 sj |
||
|
||
Traditional Singers and singers of Trad
|
Subject: Tradtional Singers and singers of Trad From: The Sandman Date: 10 Mar 25 - 04:16 AM Why judge traditional singers differently from singers of traditional songs.In every other form of music we judge on performance not how the music was learned |
|
Subject: RE: Tradtional Singers and singers of Trad From: r.padgett Date: 10 Mar 25 - 08:39 AM Not sure what you mean here I don't think we have at least in England, many Traditional, active singers, these may also be deemed song source singers Singers of Traditional songs abound, but they are NOT as i have said before, Traditional singers imv Who ever sings and what and how they sing can be judged by the audience Ray |
|
Subject: RE: Tradtional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 10 Mar 25 - 02:26 PM I suspect this is a troll, but I suppose it should be answered anyway. The whole point of a song being traditional is that it was learned from tradition. If you learned it from a recording, you didn't learn it from tradition. That doesn't make the song worse. It says nothing about the quality of the performance. But the whole point of saying something is traditional is the oral transmission. The word is INFORMATIONAL. We've already lost the word "folk" to mean "acoustic singer-songwriter." Let's not mess with the word "traditional." |
|
Subject: RE: Tradtional Singers and singers of Trad From: RTim Date: 10 Mar 25 - 02:31 PM He is just having his say here as it is also a Post of a Facebook Page.... Tim Radford |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,IS Date: 11 Mar 25 - 03:58 AM Unless one can tell the difference, the distinction is irrelevant. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Trad-lad Date: 11 Mar 25 - 08:11 AM I never realised there was a competition. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Stilly River Sage Date: 11 Mar 25 - 11:15 AM Mr. Waltz, you are correct. This is another way around to the hackneyed conversation/argument of "what is folk?" |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 11 Mar 25 - 11:22 AM Trad-lad wrote: I never realised there was a competition. In one sense, it matters only to nuts like me who think that song histories matter -- or that traditional songs matter to history. But I think there is an important distinction when Stan Hugill sang "Blow, Boys, Blow," versus when I sing it -- even when he sang it at a concert rather than on shipboard. Hugill knew, and could convey, the actual use of the song, as I cannot. Doesn't matter that you or I might have a better voice. It may be that the "better" singer gives a "more enjoyable" performance. It might even be that I would agree that the "better" singer gives the "more enjoyable" performance. (I won't claim to be any great fan of broken-down informants singing flat in cracked voices!) But there is something fundamentally different about that authentic performance. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Mar 25 - 11:45 AM Is there any music 'learned in the tradition' nowadays? |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 11 Mar 25 - 12:14 PM Dave the Gnome asked, Is there any music 'learned in the tradition' nowadays? Sure. I learned "White Coral Bells" from my mother, who did not know where she learned it. Two or three other songs, too. My father knows several songs insulting other schools. And kids often learn a lot of songs at summer camps. And how many of you learned "The Worms Crawl In" from a professional singer? In most of those cases, there was an intermediate print stage. But, as we now know, that's normal. I can't cite any instances of someone learning a Big Ballad from tradition (though, curiously, the way I learned "Lord Randall" doesn't resemble any version I've ever seen anywhere, and I've seen a lot; I wonder if I heard it on a playground somewhere). But that doesn't mean tradition is dead; it just means that it isn't preserving the stuff it used to. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: meself Date: 11 Mar 25 - 03:55 PM I've learned a handful of songs and ballads from 'the tradition', FWIW. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: meself Date: 11 Mar 25 - 03:58 PM Having said that, I would have to admit that I fall much more into the 'revivalist' than the 'traditional singer' category. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Some bloke Date: 12 Mar 25 - 03:02 AM Wow. Little alters here on Mudcat eh? We are all traditional singers in that we carry on the tradition of singing, as opposed to rapping, reciting or using your voice as a non verbal instrument. If you sing a traditional song, so be it. You are no different in definition to anybody else singing a song we assume has origins in broadsheets and beyond, other than style, delivery, talent and a rough idea of the supposed provenance. You know you’re singing trad when one half of the room reckons you’ve got it wrong and the other half were hoping you’d sing something they’ve heard of…. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: r.padgett Date: 12 Mar 25 - 03:49 AM Singers of traditional songs abound ~ but largely are NOT traditional or source singers Ray |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Backwoodsman Date: 12 Mar 25 - 06:24 AM So I wonder what The Sandman thinks. After all, he started the thread… |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 12 Mar 25 - 06:25 AM Well I'm 73 and I've never sung in front of an audience, except for a captive one in my house, mainly at Christmas whilst under the influence. Well that is until last Friday when I had my first gig as a new member of an enthusiastic group of blokes of similar age who've been singing shanties and other folkie-type songs around here for decades. Out of the 22 songs I've so far belted out with them, I know that Tom Paxton wrote two of 'em and that Ralph McTell wrote another (go on, have a guess!). Other than that, I neither know nor care where the songs originated or whether they're supposed to be traditional or whether I'm singing them "traditionally" or not. I'm not going to be getting up my own bottom about this, unlike some people I've encountered here. I'm having fun. Now all I need is someone to tell me how to sing... :-) Next gig Friday! |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve again Date: 12 Mar 25 - 06:27 AM Ps. What's a "source singer"? |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Backwoodsman Date: 12 Mar 25 - 07:23 AM Hope you’re sitting down Steve, but I completely agree with you! TBH, I don’t give a FF who’s singing a song, or how they learned it - it’s the song that matters, and the fact that it’s being sung! BTW, I pull ‘that’ Ralph McTell song out at singarounds occasionally - it always goes down a ‘bomb’ and gets the best singing of the night in the chorus! A good song is a good song is a good song, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Backwoodsman Date: 12 Mar 25 - 08:35 AM Am I the only one wondering what the Sandman’s opinions are on the topic of this thread? After all, he started it! |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 12 Mar 25 - 08:41 AM It's worth noting that some of us like song scholarship. If you don't know or care where you got a song, I'm not likely to want to bother to listen to you singing it. It's a matter of taste. But it's also a matter of history. Ignorance of the past leads to... well, for one thing, it leads to politicians who keep slapping tariffs because they don't know that we tried that in the nineteenth century and it didn't work nearly as well as the tariff-makers claimed; it just meant that American industries remained inferior to European for a long time. Of course most people don't care about song history. I know I'm a freak. But knowing a song's history never hurt and sometimes helps. As someone observed, we'll never resolve this as long as this forum covers all aspects of "folk" from navel-gazing to traditional ballads. But at least let's recognize that there is a distinction in what people like. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 12 Mar 25 - 10:07 AM "It's worth noting that some of us like song scholarship. If you don't know or care where you got a song, I'm not likely to want to bother to listen to you singing it." Well that's a bit of a shame. For decades I've been an aficionado of traditional Irish tunes and I like a bit of scholarship on that score (not that I've ever used scores!) but the chaps and chapesses I consorted with in the jigs 'n' reels always played them fully as well whether they were scholars of the muse or not (and none of us have ever lived in Ireland either). I'm a scholar of classical music too, though I can't play any of it. Were you to listen to my lusty "singing" of Cornish shanties in my big loud untrained northern voice, you might well have a "Cor-blimey-what-the-hell-was-THAT!" moment, but, sure as eggs is eggs, you wouldn't be able to glean whether or not my scholarship was up to snuff... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: r.padgett Date: 12 Mar 25 - 10:48 AM "Source" singers are the ones who first sang a particular song, they are traditional source singers Of course many songs originated in folk gatherings or can be traced to music hall singers, at last nowadays These are the traditional source singers referred to here by and last no longer with us (with exceptions) Best collections maybe Walter Pardon, Fred Jordan, Harry Cox, Sam Larner these are traditional source singers imv Ray |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Some bloke Date: 12 Mar 25 - 11:02 AM A source singer is anyone you hear sing a song and it’s the first time you heard it. At least, that’s your source. In essence, if there is evidence of a song as fitting the description of traditional, then none of the ones Ray mentions above, despite my huge admiration of them, could be THE source singer as they are out by up to hundreds of years. They are however the source for many people involved in the folk revival. In that, they are to be admired. Tom Jones is a source singer, he’s the first I heard singing Green Green Grass of Home. The thread is about as relevant to definitive agreement as starting a thread asking how many arseholes there are in a flock of sheep. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Mar 25 - 11:09 AM Not sure about sheep arseholes - Are they like lamb rissoles? |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Long Firm Freddie Date: 12 Mar 25 - 11:42 AM A fascinating interview with Steve Roud at the time of the launch of his book "Folk Song in England" in 2017: The Steve Roud interview: What is folk music, exactly? Apologies if theus has already been posted elsewhere. LFF |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 12 Mar 25 - 01:49 PM Methinks our esteemed guest Some Bloke has hit it right: > You know you’re singing trad when one half of the room > reckons you’ve got it wrong and the other half were > hoping you’d sing something they’ve heard of .... .... though my version, from recent experience, is: if half the room starts singing along to the first chorus, and the youngsters are joining in by the third one. It's disconcerting if the oldsters are concentrated on one side. (For the record, it was Pleasant and Delightful --- as was the response.) I'm slightly worried, though, that I first read our esteemed guest's first line as: > Wow. Little altars here on Mudcat eh? |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 12 Mar 25 - 02:40 PM MaJoC the Filk wrote: Methinks our esteemed guest Some Bloke has hit it right: I will generally agree, but I don't entirely agree that that this is only a response to a "mixed" crowd hearing a traditional song. It can also be the response to someone singing a modern "folk" song. If someone sings, say, "Ned Kelly's Farewell to Greta," I'll nod and say "Wow! Is that the tune?" -- and be singing along, because I know the text and just don't have a tune for it. While the "other half" wishes for something they know. But if someone sings, say, a Bill Staines song from c. 1990, I will be the one wishing to hear something I know, while the "other half" will be thinking, "You're singing that too fast," or some such thing. Same response, different song type. It's what happens in crowds with different musical tastes! Note, however, that if someone does sing "Ned Kelly's Farewell to Greta," it requires a degree of explanation, because Greta is not a woman but a place that Kelly called home. An Australian would know that, and would know who Ned Kelly was, or at least know the phrase "As game as Ned Kelly." Knowing the folklore of Ned Kelly is important to understanding Australia. So learning the song justifies explanation. Or take "I Maun Hae a Wife," which is Scottish. Will everyone understand, without explanation, that "maun hae" means "must have"? Probably not. Could you "translate" it, and sing, "I must have a wife"? I suppose so, though it doesn't sing as well. But what are you going to do with the chorus, "Buy broom besoms, wha will buy them noo"? If you don't explain that, I suspect "besoms" will be interpreted as referring to the female anatomy -- but you can't turn that line into "Buy broom brooms..." because it sounds inane. So you have to either explain or let people misunderstand. If explanation is not allowed, should we ignore an historically important song ("Ned Kelly's Farewell to Greta")? Should we ignore a hilarious song that just happens to be in a semi-foreign language ("I Maun Hae a Wife")? I suppose you could argue that these songs take more effort than some commercial navel-gazing song (although the navel-gazing may not make any more sense than the traditional song in a few years when climate change and idiot politicians have destroyed our present society). But you know what: I want to understand Australia. I want to know what Scots find funny. Just because I'm American doesn't mean that I hate them stupid furriners who talk funny and don't care for the NFL. Sure, you can sometimes do a song without explanations. But I am not interested in easy music. Pleasant music, yes, but pleasant and easy are not correlated concepts. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Steve Gardham Date: 12 Mar 25 - 03:37 PM Your OP is well aware of the distinctions between the 2 categories in his heading. In Britain and some other English-speaking places they are labels applied by researchers and revivalists simply to distinguish between those singers who were collected FROM who were not part of either of the Revivals, and those who were part of one of the Revivals, writing their own material and singing songs supplied by the first group. There is no quality factor implied in any of this. Both parties can be respected for what they have done and what they do. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Some bloke Date: 13 Mar 25 - 02:29 AM Nothing altars It would appear the %&&%& autocorrect is in an ecclesiastical mode, which is odd but my fault for not proof reading it. For the record, we constantly hear people introduce a song saying “This is / isn’t a folk song.’ I wish they’d let on and educate me as to what makes it a folk song because be buggered if I know. The only agreement I can make with others is I’m comfortable with Steve Roud’s withering take on the so called 1954 definition nonsense, although a junketing conference in Mexico must have been exciting back then. A good compromise communique in the global sense but little to do with the history of songs in Europe and its influence since the invention of the printing press. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 13 Mar 25 - 05:13 AM Since Some bloke mentioned Steve Roud, I think it a pretty good first approximation that, if a song isn't in the Roud Folk Song Index by now, and is in English, it isn't a traditional song. :-) Then we just have to decide if a song needs to be traditional to be a folk song. (Hint: it does. :-p That was easy. :-p) It's also worth saying that revival singers do have a role in the preservation of folk songs. If it weren't for revival singers, most traditional songs (other than children's songs) would be truly dead. But I would analogize revival singers to scholars of dead languages -- Latin, Sanskrit, Classical Greek or Hebrew, Old or Middle English. They do tremendously useful things; there is immense value in those old writings, and they are preserving them for us and making them available for us. But while they preserve and make available those old things, they are not actually part of the culture that produced that language and those writings. They are a sort of a bridge back to those old, valuable things. But they cannot dwell on the other side of the bridge. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 13 Mar 25 - 12:01 PM No, esteemed guest: your autocorrect had it right; it was my eyes that were being maliciously ecclesiastical. Within five minutes, I was regretting that I hadn't written "first misread" instead. *Sigh*. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 13 Mar 25 - 06:58 PM I posted to this thread earlier today in a perfectly polite and reasonable way. OK, whimsical, yet inoffensive. The most offensive thing about it is that it has been deleted. Well who knows.... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Mar 25 - 07:04 PM I can still see your message from yesterday Steve but remember that just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean that they are not out to get you :-D |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 13 Mar 25 - 09:57 PM Wow, more deletions of harmless, anodyne posts!! Oi, mods, I'm playing and singing on the kind of songs that we all love. Wassup! The ONLY thing (this morning) deleted was a blank message. Perhaps you have too many browser windows open and lost your post yourself. ---mudelf |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Some bloke Date: 14 Mar 25 - 11:16 AM Don’t worry Steve, I’m out to get you. Betty hasn’t recovered yet….. She still reminisces over how she could get a tune out of your mouth organ without breathing…… |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 14 Mar 25 - 12:15 PM It was my piece of whimsy about Ramblin' Boy. I'm sure I saw it here after posting....then didn't.... Tell Betty not to trip over those bingo balls, that bloke... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 14 Mar 25 - 12:42 PM I foresee a new excuse: Sorry Miss, the web browser ate my homework. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Dave the Gnome Date: 14 Mar 25 - 01:29 PM We are not back in Knot End are we? I told you, I bought those bingo tickets in good faith... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 14 Mar 25 - 08:12 PM Yebbut Dave, and I really hate to relive this, but the issue was not just the bingo tickets but also the bingo cards you photocopied to save money, not to speak of the box of bingo balls in that wet soggy shoe box you tried to carry across that car park in the rain, losing clickety click, legs eleven and two fat ladies in the process then trying to cover it up. This is Mudcat's perennial running sore, Dave. After all these years I'm still pointing the finger at you and Betty Swollox. And, trust me, there IS evidence... Back me up on this one, Bloke... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Dave the Gnome Date: 15 Mar 25 - 04:18 AM I think the tale has become trsditional :-D |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve .Shaw Date: 15 Mar 25 - 05:19 AM Definitely subject to the folk process! Thus the thread has turned full circle... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: r.padgett Date: 15 Mar 25 - 03:05 PM Might be an idea to sign in as a mudcat member to avoid deletions Ray |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Gallus Moll Date: 15 Mar 25 - 03:12 PM hmmmmm - one of the earlier posters listed their choice of Traditional / Source singers' =all men! (and all Englishmen------) For me, some of the best Scottish Traditional / Source singers have been women, often from the Travelling community! Just thought I'd mention that.... |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 15 Mar 25 - 05:06 PM I've always posted here, thousands of times actually, using my real name, Ray. The "guest" bit is something that's beyond my powers to rectify. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Some bloke Date: 16 Mar 25 - 12:47 PM That’s the problem with signing in, Joe Offer had this philosophy of what he called free speech where you weren’t free to call out homophobic hatred but free to spew it in the first place. It’d have been great to sign in but that’s the price of coming across what our American friends call free speech, which given recent politics, it’s no wonder some don’t understand the responsibility it requires. In short, my account was frozen and as time has dealt with the unfortunate troll and I use Mudcat for its real purpose, getting different takes and opinions on the history of songs, not much reason to rejoin. Mind you, our Betty is free with speech, especially when bad mouthing gob iron aficionados and squeeze box pumpers with gnomish attributes in the pub…. Although she reckons I’m the Doberman’s dangly bits. Sorry, but perhaps, and just my opinion you understand, the purpose of this thread might have run its course, hence Betty rearing her head after a break of many years. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 25 - 01:35 PM Well said. I was "timed out" 14 months ago after a bad-mouthing by a fellow Brit. Allegedly I was going to be back after I'd posted nicely above the line a few times. I've done that in abundance. Like you, I'm not in the habit of grovelling... Why would I! |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: meself Date: 16 Mar 25 - 03:40 PM "using my real name, Ray" - and all this time I thought "Steve" was your real name ... ! |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 25 - 04:50 PM Ah. I've had a fraught day... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GerryM Date: 16 Mar 25 - 05:07 PM "Allegedly I was going to be back after I'd posted nicely above the line a few times." Steve, if calling me detestable and a supporter of genocide is your idea of posting nicely, it's no wonder you aren't back. |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 25 - 05:29 PM It wasn't you I was referring to. I don't remember that remark, but if that's what I said I can only suggest to you that, if the cap fits... Mudcat is American. America is the land of free speech, I'm told. Perhaps, in the case of Mudcat, that applies to red-blooded yanks only...
-Joe Offer, Mudcat Music Editor- |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Robert B. Waltz Date: 16 Mar 25 - 09:27 PM Steve Shaw wrote: Mudcat is American. America is the land of free speech, I'm told. Don't misunderstand the first amendment. It says (despite what Donald Trump thinks) that the government can't stop you from saying what you want. This has nothing whatsoever to do with what you can say in a personal, private, or corporate context. If you come into my house and say, "Vaccines cause autism" or "Vladimir Putin is not a war criminal," I can and will throw you out as someone too stupid to be allowed in a civilized home. Facebook or Mudcat have similar rights to restrict speech. Often such restrictions come about to prevent fights or to help preserve other rights. Furthermore, even the first amendment restriction on government restrictions on speech is not absolute. For example, the support groups I facilitate for the Autism Society of America cannot discuss politics or religion (or the practice of medicine). This is required by the rules concerning non-profit groups that take government money. (Other non-profits are somewhat freer, but the point is, the government can restrict speech in exchange for certain other privileges.) I know that Joe does take steps to keep the peace around here. That is within his rights -- this is a service he offers to you, not a guarantee of users' abilities to spout off on irrelevant things. But I wouldn't get paranoid about it -- it appears Joe deleted (or something) one of my posts about my best-ever guitar, not because it violated any sort of speech rights but because my favorite guitar was a 12-string guitar and not a 6-string! :-)
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: GUEST,paperback Date: 16 Mar 25 - 11:34 PM During the Pseudo-crisis we had freedom of speech but you had to watch what you said and eversince this has become new normal and used as a bludgeon by gatekeepers everywhere. I like Shaw:), he's been never rude, just calls a spade a spade even when the mods are calling clubs. I like to imagine he sounds like Rex Harrison lol. Chin up old chap nobody said life was fair PS I still hold Shaw would make a great 11 PM till 8 AM moderator (not that the British ever cause any trouble) |
|
Subject: RE: Traditional Singers and singers of Trad From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Mar 25 - 12:52 AM But I think we've been off topic for far too long. Thread is closed. -Joe- One closing note from Richard Mellish:
The "Traditional Singers and singers of Trad" thread had drifted way off topic onto matters that are better avoided, so you were not wrong to close it, but I only saw it just now and would have wished to post something germane. Anything to be done about that? Here's what I wished to say. There is a distinction between the OP's categories but they overlap rather than being clearly separated. I was recently at the "Traditional Sing" weekend at Moreton-in-Marsh. It is one of the closest approximations now existing to the "National" folk music festivals in England that used to mix traditional/source/whatever-you-want-to-call-them singers and revivalists. But the former have mostly died out. There were a few at Moreton, but one who is generally considered to be in that category, Jeff Wesley, freely acknowledges having got much of his repertoire from folk clubs, as did one of those already mentioned in the thread, Fred Jordan. Gordon Hall learnt songs from his mother but also searched print sources for additional material. And what about Jeannie Robertson getting one of her ballads from Jean Ritchie? And then there's this from the great Jean Ritchie herself. |
| Share Thread: |
