On the thread about 'what makes a new song folk', Jim Carroll maintains that folk/rock makes traditional song meaningless as you can't hear the lyrics.

Now I'm well aware that folk/rock is definately not to Jim's taste, but to make the sweeping statement that a particular style of accompliment to a traditional song makes that song meaningless is not something I either understand or accept.

My view is that it is a means of preserving the tradition, and if the folk/rock style makes traditional song more accessible to the wider public, then that can only be a good thing.

I gave Jim this example of my band performing 'Blackleg Miner' but he tells me he can't hear the words!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO4PrQZgahA


So what does the team think, does folk/rock make a traditional song meaningless?

(and before anyone else says it, I'm well aware that if you can't hear the lyrics, then that could be down to a bad performance or a bad sound engineer!)

John