Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST,Phil at work
Date: 27 Jan 14 - 10:05 AM

Brian P: the parameters have been set very narrow, which always makes for a better challenge

I'll say it's a challenge. I know Sweet William & Lady Marget (fairly well), but not Barbara Allen; I know When I Was In My Prime and Let No Man Steal Your Thyme (inside out), but not Seeds of Love. And whenever I think of Claudy Banks it keeps turning into Warlike Seamen. And I can't play any of the tunes as written (I'll have to transcribe & transpose).

All in all, this could take some time!

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: maeve
Date: 27 Jan 14 - 09:29 AM

Thanks for your reply, Bert. I'm going to have to leave singing behind, I think, but appreciate your reply.

Noreen, thank you for starting the thread. I appreciate you bringing the project to the attention of those of us who find inclusive ideas a fun challenge.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 14 - 03:42 AM

"We friends again Jim?"
Sincerely hope so Bert - life's too short
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 25 Jan 14 - 09:07 PM

Hi, Matt Milton. Thanks for your link to the YouTube. (It was three days ago. I've been busy.) I have a solution to the arms problem. Listen with eyes closed or downcast.

It's fine, interesting singing in a beautiful setting.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 11:04 PM

Not me Maeve, I'm nowhere good enough. You go for it and I'll cheer for you.

We friends again Jim?

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: maeve
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 04:04 PM

So...which of you plan to send in an offering?

:)

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 03:35 PM

Wot - me worry?

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 03:24 PM

Don't worry about it Jim.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 01:36 PM

I refuse to let that stop me enjoying all the other music that I love

Vic,

I'm sorry, but you've lost me here. Why would anyone do otherwise, ever? Musical genres are a useful way to help us understand things, but beyond that...

You like what you like.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 01:17 PM

Don't get your point Bert - nothing there contradicts the points I have always made
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 01:02 PM

Jim, Maybe somebody usurped your cookie for the post on 24 Jan 14 - 03:39 AM.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Vic Smith
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 07:52 AM

Amongst my many musical loves:-
Jeannie Robertson - "My Son David"
Vaughan Williams - "Fantasia on 'Greensleeves'"
Jali Sherrifo Konteh (kora) - "Kedo"
Seamus Ennis (uillean pipes) - "The Gold Ring"
Chuck Berry - "Roll Over Beethoven"
Davy Stewart - "The Dowie Dens o' Yarrow"
Bob Marley - "War"
Yann-Fañch Kemener - "Skolvan"
Márta Sebestyén - "Szerelem Szerelem"
J. S. Bach - "Brandenburg Concerto No. 6"

My heart and soul belong to traditional song and music but I refuse to let that stop me enjoying all the other music that I love.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: C Stuart Cook
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 07:28 AM

The explosion/wanderings/redirections/confusions that threads can take never fail to amaze me.

To me it just seems there is an opportunity for anyone to come up with their own interpretations of a common starting point. From then on we get into the realms of the folk process as we can see by comparing the efforts posted so far. For me the Barbara Allen of Stick In The Wheel on Soundcloud was an absolute revelation. If that was what Sharp had heard on his bike travels I think he'd have been in raptures.

Whatever the snipes/jeers/critisms are It was worth it all for me, just for that one track.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 06:41 AM

"And how "Roll Over Beethoven" came into this conversation I also can't imagine,"
I may be confusing you with our anonymous and insulting guest - if I have, I apologise, though I believe there are similarities in your attitude.
Every time a project like this one is announced it is greeted by hordes of singer/songwriters chanting "me-me-me"
In general, their output, whatever its merits, bears no relation whatsoever to to the material collected by Sharp or his colleagues and it occupies a different position on our cultural spectrum.
This intrusion has managed to nause up our club scene so that those of us wishing to listen and perform folk song have to tip-toe through a minefield before we attend an event bearing the label "folk".
Despite claims to the contrary, there is no general public understanding of the term - there centainly isn't a universally accepted consensus, hence our failure to catch their attention and win support for our music.
"21st century....." refers, for me, to how the music Sharp et al collected is continuing to be performed in the spirit of those who passed it on to him and his colleagues - not how Vaughan Williams, Delius, Rod Stewart... or any other experimentalist or borrower chooses to use it.
Opening such projects up in this direction makes the exercise futile and, as far as those not involved are concerned, even more confusing than it already is.
If this is not what you are arguing I have misjudged what you are saying and again, I apologise.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 04:45 AM

Jim,

I didn't say anything about folk song. I commented on what I perceived as the misuse of the term '21st. century collection'. It seems that everyone else here has a different opinion, so I conceded defeat and went along with the Radio 2 usage.

How you got from this, the idea that I don't like folk music is an extrapolation that is beyond my comprehension.

I love folk music, I think that I learned my first English folk songs in the Mid Forties. Due to the influence of American music on the radio at that time, my love for American folk music soon followed.
If you can manage to get Max to release the recordings of Mudcat Radio, you will hear me singing all kinds of old songs, some of which were folk.

I certainly agree with you that folk song doesn't have 'the acknowledgement it requires.' During the Fifties and Sixties my interest in folk was pretty much confined to dancing, I liked singing then but one can't do everything at once. I have always sung but it is only after that that I started performing.

And how "Roll Over Beethoven" came into this conversation I also can't imagine, I can't remember in my whole life ever mentioning it.

And again, where did that outsider comment come from? I've kinda been around here for a while.

And 'bunch of crumblies' Sheesh, what are you smoking? I want some. All I talked about was the Radio 2 project, which whether you like it or not is a rework of a 3 songs and 3 tunes. I see nothing wrong with the project, it is fine if that is what they want to do. If you look at my second sentence above, you should be able to understand what I was complaining about. Not the project itself but what they were calling it.

As Brian says, I have said it several times, and not once did I say anything about not liking folk music. You made that one up all by yourself.

I'm glad that you like Irish music. Irish music has been in our family for three generations now that I know of, and I still sing songs that my Great Grandmother taught my Father.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jan 14 - 03:39 AM

"After all the word 'folk' used to have a specific meaning once, but that was over half a century ago"
Then you must tell us what the new meaning is - not to just a handful of clubbies, but to the language as a whole - "it means whatever I want it to mean", doesn't hack it - that went out with Lewis Carroll (no relation)
The sad fact is that folk song and music has never got a toe-hold in the consciousness of the British people, or certainly not the acknowledgement it requires.
It's starting to happen in Ireland with the music, with thousands of youngsters coming to in and, while not losing sight of the traditional base, take it up and take it wherever they wish to.
The end result is a large number of youngsters playing Irish traditional music to a high level of skill, a couple of world-class archives, several traditional music schools to die for, January to December song and music events throughout the year and seven nights a week of traditional music and song on the radio and television.
Irish music has been guaranteed a future for at least two generations.
This has not been achieved by faffing around changing its identity and trying to stuff square pegs into round holes - traditional/folk music remains what t has always been, C&W is still C%W, jazz is still performed each week at our local pub as jazz..... and we all still speak to each other without singing "Roll Over Beethoven" (which appears to be you and yours' theme song) Bert.
Loose sight of what our music is and what it means and we lose our music - simple as that.
You don't like folk song, go and sing something else and don't tell us that those of us who do are a bunch of crumblies - in so many words.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 08:36 PM

Steve, yes, but it does diminish the efforts of real collectors somewhat, now that the word collection, means 'a quantity so small that it barely fills up half an album'.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 08:31 PM

Maeve, it says that you can publish on YouTube which is is international, so I would say go for it.

Just let us know so that we can listen as well.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: maeve
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 08:02 PM

If I could trouble someone- Can you tell if an entry from other countries would be welcomed? I've about lost interest after the (interesting but off topic) palaver, but perhaps someone else would like to record an entry, in which case it would be helpful to know.

Thank you.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 06:20 PM

It still has that meaning. It's just that it has acquired several new meanings since then. So what? Many words in the English language have multiple meanings. As you say the language isn't static, the lexicologists have full-time jobs keeping up.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 04:04 PM

Brian,

looking back on this thread I realize that I have been acting somewhat out of character. I am the one usually opting for change and up to date definitions. And here I was expecting everyone else to conform to accepted definitions and consistent usage.

Of course our language is changing all the time and those of us old farts who are stuck in the mud will just have to learn to get over it.

After all the word 'folk' used to have a specific meaning once, but that was over half a century ago. :-)

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 03:10 PM

Yer right Brian, if you haven't got it by now, I guess you never will.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Brian Peters
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 01:26 PM

You've now said the same thing seven times, Bert. More than enough.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 11:47 AM

An outsider? Outside of what?

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 11:36 AM

Should read:
There has been some wonderful work on songs in the United States,that probably originated in England, in Scotland and in - out-of-bounds?
Thanks Vic - and thanks for the heads up on fingers, hands, et al - very useful
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 10:37 AM

Jim, It is Radio 2, that is claiming that three old songs and three old tunes comprise a 21st. century collection, don't blame that onto me.

When I read about a 21st. century collection I was expecting more.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Vic Smith
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 06:45 AM

A strong backing for everything that Jim Carroll says in his post of 23 Jan 14 - 03:28 AM

I have been attending and organising folk clubs for over 50 years now. If I listen to much of the singer/songwriter offerings that were around when I first starting going to clubs it sounds transient, dated and irrelevant - of very little interest. At the same time the mass of traditional songs and ballads sound as moving, emotional and timeless as they always did.
There are some writers whose songs of that era still strike a chord - Goulder, Rosselson, Tawney in this country, Dave Van Ronk and Spider John Koerner in the USA but their compositions and those of a handful of others stand out like pearls in huge heaps of dross.

I believe that most of the recently composed songs that I hear on clubs today will be equally transient.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 05:33 AM

Wonder if you are going to tell Mike Yates that the wonderful work Mike Yates has been doing in the US with Anglo American ballads and songs doesn't count?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jan 14 - 03:28 AM

"a few old songs"
For someone who appears not to like folk music (old stuff) very much, you appear to have taken upon your self a great deal in deciding what goes on and what doesn't count.
Very kind of you to let us have the voice of an outsider.
Sharp not oly opened up English Folk song to the world, he and Karpeles did pioneering work in the Appalachians - doesn't count?
Lucy Broadwood recorded songs in Ireland, including Irish language ones - too foreign maybe?
There has been some wonderful work on songs that probably originated in England, in Scotland and in - out-of-bounds?
Lomax was recording shanties in the Bahamas.
You seem to have boiled what everyone who isn't doing singer-songwriter stuff does down to "re-hashing a few old songs"
What should those of us who have been collecting Anglo Irish and Anglo Scots songs and ballads over the last thirty-odd years (rarities that have disappeared from the national repertoire altogether, most of them in better condition than that have been found in England over the last half century) in the West of Ireland, from Irish singers and musicians in Britain, from Irish Travellers living in London) do with what we've recorded - the bin maybe?
Do you actually like this "Ramblin' Sid" stuff - you appear not to understand it or its international significance.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 11:13 PM

Nothing wrong with old stuff, it is great; but if someone rehashes a few old songs it doesn't count as a dated collection.

When you date a collection it is either that date that the works were collected or the date that they were created.   

People have been reworking old songs for years. If someone had reworked a few songs or tunes in the eighties that wouldn't be called "An eighties collection" otherwise we would have thousands of dated rehashes.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST,Brian Peters
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 07:41 PM

Of course Cecil Sharp was collecting 'old stuff' too, but I've never seen it suggested that his collection was anything other than '20th century'.

What's the problem with old stuff, anyway?

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 04:26 PM

Uh Oh! we have an unnamed guest butting in here.

What they are doing Mr. Noname, is reworking some old stuff, just because they are doing it in the 21st. century does not make it a 21st. century collection. It is old stuff being reworked. Of course '21st. century collection' sounds much more exciting, but is really just sales hype.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 03:19 PM

Bert,
Once again, NO!

All that I read is the BBC are making a 21st century collection of 21st century fresh performances of some well-known old songs and tunes which are still in the 21st century very much still in vogue, on the folk scene if not elsewhere, (but some of them are, being part of classical collections as well.)

In short they are looking for new arrangements/fresh ideas of how these items could be presented.

Phew!

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: maeve
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 03:13 PM

I wonder if entries would be welcomed from other parts of the world?

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 02:43 PM

Thanks Vic
Can't wait - hope a v sign's included somewhere!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 01:48 PM

Brian, the wording implies that these songs and tunes are being collected either in or from the 21st. century. When actually they are just part of an old collection. But I said that once.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Vic Smith
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 10:30 AM

Jim wrote:-
"How do you do that Vic?"
You need to have a look-up list of Alt codes such as the one that you can see by clicking here.

Look through the symbols to get the one you want. The code for © is 0169. Hold down the Alt and type 0169 on the number pad at the right of your keyboard and then when you release Alt the © appears on your screen.

Got it now?  - Good. *

* Producing the 'thumbs up' symbol is achieved in an entirely different way.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Brian Peters
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 09:58 AM

"If you start a thread with a false statement and then get upset at people who are interested in truthful posts, then that that is called trolling; a practice which is frowned upon here."

That's possibly the most bizarre troll accusation I've ever seen on Mudcat. Noreen merely drew attention to a Radio 2 initiative (nothing to do with EFDSS) using the BBC's own description of it word-for-word.

Radio 2 is collecting together a bunch of versions of old songs, recorded in 2014. In what sense is that not a "21st century collection"? Anyway, the accusation that this is "stupid and... a lie" should properly be made to the Beeb - when you've finished extracting the honey from your headgear.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 09:13 AM

"I think that you mean © - the copyright symbol."
How do you do that Vic? - finding your last lesson invaluable for getting up people's noses
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Vic Smith
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 08:42 AM

Jim Carroll wrote
"Another problem is, of course, is that virtually all newly-composed songs come with a small (c), they are all owned and claimed by somebody, which restricts their use somewhat."

I think that you mean © - the copyright symbol.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 08:38 AM

Of course none of my songs are folk songs, I was just trying to illustrate how easy it would be for EFDSS to use a songwriter's work.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST,matt milton
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 07:42 AM

Ahem, back on track...

I enjoyed listening to this one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-2cuH5Vbxk

(though I do wish they'd just put their arms behind their backs!)

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 07:21 AM

Are you the guest who... or someone else?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 06:25 AM

Ahem, back on track...

I enjoyed listening to this one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-2cuH5Vbxk

(though I do wish they'd just put their arms behind their backs!)

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 04:30 AM

ert -
Come to terms with the fact that if your songs were folk songs there would be no need to "address issues" - they would be in the public domain
They are not, and they're not
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 04:13 AM

...The songs you make will never be anybody's but yours - nothing can ever be done with them publicly without your permission....

We tried to address this issue with Aine's songbook and her rules.

If her rules could be accepted generally, then people could use one another's songs freely within that context. I know that many are not aware of these rules which is why I gave specific permission in this thread for EFDSS to use any of my work.

Whilst there may have been nothing intentionally dishonest that Noreen wrote, the link that she posted was not honest. I know it is a small issue of semantics, but its association with a group that sticks closely to its own rather narrow definition of folk, then you would expect it to be a little more careful in its choice of words.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: selby
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 04:05 AM

Bert I for one do not understand what you are on about with erroneous statement. All I see is Noreen saw/heard something that may be of interest and shared it. It does not call for the comments you have recently posted. As far as I understand it the BBC want me (if I feel the urge) to play one or a number if tunes in my style or how I perceive them, simple really.

In an attempt to simplify it further, not a tune listed, I think Farewell to Whisky is a slow air by the very nature of its title, although it is usually played as a reel. It would then follow that potentially my offering using this tune as a example would be different. I do not think there is anything hard to understand
Keith

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 03:46 AM

"Yes Jim, copyright is a problem. "
Not a problem Bert - a defining factor.
Folk songs came from generations - centuries even of communities who made songs to represent their hopes, aspirations, experiences, emotions - reflections of their existence.....
These songs were never, as far as we can see, the property of any particular identified individual which has allowed them to freely pass on to other communities which in their turn, have taken them up and adapt them for their own purposes, and in their turn, pass them on elsewhere - 'then you has - folk-song' as the song nearly said.
The songs you make will never be anybody's but yours - nothing can ever be done with them publicly without your permission.
One of the reasons I believe that folk songs proper are not being made today is that the process that helped create them no longer exists - society as a whole has become a passive recipient of its oral and musical culture, our music comes ready made and hermetically wrapped - it is a commodity rather than an expression of community - as you revealingly say "We all want to protect our songs and if somebody is going to sell them on a CD it is only fair that the usual rates apply" - not the stuff that folk songs are made of.
There is nothing dishonest, inaccurate or even ambivalent about anything Noreen wrote.
Her request contains the invitation to contribute either songs and music that were made in earlier days and are still being performed in the 21st century.
Her "I like inclusivity" indicates that there is no restriction on which form these contributions take.
I do wish singer-songwriters would get it into their heads that we are all guests at a centuries-old feast and would be made more welcome if we learned a few table-manners.
With reference to earlier comments of one ill-mannered guest - must go, me dearie o, my gander-bag's on the washing line and it's started to rain - ooo - arrr
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Bert
Date: 22 Jan 14 - 02:15 AM

If you post a thread which contains an erroneous statement then you shouldn't be too surprised if you are taken to task for it.

The phrase 'a 21st. century folk collection' is ambiguous to start with. It can either mean collected in the 21st century or collected from the 21st. century. Neither of these meanings relate to the project that you are touting. What they are really doing is 21st. century renditions of music from an old collection, which is fine, so why didn't you say that?

I don't know if the organizers chose their title from a lack of command of The English Language, or whether they deliberately intended to deceive. Either way if you want respect then you should endeavor to make your posts accurate.

If you start a thread with a false statement and then get upset at people who are interested in truthful posts, then that that is called trolling; a practice which is frowned upon here.

Sorry about the swearing, I shouldn't have done that, but I was annoyed. I was trying to answer Jim in a civilized manner, but that wasn't good enough for you. This makes me think more than ever that you were just trolling.

By the way, why didn't you rail at Jim or Steve for starting the thread drift?

Basically, it comes down to this, if you are going to get your feathers ruffled by criticism, then perhaps you should pay a little more attention to the accuracy of the information in the threads that you start.

Subject: RE: Contribute to Cecil Sharp's Collection!
From: Noreen
Date: 21 Jan 14 - 11:38 PM

Bert, you criticised my thread subject and started your own thread about what YOU thought it should be about.

So, I suggested, very nicely, that you carry on your discussion about the EFDSS and 21st century songs, in YOUR thread, and leave my thread for those who ARE interested in its subject.

Particularly if you are going to swear at me.

Thank you.