Shall we resume saying how long we've been playing?

[jim stone]

Take your point, Tal.

But it seems to me there is a difference.

You're talking about snobbery and competition between
musicians and people knowledgeable about music, lots of stuff about details that matter to people.

I'm talking about how music is viewed in the minds
of non-musicians or people who are thinking about
becoming musicians; people who may not yet
know about music.

When we (ordinary Americans, say) think of playing an instrument like the piano,
there is often a 'high-culture' image of the tuxedo or the
evening gown, Carnegie hall, the winning of many
competitions against talented people, all of whom
have trained for years at Julliard. Music is viewed
as a competition in which there is little point in trying
if you aren't going to be the best. Naturally we think
we aren't talented enough. So there is an obsession
with talent.

THAT seems to be largely absent in India.

For the great masses of people, music is the religious
chant. It isn't about the individual or winning or talent.

And the classical music itself, whatever the differences,
is much closer to the music of the people than it is here.
You don't have vast orchestras dressed in tuxedos
playing Schoenberg, but three musicians dressed
like ordinary folk playing instruments not terribly distant
from what the people play, the music improvisationall and usually
religious in flavor.

[kennychaffin]

....

When we (ordinary Americans, say) think of playing an instrument like the piano,
.......

In some ways I'd agree, but certainly is not true in my mind, what about all the piano bars, electronic keyboards, etc?

Certainly the piano is much farther from the average person because entertainment is now piped in on the cable and airwaves so they less need to entertain themselves (which is a REAL SHAME AND LOSS).

KAC

[ImNotIrish]

Perhaps I have already responded to this thread...too lazy to check. Well, I have been playing as long as it took to get to the place I am now. Perhaps I could have taken a shorter path, but hey, you do what you can do, when you can do it.
I'm here now, and hopefully I will be somewhere else along the path tomorrow....or the day after...or the day after that.
Arbo

[Darren]

Sorry to go off topic...or rather back ON topic...

Only been playing for about 5 or 6 weeks now and just LOVE Irish flute! I started out making a G flute using CPVC and it works actually pretty well, tuning is very good. But I didn't really like the higher tone and tried to make a D flute but was using PVC dimensions on CPVC...doesn't work. :p

I just got a flute from a local maker that is a PVC one made with the thicker sched 80. The tone is great and after some adjustments the pitch is near perfect. It is a very rich sound.

Now, don't any of you pros be looking down your noses at my PVC flutes! I'm doing this for fun...and cheap fun is more...fun. This flute will do me just fine for learning and I will upgrade when I am going to play somewhere that people can actually hear me. Plus, I get a real kick out of telling friends and family it is made from PVC and watching their faces when they hear it. I'm carrying it almost everywhere I go and playing every chance I get.

I don't come from a background in Irish music, so playing the tunes takes a bit more work than some of you that have been playing them (or listening to them) for a while. But the Irish tunes are a load of fun. I am mostly playing by ear any songs I can think of that don't go much beyond the first octave...still having a hard time with the second octave sound being clean. :/

Anyway, super glad I found the Irish flute! Having a blast!

[Gordon]

Amen to that! Me, it's hard to listen to myself because all I can do is compare myself to the folks on the recordings and oh, how short I fall.

Comparing yourself to anyone is almost always a mistake, in my opinion.

Something that was said here on the boards really resonated with me, and I think it's worth repeating (and I would give credit if I could remember who said it):

Instead of thinking, "what a wonderful player," think "what a wonderful tune."

The trouble with holding your playing up to someone else's for comparison is that, no matter who you are, there is always someone who has played longer or who just plays better. Thus you hold yourself not only to an impossible standard but one that is a moving target, as well.

Focusing more on the tune and less on the player makes good sense to me.

Similarly, instead of setting your goals on playing better than ______, or even on playing better than yourself a month ago or whatever, I think it makes more sense to make your goal to try to simply try to play the tunes better.

Even that wording is not quite right. I'll try again: try to do better by the tunes.

That may not always mean playing them in a more complicated way; sometimes it may well mean playing simply and well rather than "better" but not so good, if that makes sense.

Just my $.02.

--James

Yes, just your $.02, James, but you're right on the money here, straight down the line. I probably could have edited your whole post, to save space, but I figured it wouldn't hurt for others to re-read it, in case they missed it a page back..

BTW, I think your paraphrased quote was originally from a John Skelton interview, but I could be wrong. Doesn't matter, of course, who said it. It works for me, and anyone else that really cares about playing this music.

[Rob Sharer]

We've been over this Skeltonesque philosophy before, and it still smacks of false humility to me. If it's really just the tune, why would John put his name on his recordings?

I like tunes, but I really love hearing the genuine personalities of the human beings who are playing them, too.

Rob

[jtrout]

Be careful Rod, you've exceeded 500!

[Rob Sharer]

My, my, how ever did that happen?

Rod

[Gordon]

We've been over this Skeltonesque philosophy before, and it still smacks of false humility to me. If it's really just the tune, why would John put his name on his recordings?

I like tunes, but I really love hearing the genuine personalities of the human beings who are playing them, too.

Rob

That's not his (Skelton's) point, Rob, but you probably know that already. Skelton is a great player with a distinctive style, all of which is appreciated, and any time he records, all kudos go to him, personally. The fact that we all know his name is due, in no small part, to his playing abilities, and not simply his renderings of tunes we can all play, too.

But the viewpoint, the philosophy as you called it, is about how tunes should be approached when playing them, paying more attention to a tune's rhythms, patterns, and interesting turns that make it different from other tunes, than they should worry about impressing other flute players with their mastery of technique for technique's sake, or whether they'll be acknowledged as a great player afterwards. Personality is part of any performance; the better you are, the more your style and sound will be distinctive, without effort, and you will be acknowledged for it. But that's not (or should not be) the goal, that's an end product of good playing.

Players who play to impress first, rather than to put forth their best version of tunes, ultimately leave the listener cold, hearing and remembering only the odd, technical quirks of their playing, where they altered things, rather than hearing the tune replay in their head. I am much more impressed with a player who makes me want to learn their version of a tune, than one that makes me wonder how they did some little trick on the second go-round of the B part, or - worse - where I can't quite hear what tune it is that they're playing.

There is, of course, a large gray area of players who can (and do) achieve both - and many of the players who fit the above description have their fans and followers - if that's what turns you on, then - of course - it's a matter of taste. But as a sound philosophy for players of all levels, respecting the tune first is always a good starting point and - based on your opinions given over the past 500 plus posts, you know this already.

[Rob Sharer]

Yes, of course. I'm really into the fine details of the tunes; not in a doctrinaire way, mind you, but I dislike a mulchy setting or an inattentive version. We're pretty "tune-y" at our local session, hopefully not to a fault. That said, we all share a fine appreciation for variation, which is an important and a very personal part of the music. As a player, you're really supposed to bring a part of yourself to the music; otherwise, a tape-recorder would suffice.

My negative reaction is to people taking what Skelton said and seizing upon a simplified version of it with a sort of religious fervor, using it to put down great players who might occasionally color outside the lines a bit. Michael Hynes likes to say that the flute is the "wild man" of the session. He should know! You'd never mistake his playing for anyone else's, so great is his personal contribution to the music every time he winds his flute. Same would go for Molloy, Tansey, or any number of the greats who once were decried for ruining the tunes but who now are held up as the standard-earers for the tradition. Still, it's not bloody free jazz, is it?

I'm going to come down in the middle, myself. You've got to get the tune "right," find the important landmarks that keep it anchored to the tradition. But don't be afraid to put yourself in there as well. I believe it's what we're meant to do. That cool twist in the turn of Reel X? Someone did it that way first. And who wrote the tune in the first place? One of us, really. Cheers,

Rob

[Gordon]

And now I agree with you entirely, Rob.

Now let's put put this ridiculously useless thread to bed. What'ya all say?

[Cathy Wilde]

My negative reaction is to people taking what Skelton said and seizing upon a simplified version of it with a sort of religious fervor, using it to put down great players who might occasionally color outside the lines a bit. Michael Hynes likes to say that the flute is the "wild man" of the session. He should know! You'd never mistake his playing for anyone else's, so great is his personal contribution to the music every time he winds his flute. Same would go for Molloy, Tansey, or any number of the greats who once were decried for ruining the tunes but who now are held up as the standard-earers for the tradition. Still, it's not bloody free jazz, is it?

Rob

Sorry, Gordon & others, but this thread seems to have insomnia.

Interesting take on that, Rob. I'm certain John could reply much better (and humorously). But as he's probably off grubbing honeysuckle or playing his flute or something and I'm one of the evangelists of that line, I'm going to take some responsibility for clarification. (forgive me if I screw this up, RJ!)

When I first heard him say "It shouldn't be 'Aren't I a great player?' but 'Isn't this a great tune'?" I didn't interpret it as prohibiting variations or settings per se, and years on I most definitely don't ... Shoot, John's a monster experimenter. He loves to take tunes apart, playing them in different keys, setting jigs as reels and vice versa, you name it (he's also said everyone should do this; it makes you a better musician).

In fact, I find his settings more inventive than many, but it takes some close listening because what's brilliant about his settings is they make sense to the tune. In other words, even if they're variations THEY SOUND LIKE THEY BELONG. And to some degree, I suspect they sound so good because he threw out a lot of trash before arriving at a setting he likes.

In other words, John's settings don't call attention to themselves and say "ooh, look at this double back-flip roll," etc., etc. After a few years of fairly close observation I can feel pretty confident in saying that what makes John's playing so darned listenable isn't that he doesn't vary or set things; it's just that his settings and variations are so refined they make you want to listen, dance and learn the tune.

Meanwhile, I hear a bunch of people play stuff and all I hear is a bunch of ... well, stuff. And that's OK -- I also remember John saying we all go crazy in the taste department while we're learning; it's part of the process (dang John, this is a long process). But eventually, the really top players are the ones who have the stuff and know when/when not to use it; and when they do it's seamless.

Even Molloy. He certainly has the ability to throw a lot more things in there, but he doesn't (especially now that he's not 30); to me, his best efforts are still the ones where you hear the tune. If the average person had to listen to two hours of "Moving Cloud"-style party pieces .... ?

Yeah, I know, there's room for that as well, and even an audience -- though I suspect audience size may vary in proportion to general listenability.

So bottom line I'm quite sure John wasn't saying "don't play variations or settings." I think he's saying "don't let the mechanics blind you to the music (let alone deafen a listener to it)."

Otherwise you're just wanking. And fortunately, wanking is something people still generally do alone.

[Rob Sharer]

Unfortunately, that's not how most of the folks on this forum who've chosen to (mis)appropriate John's statement have applied it. Cheers,

Rob

[Gordon]

Cathy, I hope no player interprets "respect the tune" to mean don't ever deviate from the framework of a tune, or that they should avoid personal stamps or ornamentations once they are good enough to do so. This certainly wasn't what I took away from the quote. Even so-called "simple" players - if they're worth discussing as players at all - have their own unique settings and personal variations on a tune; that's the nature of ITM.

What I object to is the idea that the tunes themselves somehow aren't interesting enough in the first place, and require overly technical book-learned crans/rolls/taps and other ornamentations for every note on every tune, so that all tunes sound, ultimately, like the next. This is often followed by the idea that traditional playing is open to any and all creative experimentation, even when the player has little or no grounding in traditional playing.

John's style is unique, yet - like Malloy and others equally gifted - his playing does not shout so much about John Skelton, the player, as it demonstrates a great, often inspiring version of a tune from him, variations and all; "here's a grand tune"", rather than "listen to me play". All the more reason, ultimately, to admire the player.

[Cathy Wilde]

Cathy, I hope no player interprets "respect the tune" to mean don't ever deviate from the framework of a tune, or that they should avoid personal stamps or ornamentations once they are good enough to do so. This certainly wasn't what I took away from the quote. Even so-called "simple" players - if they're worth discussing as players at all - have their own unique settings and personal variations on a tune; that's the nature of ITM.

What I object to is the idea that the tunes themselves somehow aren't interesting enough in the first place, and require overly technical book-learned crans/rolls/taps and other ornamentations for every note on every tune, so that all tunes sound, ultimately, like the next. This is often followed by the idea that traditional playing is open to any and all creative experimentation, even when the player has little or no grounding in traditional playing.

John's style is unique, yet - like Malloy and others equally gifted - his playing does not shout so much about John Skelton, the player, as it demonstrates a great, often inspiring version of a tune from him, variations and all; "here's a grand tune"", rather than "listen to me play". All the more reason, ultimately, to admire the player.

Amen, amen, amen -- we are singing from the same hymnbook, my friend. I'm just sorry that maybe some other people misinterpreted things and felt I owed it to whomever to try to straighten that out.

One of the neatest things about hearing John over the years is hearing how he refines something to its purest essence. Not a single nuance is overlooked; he thinks about how to approach each and every note. Talk about gifted ... but he'll be the first to say he works darned hard at it, too.

OK, back to work and then a little practice meself. I played like such a moron last night; tromping all over everything with my big Pratten hobnailed boots. I hate that!!!!!!!!!!