 sj |
||
|
||
Learning violin versus learning fiddle
|
|
|
Subject: Children learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 12 Feb 08 - 06:52 PM My 9 year old daughter has been playing piano for two years. She is quite musical, with good rhythm (a champion Irish dancer) and wants to learn another instrument. I was born in Ireland, am a guitar-player, grew up with an Irish/folk background, have been a singer in traditional Irish bands and have spent many a fun night in Irish sessions. My partner is American (we live in California) and wants our child to learn violin. I want her to learn fiddle. As we all know, the only difference between the fiddle and the violin is the music that is played on it, and this is the crux. I have been around many traditional fiddle players who sometimes will diss another fiddler as "classically-trained". They claim that once someone is trained as a violinist, it is virtually impossible for most people to "unlearn", and play well in a traditional Irish style. The claim is that they are stiff and rigid in their bowing style and fimgering. My questions are: Is this really true? If someone learns violin, are they ruined as fiddlers? Any recommendations for me regarding whether I should send my 9 year old to a fiddle teacher or to a violinist? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Volgadon Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:06 PM I think that is probably untrue. Eliza Carthy went to a music school where they were trained in a stiff, classical tradition and I think anyone will agree that she isn't a half-bad trad player... What you bring to your music is what is important. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:06 PM Oops! That should read: "The claim is that they are stiff and rigid in their bowing style and fingering." |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Melissa Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:08 PM Since the child is well into grasping her musical foundation, isn't she old enough to choose for herself which she prefers? A lesson/talk with a violin teacher and one with a fiddler...followed by a little bit of time to think it out on her own ought to solve the 'problem' for all of you--girl gets whichever she feels drawn to and the adults don't have to feel snippy about it because the bottom line is that you both honestly want the child to love music. It seems to me that fiddlers don't care whether you call their fiddle a Violin...violinists curl up their nose if you call theirs a Fiddle. She's learning to read/play by reading music for the piano. Fiddle should encourage her to broaden into also playing by 'ear' Violin keeps her papertrained. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:14 PM Her piano teacher wants to keep her focused on being "paper-trained", and at the moment is discouraging her from learning by ear. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Melissa Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:17 PM Right..that's what piano teachers do in order to keep on track with the lesson plan. What does the piano teacher think about starting a second instrument? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: PoppaGator Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:22 PM I don't know about this specific instrument (violin/fiddle), but in general I have observed that some individuals who learn music (instrumental or even vocal) under a rigid system remain stiff and unimaginative in their playing/singing, but many others do not. I believe that some of us are better able than others to make music freely and instinctively, and that those who "have it" are not likely to be spoiled by formal instruction ~ on the contrary, a solid inborn talent is generally augmented, not negated, by good formal music education. At least, there seem to be many performers who combine the best of both worlds, so to speak, and I assume that such people had a natural instinctive feeling for music, and then when they had lessons, they were able to improve even more. I am certainly familiar with the type of musician or singer who has a great deal of training but shows little or no "feeling" in their performance. I figure that such people would simply have nothing to offer musically were it not for their formal education ~ I don't believe that they had some spark of creativity that their musical education extinguished. Of course, the younger the student, the greater your fear of "miseducation" ruining something ~ that's understandable. Since your daughter is already studying two musical disciplines (piano and dance) without harm to her natural rhythm and feeling, it may be safe to assume that adding lessons on that other stringed instrument won't hurt her. Are you familar with the Suzuki method? I don't know a whole lot about it, but it seems to be an approach to the violin that works very well (especially with very young children) and develops the student's "natural" musicality first, before getting into the "nuts and bolts" of reading the dots, etc., and moving on from "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" to serious classical compositions. If you find a good Suzuki teacher, that might satisfy Mom's desire for "violin" formality without endangering the young student's personal musicality. If you have friends (playing partners) who play the fiddle according to the tradition you know best, be sure that your daughter at least gets to listen in, and has the chance to try her hand at session-participation, if and when she wants to. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: PoppaGator Date: 12 Feb 08 - 07:43 PM I would be very skeptical of a music teacher who discourages a student from "learning by ear." Certainly there should be room for as broad and deep an awareness of music as the student can possibly develop, at every stage of a musical education. Without knowing the person or circumstances, I would hazard a guess that job-security might be an issue here, and the teacher's own interests may be promoted at the expense of the student's. Perhaps that's a bit harsh, and even if it's true it may be unconscious and inintentional, but it's something to consider... |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: katlaughing Date: 12 Feb 08 - 08:04 PM I learned violin, paper-trained from age eight, but heard my dad fiddle all of my life. I have sung and played by ear all of my life and am very grateful for that. It is possible to fiddle and violin, but I think you need good models of both. I would encourage both, if you can find teachers who will work with you. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 12 Feb 08 - 08:08 PM In Scotland formal training has damaged, in my opinion, the ability to impart "blas"* into the music. In Cape Breton or Ireland the exact same tune may be played but it sounds much different and much more lively even when played at the same tempo. Written music is great for learning tunes but then the sheets should be thrown in the fire and the ear should rule. To try and play of a sheet is to clone everyone else, needed for an orchestra but terrible for folk music. * BLAS Gaelic for warmth/feeling/individual expression. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Jack Campin Date: 12 Feb 08 - 08:12 PM You are very unlikely to get anywhere very far in classical music these days if you can't play by ear. A teacher who discourages it is an incompetent liability. (And traditional music isn't the only way to learn to play by ear, either). What music is the kid particularly interested in? What music is played in the surrounding community? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: dick greenhaus Date: 12 Feb 08 - 08:16 PM Good technique, on any instrument, can be a huge help, no matter what you play. Most examples of classicly trained musicians playing folk badly is much more an indictment of their ear than of their training. I've worked with many violin-trained fiddlers who were superb fiddlers. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 12 Feb 08 - 09:01 PM Learning "blas" from a master: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clq2IgOUqm8&feature=related |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: katlaughing Date: 12 Feb 08 - 09:08 PM Most examples of classicly trained musicians playing folk badly is much more an indictment of their ear than of their training. I've worked with many violin-trained fiddlers who were superb fiddlers. Well said, Dick. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 12 Feb 08 - 09:27 PM In clarification, her piano teacher does teach a little by ear, but says my daughter is reluctant to sight-read, so she is pushing this area at this time in order to solidify. I feel that indicates she should move towards being a fiddler, rather than a violinist. Because she is an Irish dancer, she is surrounded by Irish tunes, and we listen to them at home. Certainly she is more familiar with Irish music than classical. What Sandy says about "blas" is precisely the area that concerns me. I have heard tunes played so stilted, and I have heard the same tune played full of life. I understand about some violinists "playing folk badly is much more an indictment of their ear than of their training", but is it not also about bowing techniques, ornamentation on tunes, regional styles, etc? Once classically trained "fiddlers" are in the classically trained mould, can they break that mould? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Melissa Date: 12 Feb 08 - 09:36 PM The best fiddler in this area started on violin..the early training certainly didn't damage him for fiddle when he decided to switch over. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Al no cookie Date: 12 Feb 08 - 09:59 PM OK, I'll weigh in here. It has been my experience that classically trained violinists can become quite good bluegrass and Irish fiddlers. The thing that seems to give them the most trouble is old time fiddling. With rare exceptions, they can't seem to get the "rhythm thing" going in old time, and their phraseology tends to be stiff and strained. Then, separately, there is the issue of being able to learn a tune by ear. I propose that learning by ear uses a completely different part of the brain than learning from paper. I distinctly remember being shown a tune on paper, and being able to play it OK until the paper was removed. Then I could not play it AT ALL! Then I just listened to the others who were playing, picked up the sense of the tune, and then learned it quickly, but from scratch, as though the original attempt from paper had never happened. There was an odd sensation of my mind totally shifting gears. Now, maybe this is peculiar to me, maybe not. I would like to hear whether or not others here have had that experience. Anyway, I think a person can learn both. But if learning from paper, you should just use it to get the sense of the tune, then throw away the paper, and doctor it up until it sounds good. The paper isn't the music. The music is the music. My two cents. Al |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 12 Feb 08 - 10:06 PM Fiddle permits you freedom. If you are GOOD - everyone tunes to you.
|
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Rowan Date: 12 Feb 08 - 11:19 PM The question invites generalisations that I'll try to avoid and just speak from observations from my environment. I have noticed that those who dance well, especially to tunes that may be unfamiliar melodically but with familiar rhythms, tend to pick up the lilt or swing in a tune rather quickly. Your daughter may (or may not) have shown this ability; she may yet be too young to have exhibited it. If she has, she may be already on the path to 'internalising' the music she hears and plays. Most formal music teaching requires students to learn intervals aurally and be able to reproduce them orally; your description seems to indicate that this is what's happening and I wouldn't be too concerned about where it might or might not be heading. Nine years old is an impressionable age (like most) and, at that age, I was just enjoying music and being able to sing. While my daughters (at that age) were learning instruments formally I regarded it as more important that they also "enjoyed" the activity. To this end I wasn't too fussed about missed practices and ensured they came to festivals and gigs and experienced other people enjoying playing and being actively involved in music; they're both dancers as it happens. This has had the effect of motivating both of them as players (piano for one and recorders for the other). Both can sight read reasonably well and they both have good ears but, as yet, neither plays by ear unless they're engaging in displacement activity. This occurs when they know they should be preparing for a particular event and they pull out my concertina or the fiddle or ukelele (they haven't yet bothered with the banjo but have expressed interest in the future) and spend time working tunes out by ear. I am confident that, one day, they'll do well on any instrument they choose. I did ask the recorder teacher if she could recommend any of the violin teachers in town but, describing my recorder players strengths, she said none of the violinists had the approach that my daughter required; I was confident she was levelling with me and I left it at that. There's time enough in the future for both of them to grow into whatever they want. But I'd probably suggest that, if they do want to get into fiddle, they seek advice on basic fingering and bowing techniques from both formal teachers as well as role-model practitioners. Cheers, Rowan |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Suzy T. Date: 12 Feb 08 - 11:29 PM Hi Shay, Here are my thoughts: 1. What does Shosi want to do? Does she have friends that play music, and does she want to be able to play with them? What kind of music does she love? 2. While it's not true that violinists can never "unlearn" the stiff classical thing, I will say from my own experience (violin from the age of 7, serious music school every Saturday from the age of 8 to 14) that it has taken decades (like 30 years!) to "unlearn". I had an old-school teacher who was terrifying and there was total concentration on "correctness". On the other hand, my sister Jane was one of the very first Suzuki-trained violinists in the United States (from the age of 5 - and she met and played for Mr. Suzuki himself) and while she never learned to read music very well, she was able to transition into fiddling easier, I think, and has always had a better attitude towards playing (less self-critical, more relaxed and playful). Elise Engelberg is an old-time fiddler who also teaches Suzuki violin, in San Francisco. You probably want someone on this side of the Bay, but I think you should give her a call and ask her what she recommends. She is a wonderful person and a terrific teacher, totally great with the kids. 415-431-0147. And of course there is also Bobbi Nikels. But most important, I would think, would be to have it be some kind of music that Shosi likes and wants to play FOR FUN. And "fun" is the operative word. That's the part of playing music that is SO important for kids. Actually for people of any age. Myself, I find classical way too demanding and feel like folk traditions are better for social interaction. And, for me, the social part of the music has always been the primary attraction. All best, Suzy |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Ernest Date: 13 Feb 08 - 02:28 AM I presume your daughter is learning classical music on the piano, so she is getting a formal training already. Playing a different kind of music on a different kind of instrument sounds good to me - especially she dances to that kind of music already. But in the end I think she should deceide for herself. Good Luck Ernest |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: s&r Date: 13 Feb 08 - 03:54 AM Volgadon misses the point that Eliza Carthy grew up in a folk household (wherever she was trained) and was probably pushed in a pram by the likes of Dave Swarbrick. She's a fine musician from a musical family. Fiddle or violin means less than good or bad teacher. Find the best teacher for your kids (not necessarily the best qualified, nor the most expensive) and ignore the critical prattle of others. Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: BanjoRay Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:00 AM For me, Rayna Gellert is a superb example. She was exposed at an early age to Old Time fiddle and banjo by her father Dan Gellert and his music friends, and went on to study classical violin. She is now a brilliant soulful old time fiddle player (check out Uncle Earl or her solo work) who unlike many OT fiddlers also has excellent technique. If you've got it in you, training's not going to stamp it out. Ray |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Volgadon Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:07 AM "Volgadon misses the point that Eliza Carthy grew up in a folk household (wherever she was trained) and was probably pushed in a pram by the likes of Dave Swarbrick. She's a fine musician from a musical family." What I was saying is that I don't think her playing suffered from classical training, because she brought something to the music. That's what is important, to love the music, to put your heart into it and then it won't matter what style you play. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Volgadon? Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:10 AM BTW, what was the melodeon player's name, the one who often acoompanied Bert Lloyd and would play Paganini as a warm up? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Folkiedave Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:36 AM It was a concerttina and it was Alf Edwards. If I as a non-player might add something too. First of all IMHO you have cracked the hardest part - getting your child to take an interest in music and to practice. Our morris team has a classically-trained violinist of rare quality - she had a seat in a major world orchestra - playing with us occasionally. She does things she doesn't normally do - these are: Plays standind up Plays on her own Plays without the dots Plays outside. And she says they are all equally difficult to crack so to speak. Sam Sweeney of Kerfuffle is classically trained and Catriona McDonald kept her folk-fiddling a secret whilst studying voice at University.Joe Broughton (Albion Band) teaches classical fiddle at the Birmingham Conservatoire and I believe teaches Sam. There is a solution of course - let her learn an instrument that doesn't have a classical equivalent, melodeon/uillean pipes come to mind!! |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:52 AM In response to Melissa, someway back up the thread. Even top violinists refer to their instrument as a fiddle, but fiddlers in trad music get very annoyed when called violinists. I'm not a violinist and I don't play the violin. I am a fiddler and I play the fiddle. There is a difference and it does matter. Because I play traditional music, I need the technique to play that music in that style. This technique overlaps but is not the same as classical technique. You can do both, but many classically trained violinists just seem to learn a few add-on bits of technique. If the music isn't in your head and your heart, you won't be able to play it. If it is, you'll managed, in spite of having been taught the wrong language. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Newport Boy Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:53 AM I understand about some violinists "playing folk badly is much more an indictment of their ear than of their training", but is it not also about bowing techniques, ornamentation on tunes, regional styles, etc? Once classically trained "fiddlers" are in the classically trained mould, can they break that mould? As a poor instrumentalist myself, I hesitate to come into this discussion, but I can answer that question. I have a friend, now in his late 40s. As a child from 4 to 14, he was brought up in a classical-only household, his father a first-class player of piano, harpsichord, clarinet, viol-de-gamba. He learnt piano and violin from top-class classical teachers, using formal methods and passing many exams. In his late teens and twenties, he rebelled against classical and tried guitar on pop and various ethnic music. He then went back to the violin and tried jazz. When he had children, he decided to settle down, and in his 30's did a music degree, specialising in violin. So, the musical education and instrumental teaching has given him an excellent technique and the ability to sight read any music. His adventures into pop and folk gave him the ability to pick up a tune by ear and to play with others. He learned to improvise from listening to and playing jazz, and playing baroque classical music. So, where is he now? He leads a small baroque orchestra and a baroque quartet (baroque fiddle), plays classical violin with a number of chamber groups, is lead fiddler (electric) and singer with a local pop group, plays a modern fiddle with an occasional jazz combo. With all this and some teaching, he manages to make a living. When we meet, he insists on me and my son singing and playing guitar, and blows us away with his fiddle accompaniment. He listens once to my Swarbrick tracks and repeats them with variations. All this is based on a superb technique (learned formally) and an excellent ear (by listening). (There may be a bit of natural ability there as well.) I think this is possibly the best way - if you listen and try "informal" music while learning classical technique, you have all the options open. I tried learning classical guitar technique after years of folk/blues playing, and it didn't work - I had too many "bad" habits. So, the answer to the question above is "YES". Why did it take me so long to say so!!! Phil |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Seamus Kennedy Date: 13 Feb 08 - 05:47 AM Two words: Sean Maguire. Seamus |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Meggly Date: 13 Feb 08 - 06:03 AM I felt compelled to add to this thread to offer the other side of someone transitioning from Classical to Folk. Everyone above seems to suggest that it is easy; I don't agree. And I don't think that it is easy to conclude that someone who doesn't find the transition easy doesn't have musical ability. I certainly consider myself to be musical. As an 8 year old I loved folk music, adored it, it was the be all and end all of music for me and I wanted to play the fiddle. The only way I could see of achieving that (using an 8 year old's reasoning) was to accept the offer of learning classical violin at school. Over the years the rigidity of the teaching format and complete indifference of the teacher ground all the enjoyment of music out of me. The final nail in the coffin was when, at the age of 14, I took my fairly well-honed ability to find the notes on the finger board and produce a good sound through bowing to a folk festival. I went to a workshop (not even a session) and I was not able to follow a note. My ear playing was non existant and imagining the looks of the other players I wished the ground would open up and swallow me. (I was a melodramatic 14 year old; but given teenage hormones, I don't suppose I was the only one.) I could play perfectly well a piece of music put in front of me on paper (and still can), but I didn't enjoy that. I gave up the violin and enjoyed 'Pulp' and other such 'Indi-pop' bands for a decade. So now (aged 30), I've bitten the bullet and have taken it up again; on my terms. I am going to a classical learners orchestra to further hone my technique, but am mainly concentrating on developing the ability to learn by ear; this is a struggle and is not as instantanious as you might think. But the biggest problem is spontaneity. In classical musician-ship you are taught that the man (he generally is a man) waving the batton at the front is, for you, the be all and end all of your life at that particular moment. What ever he does you follow even if it is wrong. You only follow what is on the page and you never deviate. Where as in folk music, there may be a band leader, but any ornamentation you try just adds to the otherwise simple fabric of the tune; and no one minds if you play a bum note. I am struggling to 'learn' oramentation because it can't be 'learned'. And I suppose that this is my essential point. You can learn to play classical music, you can't learn to play folk, it is a personal journey of growth that each individual must make on their own. The ultimate zen music! Some people mentioned Eliza Carthy further up the page; yes she may have learned classical music and this may have impacted on her folk playing, but she was allowed (or, I suppose, allowed her self) to fiddle arround as well, developing a feel for how to play folk simultaneously. So, I suppose my advice is, don't bank on it being that easy to make the transition at a later date. Maybe piano is enough classical teaching for now and learning any instrument using another technique (folk or Suzuki method) would certainly positively add to your childs all-round abilities. Of course you could always ask your child what they want, as many people above have suggested. Meg (now a less melodramtic adult & finally enjoying the journey (to borrow a stylistic tick from Charlotte) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 13 Feb 08 - 07:53 AM David Greenberg is one who did manage to master both the classic and folk idiom. In the second link you can watch him change over. http://www.cpo-live.com/main/biography.php?id=312 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_ZWWlGxRM |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Folkiedave Date: 13 Feb 08 - 08:03 AM And for anyone within reach of Sheffield there is the http://www.sheffieldfiddlers.org.uk/ |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: OldFolkie Date: 13 Feb 08 - 08:38 AM Just two pennorth in a slightly different direction.... Although I'm not a violin or fiddle player (I play guitar), having had classical piano lessons as a child for a year, I then rebelled, and went my own way playing paino by ear. When I took up the guitar, I started out being a self taught folk style player. Then I found I was in a rut, and couldn't get the guitar to do what I wanted it to. 'Thinking out of the box' and having listened to a friend who was a classically trained guitarist, but now plays folk and blues, I decided to try classical style, and bought a couple of 'teach yourself classical style'. I am not exaggerating when I say that it opened up a completely new vista. Suddenley, when playing folk, I could get the guitar to do those thiongs that I previously couldn't. Moral of story - it can definitley be of benefit to try both, and let them complement each other! Best wishes to your daughter - glad that soem of the younger generation are interested in keeping folk very much alive! |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,SallyM Date: 13 Feb 08 - 09:57 AM Just another two penniworth, this is an interesting thread. I used to play piano as a kid but could, and can still only play with 'the dots' in front of me, although my sightreading is pretty good I am lost without the dots. However fairly late in life, in my early 30s I discovered folk music and was luckily enough to live near someone who taught fiddle, her main passion is Donnegal fiddling style. She taught in a group situation, workshop style by learning the instrument though playing tunes without the music. It was a complete revelation to me, and I agree with an earlier post that I am convinced that you use a different part of the brain to learn in this way. I also find that tunes I have learnt by ear I have never ever forgotten. 15 years on and I am now an avid folk fiddle player mainly in the English style. I recently found myself getting more irritated by the complete dominance of classical music at the local Saturday Morning Music School my daughters were attending, and so offered to coordinate/facilitate a folk group. I have only being doing this for about 18 months now but it is very rewarding. I teach them a wide variety of popular folk tunes often played at sessions in our area in the same way I learnt them - and still do learn them - by ear. I get the impression that learning by ear comes very naturally to children and although at first they feel a bit unsure, they soon get the hang of it. I just hope they continue to retain this ability while they are still being taught their instruments in the conventional reading-the-dots-way. Time will tell. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 13 Feb 08 - 10:10 AM MacDuff, do you really think that your little daughter needs another challenge? Because if you do some reading, you will find that middle-class American girls in general are pressured too much. Be intelligent! Be talented! Be athletic! Be slim! She already has school, Irish dancing and piano. The Irish dance thing, with its long trips to competitions, is no easy road. Is she also doing a sport (soccer?) How much does she play? Does she hang out with friends, doing nothing? When does she get down on the floor and play with a baby? If she goes through a growth spurt, she needs extra sleep. Does she get it? As for fiddle-violin lessons, if you do it, make sure she has a teacher who knows how to do it right. Her body is young and her tendons, etc are tender. Avoid a self-trained person who unwittingly damages her vulnerable system. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Grab Date: 13 Feb 08 - 10:16 AM I'm another who quit classical violin aged 16 because I was bored with it, picked up folk fiddle aged 26, and was shocked to find how much fun it was. Frankly I was also disappointed in my parents (who were folkies of the campfire-song variety) not having told me that folk fiddle even existed when I was a kid, because if they had then I might not have quit the instrument. In between I learnt to play guitar, which gave me a solid basis for improvisation and playing by ear. Whichever way you go, initially you need to learn how to play notes to pitch, with correct bowing technique (ie. wrist action), with co-ordination between hands, and at suitable speed. Those are essential for both styles. After that, a classical player needs to be able to translate from page to fingers with a minimum of thought required. That's a separate skill. Or a folk fiddler needs to be able to translate from known tune to ornamented tune with "lift" as appropriate. That's a separate skill. Folk fiddle also uses slides which are almost never seen in classical music, and may allow for spontaneous harmonisation with the main melody which is totally verboten in classical - separate skills again. As separate skills, there's no reason you can't learn both paths. As Meg says, it's harder to learn when you're past 20, but that's just the nature of learning. They're separate though, and knowing one will not help you with the other. For getting the basic techniques right, I'd highly recommend a classical teacher or a folk teacher who has trained classical-wise. Classical schools have spent 400 years working out how to play the violin/fiddle with maximum speed, dexterity, efficiency and tone, so there really is no substitute. I have a friend who's been learning with a folk teacher, and whilst the "feel" in his playing has improved, his bowing action remains appalling and the resulting tone is dreadful - having seen his teacher's technique, I then realised why. This is only technique though - what you do with that technique is down to the individual musician. To be honest, most of fiddle playing comes down to imitation. You hear how someone else does it and think "that sounds good". Then when you find a similar bit in something you play, you can use the same ornamentation - if it works then great, if not then you don't do it next time round. If you're around Irish players and you're playing yourself, you pick it up. So I'd recommend giving her classical lessons and then drag her round the Irish sessions for fiddle playing, and she'll get the best of both worlds. And shoot the piano teacher. Or force the piano teacher to teach her honky-tonk piano, blues and jazz, and improvising around a chord progression. If the piano teacher can't (or won't) teach that, find one who can. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,irishenglish Date: 13 Feb 08 - 10:16 AM I would just add the name of Peter Knight to this discussion-definitely classically trained, but I know in his formative years he talked about going to see Irish fiddle players in London, and the effect that had on his playing. He more than anyone I can think of at the moment, has really merged those two styles quite well. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: katlaughing Date: 13 Feb 08 - 10:21 AM As they are getting it at such a young age, I am sure most of them will, Sally. Judging from my upbringing and that of my children and nieces, as well as my grandson. Most kids learn by ear before they see notes anyway, at least through nursery songs/lullabies/etc. As Seamus said, Sean Maguire and Sean Maguire in Full Flight. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Russ Date: 13 Feb 08 - 12:11 PM |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Russ Date: 13 Feb 08 - 12:15 PM This says it all. I always post this link in threads like this. http://www.stringsmagazine.com/issues/Strings102/masterclass_102.html Russ (Permanent GUEST) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,The Mole Catcher's Apprentice Date: 13 Feb 08 - 12:26 PM "Joe Broughton (Albion Band) teaches classical fiddle at the Birmingham Conservatoire" ummm..not according the Birmingham Conservatoire website he doesn't. Folk Fiddle - Joe Broughton (late of The Albion Band) Strings and Things At The Birmingham Conservatoire Charlotte (the view of The Conservatoire from Ma and Pa's piano stool) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: dick greenhaus Date: 13 Feb 08 - 01:44 PM I can't be sure, but I'm willing to bet that Jay Ungar and Aly Bain had some classical training. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,The Mole catcher's Apprentice Date: 13 Feb 08 - 01:56 PM according to the Aly Bain Wikipedia entry he learned his instrument from the old-time master Tom Anderson and left for the mainland in his early twenties, but that's about all I can find at the moment Tom Anderson and Aly and Phil Charlotte (up in the Highlands somewhere) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Jack Campin Date: 13 Feb 08 - 03:09 PM [where did my cookie go?] There hasn't been any real distinction between classical and folk fiddlers in Shetland for a hundred years. Violin/fiddle teachers have been the same people since Gideon Stove. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Folkiedave Date: 13 Feb 08 - 03:21 PM Sorry about - that Charlotte. Dave (who normally checks his facts meticulously) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 13 Feb 08 - 04:59 PM As the person who placed the original post, I am fascinated with all your perspectives. Know that my daughter is an all-round social child who loves all types of music. Her current faves are Girl Groups of the Sixties! Granted, Irish dance competitions take a great deal of commitment, but she really enjoys her dancing and performing. She also attends a school that has an Arts and Music focus. She loves her piano teacher, who is very skilled, understanding and does teach honky-tonk, folk tunes and a wide variety of other music. The teacher's focus currently is on sight reading because my daughter finds it much easier to listen and copy, as opposed to reading the music. As a non-sight reader myself, I know how important is this skill. Russ's link to the Strings Magazine article above was incredibly enlightening, putting much of the differences into a very clear perspective. Also, it is good to see your many examples of people who have successfully "crossed over". However, these are professional musicians who are extremely gifted. That's how we know about them. Thank you to all who shared their own personal stories. These angles are really helpful. I can see this thread will continue as it is such an interesting topic, but wanted to express my appreciation for your time and input. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,The Mole Catcher's Apprentice Date: 13 Feb 08 - 05:57 PM and we haven't even begun to discuss the Hardingfele style of fiddle playing ;-) Charlotte (up that fjord without a paddle) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Tootler Date: 13 Feb 08 - 06:28 PM My partner is American (we live in California) and wants our child to learn violin. I want her to learn fiddle. What instrument would she like to learn? Her wishes in this matter did not seem to me to have been articulated in your original post. Are you sure it is her that would like to learn fiddle/violin and not you and your partner? It is vital you are clear what she would like to learn. It may not be easy, but there is a rather good book called "The right instrument for your child" or something like that which looks at choice of instrument from all angles both musical and non musical. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 13 Feb 08 - 07:55 PM In the second sentence in my post, I made it clear that my daughter wants to learn another instrument. "She is quite musical, with good rhythm (a champion Irish dancer) and wants to learn another instrument." Her three cousins play fiddle, so fiddle/violin is first choice. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Artful Codger Date: 13 Feb 08 - 09:22 PM Classical training is the best way to learn the control necessary to play fiddle well. Most folk teachers will not teach proper technique, since they've never learned it--at least, not all of it. They are also more likely to emphasize repertoire rather than technique, or so my experience indicates. The result is that you'd be more likely to develop bad habits early which you may never overcome. Sure, to play fiddle, you need to augment what you learn through a classical approach, or rather, focus on different elements. But the more control you have over intonation, bowing, finger positions and ornamentation, the more easily you can adapt to whatever playing styles you wish to focus on. I don't believe there are "bad" habits you'd pick up from classical playing, particularly if you know early on you wish to play fiddle styles. Even if your teacher wants you to be able to stick faithfully to the notes, dynamics and exact phrasing, there's nothing to prevent you from also improvising, or picking up tunes by ear, or experimenting with alternative bowing patterns and so forth. Faithful reproduction ensures that you develop proper control over specific facets; it isn't a straight-jacket. I've taken up fiddle relatively late in life, and I'll never become more than a passable fiddler. But it was a no-brainer for me to choose whether to start with a folk or classical teacher. I know I can pick up most of what I need to know about folk fiddling just by listening to recordings: there's virtually nothing in the folk styles which doesn't exist in close form in classical technique. Hardly surprising, considering how much of the classical repertoire has grown out of folk forms. Not to mention that there's a wealth of fantastic stuff in the classical repertoire going way beyond the harmonic and melodic limitations inherent in most folk music. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: treewind Date: 14 Feb 08 - 03:58 AM "once someone is trained as a violinist, it is virtually impossible for most people to "unlearn", and play well in a traditional Irish style" That's rubbish, but it does raise the point that you have to spend some (a lot of) time learning to play folk styles. A classical training doesn't do any harm, but it's certainly not a replacement for many hours of listening to folk music, learning tunes, sitting in sessions, playing for dancers and generally learning the trade. Remarks like the above arise from the spectacle of violinists with no folk music experience sitting down in front of a book of jigs and reels, sight reading them note-perfect (but not sounding a bit like folk music) and declaring that folk music is easy. It's a shame that your daughter's teacher is actually discouraging her from learning by ear - that's a very useful skill. Ear training makes a better all round musician. Good violinists do not have a stiff rigid bowing hand and they have to play in many different musical styles. Learning to hold the instrument properly can't do any harm, neither can learning to read music. Next, we'll have poets and storytellers telling us that learning to read detracts from their art... Many jazz musicians have it all: they have terrific instrumental technique, they can sight read, jam along by ear, play in any key, improvise over chord changes and some even perform classical music. Having all those skills certainly doesn't make them worse jazzers. Anahata |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sorcha Date: 14 Feb 08 - 04:03 AM Well, it took me a long time to sound like a fidder, instead of a violinist playing fiddle tunes, but ask the people who've heard me. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Tootler Date: 14 Feb 08 - 03:08 PM Guest MacDuff, I suggest you reread your own post In the second sentence in my post, I made it clear that my daughter wants to learn another instrument. "She is quite musical, with good rhythm (a champion Irish dancer) and wants to learn another instrument." I agree you said that but you did not say Her three cousins play fiddle, so fiddle/violin is first choice. What you did say was ... My partner is American (we live in California) and wants our child to learn violin. I want her to learn fiddle. From which it is perfectly possible to make the inference the choice of violin/fiddle was yours and your partners not hers. As a parent (of grown up daughters) myself I was simply sounding a warning. I would really rather have PM'd you on this, but as you are posting as a guest I cannot. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 14 Feb 08 - 04:09 PM check out ZOE CONNOLLY.She is on my space,Ithink she does both. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: peregrina Date: 14 Feb 08 - 04:16 PM I think you mean Zoe Conway, no? yes definitely plays both. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 14 Feb 08 - 04:30 PM yes my apologies,Zoe Conway. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: s&r Date: 14 Feb 08 - 06:13 PM From Joe Broughton's website "Joe studied at the Birmingham Conservatoire where in 1997 he won the prestigious Conservatoire Composition Prize. He now teaches Folk Music and composition there. The Conservatoire Folk Ensemble has now become a gigging entity in its own right. The Birmingham Conservatoire made Joe an honorary member in 2003, which carries the designation HonBC." Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Rowan Date: 14 Feb 08 - 08:37 PM In clarification, her piano teacher does teach a little by ear, but says my daughter is reluctant to sight-read, so she is pushing this area at this time in order to solidify. From your posts, it sounds like your daughter already has the ability to "listen" and this would be strengthened if she's doing well in competition Irish dancing. With technical basics taught well by a classically trained teacher who is on the girl's wavelength and continued exposure to sessions and live fiddlers, I reckon she'd be well ahead of most of us at 15. So long as she continues to find it all a pleasant experience. Cheers, Rowan |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sorcha Date: 14 Feb 08 - 09:03 PM Eugene O'Donnel. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:25 AM "Classical training is the best way to learn the control necessary to play fiddle well" "I'll never become more than a passable fiddler" Could there be a connection? If Artful Codger had had lessons from a traditional fiddle teacher rather than a classical teacher, would he/she have been a better fiddler? If someone wants to learn to cook Indian food, they don't go to someone who will teach Greek cookery and then think they will be able to cook Indian food - or at least not without 'converting'. Why learn technique which, while related to what you want to learn, differs so much that you will need to re-learn in order to play in the style you actually want to play? Some people can do it (but why add an extra barrier between you and the music) and some people can't. I suspect that more can't than can, but that may be because those who can just sound like good fiddlers so their background is invisible, but those who can't just sound like classical fiddlers who are well out of their depth. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Grab Date: 15 Feb 08 - 08:32 AM Could there be a connection? If Artful Codger had had lessons from a traditional fiddle teacher rather than a classical teacher, would he/she have been a better fiddler? No and no, because the techniques are (or should be) identical. It's what you do with those techniques that makes it classical or folk. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 15 Feb 08 - 09:10 AM The techniques are not identical. The use of the bow, and the types and use of ornamentation are not the same. Just as all traditional fiddling is not the same. Some styles are 'more' classical, some not. If anything, baroque music has more to offer than modern classical - but many violin teachers offer a one size fits all approach to their own music- students learning three pieces for an exam will be taught the same technique for all three, even if one is 18th, one 19th and one 20th century. There are areas of overlap, but there are differences, and the main one is the technique used to give the music the right feel for the dance. Just listen to a classical player trying to play a jig. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:13 AM This thread has been a great discussion but has resolved little for MacDuff except agreement to disagree. There is no doubt in my mind that classical training has some benefit but also some liabilities to a person wanting to play in the folk ideom. If I wanted to learn to drive a truck I would perhaps learn better from a truckdriver than from a racecar driver even though the skill and ability to drive may be much higher with the racer. Best to learn from those do what you want to achieve! |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:29 AM The techniques are Identical.The use of the bow is the same,ornamentation is very similiar,an exception being the amount of Vibrato used[that too can vary in different types of classical music. [Just listen to a classical player trying to play a jig.]end of quote.Sean Maguire ,ZoeConway,PaddyGlackin,MattCrannitchall stated off as classical players,but through the absorption by listening,can play jigs very well. Basroque is classical music. [There are areas of overlap, but there are differences, and the main one is the technique used to give the music the right feel for the dance].endof quote. there is no difference in technique[for example you still have to keep the bow straight,and be able to have good control over both long and short bows for both styles].your intonation has to be good for both.[for a few tunes it is necessary to play in 3rd or even 5th position,a good classical left hand hold allows you to do this] no its not a question of differing technique,its a question of absorbing style,before a classical player can play traditional music he /she needs to have listened to a lot of it. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,The Mole Catcher's Apprenticr Date: 15 Feb 08 - 11:14 AM "No and no, because the techniques are (or should be) identical. It's what you do with those techniques that makes it classical or folk" Exactly, there it is, perfectly summed up. The same goes for piano...classical and popular, it's what I do with my technique that makes the music what it is, and the composers of course, whether it be Mozart or Berlin. "except agreement to disagree" sounds like most of the threads on Mudcat ". He (Joe Broughton) now teaches Folk Music and composition there (the Birmingham Conservatoire) according to the Birmingham Conservatoire website Folk Fiddle - Joe Broughton Strings and Things Composition Tutor- Joe Broughton Composition Charlotte (the view from Ma and Pa's piano stool) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:27 PM Many photos of old players (late 19th, early 20th century) show them holding the bow some way up from the frog. Ever seen a classical player holding it like that? Why do you think that is? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,te Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:30 PM Because they were self-taught? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: PoppaGator Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:33 PM I would suppose that holding the instrument against one's chest, rather than under the chin, means that the player is not classically trained... |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:49 PM For the record, none of the Irish fiddlers cited by Dick Miles started off as 'classical players'. Each had begun learning traditional fiddle music before they took up classical lessons. And, also for the record, Seán preferred McGuire as his surname and Matt's second name is Cranitch (with 1 'n'). |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Al Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:51 PM Anyone who doesn't have a tin ear can listen to a fiddler for a few moments and tell, with 99% certainty, whether or not they were classically trained. So, there most certainly is a difference. Some people like that classical sound. Others do not. So, à chacun son goût. Al |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:54 PM But not ALL old fiddle players do that. Stephane Grappelli[jazz]says in his book he favoured the classical hold,yet he was a Jazz player. guest cg.you are[imo]misinformed. holding it against the chest,just makes it easier for singing with,but it means certain tunes[ someScott Skinner,Contradiction reel, the Dawn,]cant be played in the keys they are generally played in. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Don Firth Date: 15 Feb 08 - 02:47 PM When I started taking some voice lessons, I was warned by folkie friends that this would completely ruin me for singing folk songs. They would make me sound like an opera singer. Oh, horrors!! But I knew what I wanted to learn. I went ahead and did it anyway. In fact, I took lessons from an retired Metropolitan Opera soprano. And, I might add, I told Mrs. Bianchi what my musical interests were and she said "fine!" She taught me correct diaphragmatic breathing, voice placement, had me singing lots of vocal exercises, she even had me singing a few art songs—for certain aspects of vocal technique. And then we started working on folk songs. I took lessons from her for a couple of years. Then, I took some lessons from a male singier who had the same kind of voice I did—bass—just to get a different approach. Among other things, he had me bring my guitar to the lessons and we worked on songs that I was actually singing. Lots of times Mr. Street would stop me in mid-song and say "What does that line mean?" He would ask me to explain it to him in my own words. Now, he knew perfectly well what it meant. He just wanted to make sure that I knew what it meant, so I wouldn't just be singing the song by rote memory (which I hear a lot of folk singers doing). And he was a bear when it came to enunciation. "That song tells a story, and it's important that your audience hears the words clearly." From Mrs. Bianchi, I learned solid vocal technique that has allowed me to sing a lot, while at the same time, keeping my voice healthy and strong. Still at it, and I'm 76 years old. From Mr. Street, I learned how to put a song across to an audience. And I do not sound like an opera singer. I am "paper trained" on classical guitar. I can read for the guitar, and I can play some Tarrega, Sor, Carulli, Villa-Lobos, several transcribed lute pieces, a little Bach, and even a bit of flamenco. But this doesn't stop me from simple strumming, alternate-bass picking, jamming along with bluegrassers, or just generally messing around. Interestingly enough, regarding one of the people, one of this area's more prominent folk singers, who predicted complete disaster if I took lessons, especially classical lessons. He told me he couldn't read music and had learned his guitar chords out of a book of chord diagrams. I later learned from his sister that when he was younger, he had taken classical violin lessons for nine years and he could read music very well. I have heard classically trained musicians who are quite stiff. But they're also stiff when they play classical music. But I have also heard classically trained musician who can really let 'er rip! It depends less on whether or not a person has had classical lesson and more on just what kind of person they are. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:17 PM Geoff Wallis. Sean McGuire 1927 - 2007 By Ronan Nolan In the 1950s and 1960s, when the music of Coleman and Morrison seemed to a new generation to have been there forever, hearing Sean McGuire playing his fiddle on Radio Eireann had an uplifting effect. Sean Stephen Maguire (he later changed his name) was born in Belfast on December 26, 1927, into a musical family. His father, John, played piccolo, concert flute, whistle and fiddle. His brother Jim, who passed away in early 2002, was highly thought of as a fiddle player. The two brothers recorded an album together in 1982. At the age of 12 Sean began his fiddle playing. His two teachers were Professor George Vincent, from whom he learned fingering, and Madame May Nesbitt, who taught him his bowing technique. As a teenager he was first violinist with the Belfast Youth Orchestra and he turned down an invitation to join the Belfast Symphony Orchestra because he felt more at home playing traditional music. "I decided to devote my techniques to the furtherance and promotion of my culture," he once said. At the age of 15 he broadcast on BBC Overseas Radio. At 22 he won the gold medal at the All Ireland Oireachtas Fiddle Championship, scoring 100% from the four judges. ...he was born sean maguire. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:21 PM No, Dick, You're wrong, Seán had already received lessons from his father before he was sent for formal tuition. And, for the record, I wrote 'Seán preferred McGuire as his surname'. I had the pleasure of meeting him and asked him which version of his name he used, he was adamant that it was 'McGuire' and signed a copy of one of his CDs using that form to verify the fact. I think we should all bow by Seán's choice. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:31 PM ... and I meant to write 'bow to Seán's choice' ... apologies. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:12 PM . I know players who have started off as classical musicians and have ended up as good traditional players. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Artful Codger Date: 15 Feb 08 - 08:51 PM Ahem, the reason I won't become a good fiddler is NOT because I'm taking the classical route, but rather because I have personal impediments (like having broken both hands many years ago) and I didn't start on the instrument till quite late in life. But thanks for jumping to the wrong conclusion there. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:41 AM Willie Taylor wasn't a bad fiddler and his hands were a real mess, the missing finger was only part of it. And what defines a good fiddler? The ability to make people get up and dance? or knowing half a dozen styles of vibrato and being able to describe the difference between staccato and spiccato? Or even spell staccato and spiccato? Artful Codger, if your head and heart are in the music and you have been taught the right technique, you will be good, even if you can't do everything you would like to because of physical problems. Think of it in song terms. Which would you rather hear, someone who understands what they are singing, knows the culture and context of the song and can communicate the soul of the song to the audience, but who hasn't got a great voice, or someone with a beautiful voice and vocal technique who might as well be singing a shopping list for all the meaning there is in? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: goatfell Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:41 AM well to me a Violin and a fiddle is the same so they are both the same to a person who likes classical it's a violin and to a person that likes ie folk/country music it's a fiddle. same instrument different names that's all. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 16 Feb 08 - 10:48 AM The basic instrument is the same. The set-up (bridge height, curve, string type) may be different. Many players of traditional music prefer a flatter bridge. By the way - the (possible) reason why the habit of holding the bow a couple of inches up from the frog developed. Compare the length of a modern bow, the average length of a baroque bow and the playing length of a modern bow held traditional style. Try it and see how it affects the feel of the bow. (Unfortunately some 'classically' trained players are unable to make a baroque bow work for them. I have a problem in terminology because 'classical' also refers to a particular period, and someone who has learned the correct technique for that era will have no problem.) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: katlaughing Date: 16 Feb 08 - 11:03 AM One thing that bothers me, which I see from time to time, is an assumption that a person who was taught to play violin, in orchestra, etc., has no feeling for the music. As though they are all just automatons. That is erroneous...just as there can be a feeling of great camaraderie etc. in a session when everyone joins in and the bits go together so well, so can that feeling be felt when a symphony orchestra joins together to express something beautiful, powerful, moving, etc. There are some violinists who are so passionate you will see them sway, sit taller, or stand taller if they are a soloist, along with the movement of the music, their whole bodies are into it as well as their spirit and mind. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST Date: 16 Feb 08 - 01:02 PM I agree. I wouldn't (and didn't) say that classical players have no feeling for the music. To play any kind of music successfully you have to have a feeling for and understanding of that sort of music, which means learning and using the right technique for the music, whether it's traditional, jazz, early, 19th century orchestral, heavy metal - whatever. Unfortuntely some people, usually classical trained, believe either that their technique is right for every kind of music, or that classical technique is some sort of basis that everyone has to have and that to play other style you have to learn classical first and then convert. It is possible to play successfully in more than one style - provided you have to necessary understanding and technique. But if you want to play traditional music,why spend years learning to play a style of music you don't want to play,only to have to convert later. If the child wants to learn traditional fiddle, then let her learn that.
|
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 16 Feb 08 - 01:30 PM Captain Birdseye wrote: 'I know players who have started off as classical musicians and have ended up as good traditional players.' OK, name some! (I'm not disagreeing with you, but just interested in your view.) |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Al Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:11 PM e.g. Erynn Marshall, Rayna Gellert, Earl Johnson |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Al Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:19 PM I believe it was Doc Watson who once said that the accumulation of bad techniques and your limitations are what ultimately give you your "style". I must say that most average people not steeped in the music seem to react with more interest to fiddlers who were classically trained. I suspect it's because it gives them something familiar to recognize. When faced with a funky fiddler with lots of "style" but not any classical training, those people just don't quite know what to make of it. It sounds foreign to them. Not homogenized enough to dial into. Of course, after you've become immersed in the genre a while, things will sound different to your ear. Al |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:51 PM Al, good examples, but I'm specifically interested in Irish musicians, as Dick was too when he made his posting. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 16 Feb 08 - 03:30 PM I was referring to traditional musicians generally[Not specifically Irish]. The people that came to my mind were Ed Caines[English fiddle player. Lizzie Holmes.Geoff Dixon.Liam Kenneally[Local to West Cork,all good players] I am fairly sure[But not 100 per cent]that Tom MCconville,and Micheal Plunkett [Rakes]were too. I have also met at least another three[over my years on the folk circuit],whose names I cant recall, who were[ you will just have to take my word for it]. Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis - PM Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:51 PM Al, good examples, but I'm specifically interested in Irish musicians, as Dick was too when he made his posting. Geoff ,check my posts again. you are wrong, I was talking about traditional players.where did I mention that I was talking exclusively about Irish traditional players. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 16 Feb 08 - 03:35 PM Matt Cranitch: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Cranitch is something of a renaissance man in the realm of Irish traditional music: player, scholar, exponent, teacher, writer. With a long history of tunes under his belt, having played with Na Filí, Any Old Time, and currently Sliabh Notes, Matt is also the author of The Irish Fiddle Book, one of the most useful and comprehensive instructional texts available to beginning students of the music. It was that book that got me on the right path with my bowing after some initial misadventures, and that I recommend to all of my serious students now. It's a rare combination -- someone who's able to both play the music with great skill and swing, and someone who's able to analyze as a scholar. A Senior Research Scholar for the past year, with support from the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences, Matt is at work on a dissertation looking at the music of his beloved Sliabh Luachra in greater detail. We met at his home in County Cork on a lovely afternoon this past winter. Matt Cranitch: I grew up in the little village of Rathduff in County Cork, midway between Cork City and Mallow. Both my parents were teachers and taught in the local primary school, or national school, so they taught me at some stage. My father Mícheál played the accordion and the fiddle and sang a bit as well. My mother Kathleen sang. And my grandfather on my father's side, whose name was also Matt, was a melodeon player and a stepdancer. Now I never remember him playing, as he died when I was too young, but certainly I was aware that this was the case. When I was maybe seven my parents got me a fiddle and the plan was that my father would teach me. But the lessons tended to take the form that he'd play the fiddle and have me sit down and listen to him; so they decided to send me to the Cork School of Music instead. I went there when I was eight to learn what's called classical violin, and I continued with that and playing traditional music at home, both those activities in parallel. By my mid-teens I opted for the traditional playing and gave up the classical lessons. So that would have been my early development. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Geoff Wallis Date: 16 Feb 08 - 03:38 PM Dick, Your posting of the 15th Feb, 10.29am, specifically referred to four Irish traditional fiddlers and nobody of any other nationality. What is one supposed to assume? |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:50 PM never make assumptions. what is important, is that classical musicians ,listen to a lot of traditional music. it may take some considerable time before they are able to play it well ,but it can be done. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Don Firth Date: 16 Feb 08 - 05:37 PM A couple of points I would quibble with—well, there are lots of points here that I would quibble with, but frankly, I don't have the time. There is a large quantity of misinformation being promulgated here by non-classically trained musicians about classically trained musicians, what they think, what they can do and can't do (mostly about what they can't do) that reveals a lot of ignorance about classical musicians, classical music, and classical training. One small point that illustrates some of this ignorance. Someone up-thread said, "It seems to me that fiddlers don't care whether you call their fiddle a Violin...violinists curl up their nose if you call theirs a Fiddle." Not so! Most classical violinists I have met refer to their violins as "fiddles." And I heard an interview on television some time ago with Itzhak Perlman and Pinchas Zukerman. I don't know what kind of violin Zukerman had, but Perlman had a 1743 Guarneri del Gesu (worth millions!), and both of them kept referring to their instruments as "fiddles." I've heard Isaac Stern do the same thing. Also Henry Siegel, who was concertmaster of the Seattle Symphony Orchestra for many years. So, where did that idea come from? Out of someone's imagination, I think! And another misconception. ". . . if you want to play traditional music, why spend years learning to play a style of music you don't want to play, only to have to convert later[?]" You don't have to "spend years." Whether instrument or voice, a few months' classical lessons will get you off to a good start, and you will avoid the mistakes, dead ends, and bad habits you'll invariably pick up while trying to teach yourself—or learn from some teacher who was self-taught. Taking a few singing lessons (a couple of months, perhaps) can make singing a whole lot easier and save you from developing vocal habits that will eventually wreck your singing voice. And, no, it won't make you sound like an opera singer! Believe me, aspiring opera singers wish it was that easy. For them, they do have to study for years, and a lot of them still don't make it. Not everyone has the voice for opera. Same thing for any musical instrument. A few months' classical lessons in the beginning can save you a whole lot of grief later on. The teacher is not teaching you to "play classical music." The teacher is teaching you an efficient way of playing the instrument. The kind of music you play on that instrument—and your "style" (which is an individual thing) is up to you. By the way, speaking of Doc Watson, I took in a workshop he gave at the 1964 Berkeley Folk Festival. When he was talking about flat-picking fiddle tunes, someone asked him how he could play them so fast and so cleanly. Doc responded, "Well, I practice scales for at least a half an hour a day." Several people gasped in horror. "Scales!!" Later, when Doc as talking about fingerpicking, as he tried to explain it, he said, "It's like playing arpeggios." Then he grinned and said, "Of course, I'm not supposed to know words like that!" Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: The Sandman Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:04 PM Don ,thanks a good post. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Melissa Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:18 PM It's handy for you to know more about MY observations than I do..thanks for breaking me of the illusion that I am the one walking in my shoes. I do appreciate that a lot, Don. Remind me to thank you later.. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,Al no cookie Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:37 PM Ah, a few months worth of standard classical lessons when first getting started. That sounds like a great idea to me. Maybe even a few after playing for 30 years, sort of like a tune-up. Al |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Don Firth Date: 16 Feb 08 - 08:36 PM Not a bad idea, Al. George Street, one of the voice teachers I mentioned above, told me that he knew a violin teacher in New York who worked only with concert artists. And he charged mucho bucks! From time to time, classical musicians and singers find that something isn't working right, and they will look up one of their old teachers or someone like the fellow Mr. Street knew. For a "tune-up!" Mr. Street said that he asked this fellow, "Just what can you teach a person like Jascha Heifetz or Yehudi Menuhin?" "Lesson One," the man answered. "When something goes wrong with a virtuoso's playing, invariably it is something very basic. Perhaps it's the way they hold the bow, or it could be the position of their left hand, or something to do with fingering. But whatever it is, it's something so simple that even they forgot it, and miss it when trying to analyse their own playing. They think it has to be something far more drastic than that. But it's drastic enough! Usually a couple of lessons and some concentrated practice, and they're back on track again." Whenever I start having problems vocally, I pull out the notebook I kept when taking voice lesson and go through the early notes and exercises. Or with the guitar, I pull out Aaron Shearer's Classic Guitar Technique, Volume I. That usually does it. If it doesn't, I go take a few lessons. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Artful Codger Date: 17 Feb 08 - 03:48 AM c.g.: Are those the only choices I get? Scylla and Charybdis? :-} I find bad singers and lifeless singers both difficult to listen to, though the latter less so. I have some fiddle records that I listen to as a source of tunes and stylistic pointers, but cannot really enjoy, because the scraping, rhythmic errors and bad intonation make my toes curl. 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. Classical training focuses on technique more than repertoire; folk training generally does the reverse. Even if you only intend to play folk, you're likely to develop more control and proficiency if you start with a classical approach. As for the dreaded "conversion", it's easily avoided. My formal study is classical; my recreational playing is fiddle tunes. Keep in mind that folk music comes from folk--people who, by and large, had little formal musical training of any sort. It's not rocket science--its characteristics are relatively easy to recognize and replicate, and it tends to be less demanding or diverse than the classical repertoire. If a violinist has a real feel for the music, there is no reason why he can't play it as well as--or even better than--a folk-trained fiddler. And if a person doesn't have that feel, it doesn't matter what approach he takes. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 17 Feb 08 - 04:45 AM 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. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,c.g. Date: 17 Feb 08 - 04:48 AM Er - probably worth saying. I've seen a lot of discussion like this on this and other forums. All too often they descend into rudeness and worse. Thank you everyone for your reasoned and thoughtful responses |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 19 Feb 08 - 08:20 PM Yes, thank you all sincerely for your various and so interesting viewpoints. You have given me much to ponder. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Rowan Date: 19 Feb 08 - 10:56 PM And it's now a round 100 |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Grab Date: 20 Feb 08 - 01:16 PM The techniques are not identical. The use of the bow, and the types and use of ornamentation are not the same. That's not technique. Technique covers being able to pitch notes accurately with your left hand, to bow cleanly with your right hand with a maximum of efficiency, to choose bow position on the strings for various tones, and to coordinate the movement of both hands accurately. That's all. (OK, vibrato as well, but that's rarely an issue for folk.) And that's what classical teachers know best how to teach, because that's all they do for the first 2-3 grades. Everything else after that is style. And that's where you get folk-specific - see earlier posts. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: Don Firth Date: 20 Feb 08 - 02:21 PM Well put, sir! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: John Hardly Date: 20 Feb 08 - 02:48 PM If one learns to play by ear, one will be FAR less likely to ever learn to sight read. If one learns to sight read, it is less likely that one will learn to play by ear. The question becomes which of the two above is easier to go against? I think it's probably easier for a sight reader to learn to play by ear than the other way around. Given that, it's not a bad idea for a teacher to suggest that a child not first learn to play by ear. Why? ...because the very best option would be to be able to do both equally well. I know a few people (including the best fiddler I've played with) who, as youngsters, faked their way through orchestra because they could mimic well (by ear). But when push came to shove, the door finally slammed on them when they REALLY needed to be able to sight read. |
|
Subject: RE: Learning violin versus learning fiddle From: GUEST,MacDuff Date: 22 Feb 08 - 01:43 PM Adding to the conversation: This from a friend sent to me privately: My training is classical and I believe that it has created a solid technical foundation for playing the violin efficiently and understanding sound production. Classical posture is based around getting the most out of one's arm and fingers without compromising the physical structure of the body thus and avoiding injury. The Suzuki method of learning violin is also greatly focused on training the ear, a skill essential to fiddle playing (my background). As far as switching from classical style to a folk idiom, I don't believe anything can not be unlearned, but there are some notable different physical differences in playing the instrument. The difference stylistically between Irish and classical music is huge. Sound production, phrasing and the 'swing' of Irish music stand out the most to me. I do not believe it is impossible to be a great Irish fiddler and come from a classical background, but it takes a serious immersion in the music to understand the differences and be able to control their production. It also depends greatly on the desired sound of the folk player a classical violinist is trying to imitate and learn from. Example: Kevin Burke was trained classically and he sounds like it, smooth articulate and very controlled playing, but ultimately an amazing musician in the Irish idiom. A player like Paddy Canny however, no classical training and his sound is unique, and I know from my background I could never play like him. I guess what I am trying to say is that I believe it is possible to learn a folk idiom from a classical background and understand and communicate it's intricacies, it is not so easy however to sound like a self taught or folk schooled fiddler when coming from a classical background. The best approach for your daughter I believe depends on what she wants to become. Making this change has been a big part of my development and I'm no way near to mastering it, but I've put a lot of time into it and had a lot of instruction as well. I'd be happy to talk with your daughter's mother more about my personal efforts and struggles if she would find it at all helpful. Best of luck with whichever avenue is pursued. |
| Share Thread: |