your lyrics, get self conscious, feel stupid, wish you were never born, if you start something but then find don't have enough passion to ride through the rough spots and take you to the end....
umm, meaning,, if passion runs short you can always use technique as a back up..
pant pant.. never wrote so much ..,,whew
ah.. it's the variety.. and singers are a varied bunch,, you get the well-crafted ones, and all manner of peolple..humourous, broad, deep, historical, sad, wise, it's the variety that keeps the ear tuned, and the listener engaged. And what better way to produce variety than to make sure the field is open to al? Everyone should feel in their own moment to be able to bite time and take the plunge and add their two cents and add to the WHOLE that way (peace&love, bros).. WE ARE ALL CHarActers..we each have something interesting and entertaining parts to add to the picture.. and you know what?
All those "pros, the "alphas" that drop-in to or lead all those session long for and desire a NEW moment of inspiration, some class act to emerge out of the ho hum humdrum, to inspire them, make them see music differently somehow..
hey Jack, hold the cameras, I ain't finished yet,, Wait! wait,, your lights are distracting me,, cue stage left/ what ? what/ where/ uh what's that hook? is that Bo-Peeps shepherd stick? haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllppp!!!!
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by vboyd100
Re: shutting up for the singing
(i get teased when i get too poetic and dramatic)
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by vboyd100
Re: shutting up for the singing
The scene was a pub in Glasgow some years ago. This guy stands up and addresses the bar - "Bestuforder, please, ladiesangemmun. There's a wumman here gaunae try an' gie's a song......"
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Kenny
Re: shutting up for the singing
OK you've got me. As a mere singer I have been lurking for months but I just had to register and join in with the discussion.
I have only been singing in mixed sessions for about 6 months or so. Previously I stuck to small folk clubs where I had the quiet, small audiences that I needed - being desperately nervous. I find that it does me good singing against a certain amount of pub chatter as it helps me to learn to ignore it. Sometimes the musicians even get worked up on my behalf about the noise. And sometimes, magically the pub goes quiet and they all stop and listen.
Julie
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by jfother
Re: shutting up for the singing
It would be tempting to say that a really good singer will cause everyone to shut-up and listen anyway, without any of the censorious hushing, but there is so little respect for music in some places that some folk won't even shut up gabbin' when the rest of the bar has gone deathly quiet. But I've seen singers command such attention a few times and it's anamazing experience. One of my (non-musical) pals wandered into a bar once and ordered a pint and crisps just as such a singer was starting up, and said later "I wuz feart to open ma crisps!"
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Bren
Re: shutting up for the singing
That's the point I'm trying to make. If you start a song or play a slow tune, and after a few bars, you realise the whole place has gone deathly quiet, it's absolutely magical - and I think, inspires you to put your whole heart into what you are trying to put across.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
Yes. Sometimes you have to earn respect. It's a tough old world, but it's magic when you get through to folk.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Bren
Re: shutting up for the singing
Singers do deserve respect but I've noticed that in more formal/circle type sessions(which I normally try to avoid)they don't give the same "order" to musicians when it's their turn for a tune. Now, I normally wouldn't worry about people talking as I played but, in this type of situation, the same rules should apply to all.
I've also noticed that where there a few musicians who happen to play a set of tunes together, the singers count this as "one turn" ie we've all had our tune and it's the singer's turn again. So, you could end up with having 5 songs for every set of tunes. Now I and other musicians often get crafty and position ourselves at opposite corners of these circles just so that we each "get a turn". The downside of this, though, is that we're more likely to choose more obscure material and the true "session feel" is lost.
Yes, the answer is to avoid these kind of sessions.
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Johnny Jay
Re: shutting up for the singing
John J has mentioned what I think the real question was meant to be - why don't the same rules apply to all? It's tradition, yes, but where did that tradition come from?
A searingly beautiful solo from an instrumentalist who has practiced 10 or 20 hours a week for 10 or 20 years *might* get everyones attention. It's even happened to me (not that I am in that class). But a dismal rendition of Tie a Yellow Ribbon with half the verses forgotten, sung in a key that slides a tone or two either side of where it started will evoke the censorious cries of "Shush-its-a-song" and the dirty looks. The fact that it annoys me is not very interesting - it's clear that it *is* a tradition. But why?
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Alex Wilding
Re: shutting up for the singing
At the opposite extreme, I have "invaded" singers-only sessions before now with a box, sung 2 verses of a song unaccompanied, launched into some tunes, then sang the last verse and lived to tell the tale.
Does anyone else find that
1) Non-instrumentalist singers can be the people who talk loudest during tunes
2) The best singers in the room are often amongst the people who don't sing at the session
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by geoffwright
Re: shutting up for the singing
Well put, Geoff!
# Posted on June 28th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
Same here Geoff - joined a circle of death, which I was under the impression was a "Normal" session, played two setson the box, one after the other (which is illegal, apparently), got shouted and swore at by an irate old geezer. Then a few days later my name came up on a thread at the mudcat cafe and they were still assasinating my character. The thread then got so acrimonious and sweary that it got deleted - and that's virtually unheard of over there.
But you're right about the non instrumentalist "singers" talking the loudest - this is also in inverse proportion to their talent.
# Posted on June 29th 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: shutting up for the singing
I must admit I quite relished the experience. On the virtual virtuoso thread I notice John J just posted a quote from desiderata about not comparing yourself to others - but I have to say, from the people *I* know who are mudcatters, or at least the gang who were slagging me off on that mudcat thread, their comments were water off a duck's back, as their level of musical talent was total crap.
(Sorry for comparing!)
# Posted on June 29th 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: shutting up for the singing
Danny ... you do the vilifiers a service in your last post that they do not warrant. Apart from Sheila of Ken&Sheila Inc., who did weigh in with a few comments, having taken umbrage at some of your more, ahem, "colourful" acronyms, the rest of the sniping crew reminded me of a very black kettle - yea, blacker even than the black gateway to Hell's black innermost pit - calling a shiny kettle - just out of the box - black. To suggest that they have even the tiniest modicum of musical talent is to treat them to a long, cool draught of the milk of human kindness. Those people do not - even - possess zero musical talent. Instead they possess negative musical talent in that their talent is to reduce an otherwise potentially quite musical experience to a series of stop-start, bumbling, "inappropriate" quasi-musical "episodes" (let's not grace with the titles song or tune). Odious, nasty, lazy people with no regard or respect for - or indeed, I suspect, concept at all of - the sheer hours that people have put in to "learning the grip".
# Posted on June 29th 2004 by Aidan Crossey
Re: shutting up for the singing
Not convinced by the ' a good singer will command order' argument and certainly my experience doesn't offer any support for that.
The words of a song need to be heard in order to appreciate it so shush it has to be. On the other hand a load of musicians can 'usually' make themselves heard over the din.
Taking up Jack's point as well - a singer IS performing and needs the attention.
For Gawd's sake the singers usually only take up about 1% of the session and it's not too much to ask for a wee bit of quiet for 5 minutes.
There is also the question of the 'bad' singer who has a really cracking song. I know a couple of oul boys who have voices like broken coke bottles getting ground up under a door BUT who have some mighty [and very funny] songs that deserve to be listened to and frankly their 'voices' would never command order without the assistance of a volunteer fear an tí to hush the crowd.
# Posted on June 30th 2004 by breandan
Re: shutting up for the singing
Is no singing welcome at a session ?
# Posted on June 30th 2004 by BegF
Re: shutting up for the singing
Well I guess I WAS feeling a bit jaundiced towards singers and 'shushers' when I made the comments about them standing on their own two feet. The thread reminded me of a recent session when I had this fellow bellowing over the tunes all night, until he decided to sing a song, whereapon much shushing ensued and musicians were getting dirty looks for the sound they made by putting their fiddles down on the table! What made it even more galling is that he's a brilliant singer(!)
And while I'm standing with my hands up, I'll admit that citing Cath as an example is a little unfair on other singers, as she has a much better ability to project her voice than most other singers I've heard. (And a better voice to project(!)
# Posted on June 30th 2004 by Ottery
Re: shutting up for the singing
LOL Mark!
# Posted on June 30th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: shutting up for the singing
Are no singers welcome?
Depends on context. If all you get are hacks and windbags, then best keep the session focused on the tunes and to hell with the singers.
# Posted on June 30th 2004 by Hanley