I will try to boil this down to a simple question: if a dance school is putting on a Saint Patrick's Day performance at a festival, and is using a track from one of Liz Carroll's CDs as a part of the show, should they not pay Liz for the use of the music? Or maybe more importantly, announce whose music they are using, and where people can buy it?
I was watching a show and this sort of grated at me. What was worse...they had musicians sitting on stage at the time, twiddling their thumbs.
As I understand it, the Trinity School in Chicago has recordings of Liz done just for their dancers. The musicians who travel with Trinity also play along. They've taken "Sevens" as their special tune, but they give Liz full credit. And I think she's happy to have them use it. Trinity then has affiliate schools around the country--sending Trinity instructors out on a monthly or so basis. So it's possible these satellite schools also have permission to use Liz's music.
I think that festival organizers will have already paid general usage fees. Just like bars and pubs pay fees so that bands can play cover songs or so the bar/restaurant/pub can play CDs on the house sound system. This is standard industry practice. So no, the dance school would not owe Liz Carroll royalties.
As far as live vs. recorded music for dance school performances, live music can be can be unpredictable for students. They are often in need of specific tempos and specific pieces for public performances. My daughter is a step dancer and I am quite famiiar with her school's performance needs. It's just simpler to go with a recording of the piece that you've been working with than to hope the band can keep a steady tempo or play the right pieces that your performance requires.
Will, I am very familiar with Trinity, and Mark Howard has always had an enlightened view of the music. He has been supporting the connection between music and dance. And he has kept some of the Chicago musicians in the mix. He has done this from the beginning. Even when he uses recorded music, he gets local musicians to provide it. People will complain about Mark, but at least he has made efforts in this area.
I am near certain that no "general usage fees" are paid for the vast majority of these performances. And the music is direct from commercial recordings, not made specifically for a dance school.
Dances that are choreographed and performed to commericial recordings are stiff and often lifeless to me. In the case of Liz's recordings, they may do a dis-service to the music itself.
Live music can be "unpredictable for students" because many of them never dance to live music. Many do not know how. You can see this at the feis and at their performances. They do their patterns and could give a hoot if the musician is playing a jig or a reel. When you see a dancer that really interacts with the music, with the musician, and visa versa, then that is really something.
And there are competent musicians in this community that can play at tempo, steadily, and can play the various tunes that are selected on commercial recordings.
Jode wrote "When you see a dancer that really interacts with the music, with the musician, ..., then that is really something."
A dancer can not interact with the musician when performing on stage. Therefore it's meaningless to use live music for stage performances. Live music is important only when people are just dancing for fun in ceilis, sessions, pubs, bars, barns.
Okay I'll say it since no one wants to: Dancers complaining about musicians and relying on CDs instead is the tail wagging the dog. GOOD dancers can dance to competent, steady, live musicians AT ANY TEMPO. Lousy dancers throw a fit and say this is too fast/this is too slow/I don't know this tune, mainly because they never bother themselves to learn anything about the music, dancing to them is not an art form, neither is the music, it's just a ploy for attention/parental approval/all of their friends are doing it. I'm sick of taking a beating from a bunch of ingrates who would have NOTHING to dance to without traditonal musicians' efforts down the years. We don't NEED dancers, our music can be enjoyed on its own merits but dancers look kind of silly leaping and stomping about without a tune, don't they?
And don't get me started on the parents of dancers. Quit trying to live through your kids, you're no better than the effin hockey or baseball dads who have a few beers and get in fights at youth league games. Jeez.
Phew. I feel better. Flame away I've got my asbestos boxers on today.
Hear hear to that. The whole Irish dance world is a disgusting perversion of what it should be. I have a 9 year old daughter who would have loved to participate. But after some initial exposure to it, no way, I yanked her away from those sadistic people. I was horrified.
Hey Jode! I'm not sure which of the schools you're talking about, but I do know what you are talking about. Having been a dancer with a couple of them, I can take a dancers perspectve on this as well as looking at it from the musicians point of view. As a dancer, there was a certain amount of time when we only used canned music, and then a few years ago we started using live music. It can be great to use live music but it all depends on the musicians and the way they play. For me, the reason I danced the way I did was because of the music, and when the music and the tunes played are mediocre, then it can really take away from the performance. In that way, I sometimes would rather perform with the canned music.
Looking at it in respects to the musicians music, like Liz Carroll, I do not think that it is okay to just use it with out any permission and/or acknowledgement of whose music it is. I know that we had permission from Eileen Ivers to use her music at performances, and I think it would be the responsible thing for dance schools to treat the music with respect. Because it is true that a lot of dancers dont.
And as for a dancer not being able to interact with a musician when performing on stage, I completely disagree. When I danced whether it was a performance, or a competition, or just for fun, the music was what really mattered to me. I was capable of performing just fine without great music, but when you can tell that a musician is playing passionately and is really feeling the music, that is when I performed and placed the best. I think a good dancer should be able to dance to anything, and because it is fun should be a reason that they dance. So since "live music is only for people who are dancing for fun" I disagree that "it is meaningless to use live music for stage performance".
Hi Danni El, nice to see you on the board! I am purposefully not naming names, and this was a general feeling I got from the festival the other day. I am glad to hear that the school organizers actually asked Eileen if they could use her music!
And I should be careful not to paint with too wide a brush. We have some good schools here and I have experience with two of them that teach a respect for the music.
My point was more the use of commercial recordings without giving credit to the musician. Since the performance is integrated, the dance with the music, you are presenting a whole package. When the music portion is from a commercial recording, it somehow seems a mis-representation. It somehow seems like the Irish Trad version of lip-syncing to me.
Simple question...is the dance school being paid for their performance ? And are the people there paying to get in ? In these cases the artist whose recorded work is being played should certainly be getting both a credit and a royalty. On the other hand I wouldn't be holding my breath on this matter. You could always take this up with the organisers and dance school leader, invoking the performing rights society, copywright or whoever ( where are you ? ).
And as for dancers who can't dance to live music.......there was a very good article quite some while ago in a guitarists' magazine by a pro guitarist asked to play live for a modern dance ensemble who had been rehearsing to an old album of his. He actually had to do quite a lot of work, taking his current performance back to the original recording tempo, etc, but commented "after the end of the first performance, behind the applause could dimly be heard the sound of a musician, laughing with sheer pleasure.." in the right moments, musicians and dancers CAN interract. After all, aren't we playing "The Dance Music of Ireland" ?a
Use of recorded music in dance performance
Use of recorded music in dance performance
I will try to boil this down to a simple question: if a dance school is putting on a Saint Patrick's Day performance at a festival, and is using a track from one of Liz Carroll's CDs as a part of the show, should they not pay Liz for the use of the music? Or maybe more importantly, announce whose music they are using, and where people can buy it?
I was watching a show and this sort of grated at me. What was worse...they had musicians sitting on stage at the time, twiddling their thumbs.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Jode
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
As I understand it, the Trinity School in Chicago has recordings of Liz done just for their dancers. The musicians who travel with Trinity also play along. They've taken "Sevens" as their special tune, but they give Liz full credit. And I think she's happy to have them use it. Trinity then has affiliate schools around the country--sending Trinity instructors out on a monthly or so basis. So it's possible these satellite schools also have permission to use Liz's music.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Will CPT
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
I think that festival organizers will have already paid general usage fees. Just like bars and pubs pay fees so that bands can play cover songs or so the bar/restaurant/pub can play CDs on the house sound system. This is standard industry practice. So no, the dance school would not owe Liz Carroll royalties.
As far as live vs. recorded music for dance school performances, live music can be can be unpredictable for students. They are often in need of specific tempos and specific pieces for public performances. My daughter is a step dancer and I am quite famiiar with her school's performance needs. It's just simpler to go with a recording of the piece that you've been working with than to hope the band can keep a steady tempo or play the right pieces that your performance requires.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Craymcla
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Will, I am very familiar with Trinity, and Mark Howard has always had an enlightened view of the music. He has been supporting the connection between music and dance. And he has kept some of the Chicago musicians in the mix. He has done this from the beginning. Even when he uses recorded music, he gets local musicians to provide it. People will complain about Mark, but at least he has made efforts in this area.
I am near certain that no "general usage fees" are paid for the vast majority of these performances. And the music is direct from commercial recordings, not made specifically for a dance school.
Dances that are choreographed and performed to commericial recordings are stiff and often lifeless to me. In the case of Liz's recordings, they may do a dis-service to the music itself.
Live music can be "unpredictable for students" because many of them never dance to live music. Many do not know how. You can see this at the feis and at their performances. They do their patterns and could give a hoot if the musician is playing a jig or a reel. When you see a dancer that really interacts with the music, with the musician, and visa versa, then that is really something.
And there are competent musicians in this community that can play at tempo, steadily, and can play the various tunes that are selected on commercial recordings.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Jode
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Jode wrote "When you see a dancer that really interacts with the music, with the musician, ..., then that is really something."
A dancer can not interact with the musician when performing on stage. Therefore it's meaningless to use live music for stage performances. Live music is important only when people are just dancing for fun in ceilis, sessions, pubs, bars, barns.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by nemethmik
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
er, what?
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Q
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Okay I'll say it since no one wants to: Dancers complaining about musicians and relying on CDs instead is the tail wagging the dog. GOOD dancers can dance to competent, steady, live musicians AT ANY TEMPO. Lousy dancers throw a fit and say this is too fast/this is too slow/I don't know this tune, mainly because they never bother themselves to learn anything about the music, dancing to them is not an art form, neither is the music, it's just a ploy for attention/parental approval/all of their friends are doing it. I'm sick of taking a beating from a bunch of ingrates who would have NOTHING to dance to without traditonal musicians' efforts down the years. We don't NEED dancers, our music can be enjoyed on its own merits but dancers look kind of silly leaping and stomping about without a tune, don't they?
And don't get me started on the parents of dancers. Quit trying to live through your kids, you're no better than the effin hockey or baseball dads who have a few beers and get in fights at youth league games. Jeez.
Phew. I feel better. Flame away I've got my asbestos boxers on today.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Hanley
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Hear hear to that. The whole Irish dance world is a disgusting perversion of what it should be. I have a 9 year old daughter who would have loved to participate. But after some initial exposure to it, no way, I yanked her away from those sadistic people. I was horrified.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by saltcast
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Hey Jode! I'm not sure which of the schools you're talking about, but I do know what you are talking about. Having been a dancer with a couple of them, I can take a dancers perspectve on this as well as looking at it from the musicians point of view. As a dancer, there was a certain amount of time when we only used canned music, and then a few years ago we started using live music. It can be great to use live music but it all depends on the musicians and the way they play. For me, the reason I danced the way I did was because of the music, and when the music and the tunes played are mediocre, then it can really take away from the performance. In that way, I sometimes would rather perform with the canned music.
Looking at it in respects to the musicians music, like Liz Carroll, I do not think that it is okay to just use it with out any permission and/or acknowledgement of whose music it is. I know that we had permission from Eileen Ivers to use her music at performances, and I think it would be the responsible thing for dance schools to treat the music with respect. Because it is true that a lot of dancers dont.
And as for a dancer not being able to interact with a musician when performing on stage, I completely disagree. When I danced whether it was a performance, or a competition, or just for fun, the music was what really mattered to me. I was capable of performing just fine without great music, but when you can tell that a musician is playing passionately and is really feeling the music, that is when I performed and placed the best. I think a good dancer should be able to dance to anything, and because it is fun should be a reason that they dance. So since "live music is only for people who are dancing for fun" I disagree that "it is meaningless to use live music for stage performance".
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by DTE
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Hi Danni El, nice to see you on the board! I am purposefully not naming names, and this was a general feeling I got from the festival the other day. I am glad to hear that the school organizers actually asked Eileen if they could use her music!
And I should be careful not to paint with too wide a brush. We have some good schools here and I have experience with two of them that teach a respect for the music.
My point was more the use of commercial recordings without giving credit to the musician. Since the performance is integrated, the dance with the music, you are presenting a whole package. When the music portion is from a commercial recording, it somehow seems a mis-representation. It somehow seems like the Irish Trad version of lip-syncing to me.
# Posted on March 22nd 2005 by Jode
Re: Use of recorded music in dance performance
Simple question...is the dance school being paid for their performance ? And are the people there paying to get in ? In these cases the artist whose recorded work is being played should certainly be getting both a credit and a royalty. On the other hand I wouldn't be holding my breath on this matter. You could always take this up with the organisers and dance school leader, invoking the performing rights society, copywright or whoever ( where are you ? ).
And as for dancers who can't dance to live music.......there was a very good article quite some while ago in a guitarists' magazine by a pro guitarist asked to play live for a modern dance ensemble who had been rehearsing to an old album of his. He actually had to do quite a lot of work, taking his current performance back to the original recording tempo, etc, but commented "after the end of the first performance, behind the applause could dimly be heard the sound of a musician, laughing with sheer pleasure.." in the right moments, musicians and dancers CAN interract. After all, aren't we playing "The Dance Music of Ireland" ?a
# Posted on March 23rd 2005 by Guernsey Pete