Mudelf - I actually typed in c.g. but as I did it last and my computer was having a fit of sulks, it didn't register. Sorry.

In fact I've just typed a long reply to this which the computer ate, and I'm not sure I've got time to do it again.

Artful, (if I may be so informal), it's not a choice between a good singer and a bad singer, but a continuum between someone who uses what voice and technique they have in the service of the song, and someone who uses the song to show off their beautiful voice. The point I was making, obviously rather clumsily, was that you can be a good fiddler even with physical problems, if you have the love and passion and knowledge and can communicate those. Physical limitations may prevent you being great, but you can be good.

"You don't have to "spend years." Whether instrument or voice, a few months' classical lessons will get you off to a good start," (Don Firth.) I agree. If you can't find a good traditional teacher, this is a good substitute. However, I'm as unhappy about the idea that all people teaching traditional style fiddle are self-taught clumsy incomtetants as I am about the idea that all classical musicians are soulless, rigid and can only play from the dots.

"Unless you're a musical wiz and play several hours each day, a few months is NOT sufficient time to get a good foundation on the fiddle. It takes years to develop proper bowing technique and intonation, and there's so much else to learn beyond that."

Yes. That's why I've spent years working on traditional music. I don't want to spend my practice time playing music that I love listening to but don't want to play.