Have you ever been to a session where there are many players?? Both melody and backup? I was at a session recently and there were many people playing, at least 5 fiddles, 4 winds, 3 bodhrans, 3 guitars... needless to say it was a full house. The sound was good, powerful even, and the session drew in many people.
I was just wondering if others have had a similar experience, it was the first for me!
Yes, here in Montana we call that a brawl, or a stampede if it moves from pub to pub. In the Bay Area they apparently call it a dogpile. Inside the Beltway it's known as a quorum.
I once counted 28 players at one session, 18 of which were fiddlers. It was noisy. This was the infamous session in which one end of the table started up a tune, whereupon the other end joined in, only to realize 12 bars later that the tune wasn't the tune they thought it was, and no one could tell.
Here in Tasmania it's not uncommon to have upwards of 20 players especially in the dead of winter or the height of summer. The only trouble comes when there are more backers than melody instruments. On one occaison (I wasn't there) the infamous "Bodhran choir" session happened. About 8 drummers turned up!!! Mostly though we have moderate sized evenly instrumented sessions....so come on down to Murphy's in Salamanca on a Sunday.
here in New Brunswick every thursday night there's like a hundred fiddle players along with a whole wack of accompany instruments ... it's crazy! it's an organized thing, very social, but a lot of fun ...
At the Irish Fleadh Ceol it is quite possible to be in a session with up to 100 folks playing. The biggest session outside of Ireland I attended was in the Dubliner Folk Bar in Oslo, Norway about 2 years ago. There were 30+ at it.
Been there, done it, but it's not my idea of fun. Upwards of 15, things can get sloppy. When you get that amount of players you'll get the odd cabbage hiding in amongst it who can't really play, but who likes to pose. Hence the potential sloppiness. Personally, I like 4-6 strong players. Sometimes 2-3, if they all know what they're doing.
I go to two different sessions...one has between 3 and 6 people...which is just lovely because we get a very tight sound and it's easy to communicate (both verbally and musically) with the others. The other one I go to can be as large as 20 and it's just a blast...lots of people, lots of variety, gets quite loud and rowdy and I have so much fun...our last one was really tight, even though we had so many people crammed into the place. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, so I'm glad I get the variety.
Fair points, but in my experience, very large sessions tend to be UNdemocratic, which might appear counterintuitive at first glance. I think they tend to be led by one or two loud instrumentalists eg, a box, a banjo or a fiddle, or maybe a couple of players who play together and have a set repertoire. Maybe that's just me being selfish, wanting my own tunes in, but I'm just being honest about what I do or don't enjoy.
Hey Will, interesting you still call it a brawl in Montana. Did you realise it's from the old word for a lively dance (a bransle - pronounced 'brawl')?
Funny how some of the old traditions from the UK have survived in America long after they've died out at home.
How do you manage to get the words bodhran and choir to sit next to one another in a sentence? When I try it, nature itself intervenes and prevents it from happening.
Hmm, fun, James, but not as we know it. Counted 36 musicians at one of the Catskills' sessions. One fluter was playing on her own a good 25 feet away from the core of celebrity musicians. Couldn't decide whether that was an example of dedication or desperation. No matter how big or small the session, it only takes one person to ruin it. Danny, I'm sure you recall yer man wi' the flute at the Jackie Daly session in Furlong's.
There's only so much I recall from that trip - those Furlong's Irish Orchestra sessions were the biggest I've ever witnessed, but they were tight (apart from the guy whom you mentioned - yes, I do recall some person not quite in concordance with everyone else, to put it mildly) - but the tightness was due to the fact that there were one hell of a lot of very good players in attendance and the core group, (Daly, Crannitch et al) kept a very good grip on the proceedings - and everyone was in awe of them so were automatically obedient. Quite strange, but enjoyable and spectacular nonetheless.
Big sessions can really gel well. Sorry to hear some of you guys don't like playing with lesser folk at these events. I was at one big session this summer - 25+ players most of whom were pretty good, all of whom were very encouraging of the rest. Best evening, night and early mornig of the year I thought.
Large Groups of Players?
Large Groups of Players?
Have you ever been to a session where there are many players?? Both melody and backup? I was at a session recently and there were many people playing, at least 5 fiddles, 4 winds, 3 bodhrans, 3 guitars... needless to say it was a full house. The sound was good, powerful even, and the session drew in many people.
I was just wondering if others have had a similar experience, it was the first for me!
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by picking up that fiddle
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Yes, here in Montana we call that a brawl, or a stampede if it moves from pub to pub. In the Bay Area they apparently call it a dogpile. Inside the Beltway it's known as a quorum.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: Large Groups of Players?
5 fiddles, 4 winds, 3 bodhrans, 3 guitars?
Pah, that's TINY!
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Ottery
Re: Large Groups of Players?
I once counted 28 players at one session, 18 of which were fiddlers. It was noisy. This was the infamous session in which one end of the table started up a tune, whereupon the other end joined in, only to realize 12 bars later that the tune wasn't the tune they thought it was, and no one could tell.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Here in Tasmania it's not uncommon to have upwards of 20 players especially in the dead of winter or the height of summer. The only trouble comes when there are more backers than melody instruments. On one occaison (I wasn't there) the infamous "Bodhran choir" session happened. About 8 drummers turned up!!! Mostly though we have moderate sized evenly instrumented sessions....so come on down to Murphy's in Salamanca on a Sunday.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Tassiebodhran
Re: Large Groups of Players?
here in New Brunswick every thursday night there's like a hundred fiddle players along with a whole wack of accompany instruments ... it's crazy! it's an organized thing, very social, but a lot of fun ...
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by stickson007
Re: Large Groups of Players?
At the Irish Fleadh Ceol it is quite possible to be in a session with up to 100 folks playing. The biggest session outside of Ireland I attended was in the Dubliner Folk Bar in Oslo, Norway about 2 years ago. There were 30+ at it.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by compaqjohn
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Been there, done it, but it's not my idea of fun. Upwards of 15, things can get sloppy. When you get that amount of players you'll get the odd cabbage hiding in amongst it who can't really play, but who likes to pose. Hence the potential sloppiness. Personally, I like 4-6 strong players. Sometimes 2-3, if they all know what they're doing.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: Large Groups of Players?
I go to two different sessions...one has between 3 and 6 people...which is just lovely because we get a very tight sound and it's easy to communicate (both verbally and musically) with the others. The other one I go to can be as large as 20 and it's just a blast...lots of people, lots of variety, gets quite loud and rowdy and I have so much fun...our last one was really tight, even though we had so many people crammed into the place. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, so I'm glad I get the variety.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Crysania
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Fair points, but in my experience, very large sessions tend to be UNdemocratic, which might appear counterintuitive at first glance. I think they tend to be led by one or two loud instrumentalists eg, a box, a banjo or a fiddle, or maybe a couple of players who play together and have a set repertoire. Maybe that's just me being selfish, wanting my own tunes in, but I'm just being honest about what I do or don't enjoy.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Hey Will, interesting you still call it a brawl in Montana. Did you realise it's from the old word for a lively dance (a bransle - pronounced 'brawl')?
Funny how some of the old traditions from the UK have survived in America long after they've died out at home.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by bc_box_player
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Like trying to conquer the world.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by showaddydadito
Re: Large Groups of Players?
...and failing.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: Large Groups of Players?
There is a didgeridoo jamming session allegedly takes place around Nottingham. Nearly as bad as a bodhran choir?
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by geoffwright
Re: Large Groups of Players?
How do you manage to get the words bodhran and choir to sit next to one another in a sentence? When I try it, nature itself intervenes and prevents it from happening.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by showaddydadito
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Hmm, fun, James, but not as we know it. Counted 36 musicians at one of the Catskills' sessions. One fluter was playing on her own a good 25 feet away from the core of celebrity musicians. Couldn't decide whether that was an example of dedication or desperation. No matter how big or small the session, it only takes one person to ruin it. Danny, I'm sure you recall yer man wi' the flute at the Jackie Daly session in Furlong's.
# Posted on November 23rd 2004 by LongNote
Re: Large Groups of Players?
There's only so much I recall from that trip - those Furlong's Irish Orchestra sessions were the biggest I've ever witnessed, but they were tight (apart from the guy whom you mentioned - yes, I do recall some person not quite in concordance with everyone else, to put it mildly) - but the tightness was due to the fact that there were one hell of a lot of very good players in attendance and the core group, (Daly, Crannitch et al) kept a very good grip on the proceedings - and everyone was in awe of them so were automatically obedient. Quite strange, but enjoyable and spectacular nonetheless.
# Posted on November 24th 2004 by Rudall the time
Re: Large Groups of Players?
Big sessions can really gel well. Sorry to hear some of you guys don't like playing with lesser folk at these events. I was at one big session this summer - 25+ players most of whom were pretty good, all of whom were very encouraging of the rest. Best evening, night and early mornig of the year I thought.
# Posted on November 24th 2004 by bigfish