Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 16 Dec 04 - 12:34 AM

Amy Martin's definition is a good one. I like it. It's vagueness and also it's poetic precision are compatible opposites that make me really want to hear her music. It's a keeper definition that I want to write down and look at just because I like the way it makes me feel when I read it.

It rings true !!

I jumped out of bed in the middle of the night last night---and wrote down what turned out to be my own final proclamation of what, for me, this folk music of ours IS. Michael Cooney and I have been e-mailing about what I put down last night. I'm going to bed now---but tomorrow I may get it together to post it here. This seems to be a decent place to put it.

Good thoughts from just about all you folks. As with many threads Jerry starts, this one is the first actually respectful "what is folk" kind of discussion to wind up in this forum. That is nice to see.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Mark Clark
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 09:23 PM

Allison, That is far and away the best definition of folk I've ever seen. Thanks. That is exactly what drew me to folk music in 1959 & '60. Rock & roll had lost it's creative energy and the airwaves were filled with plastic pap. It took the folk boom and the internationalization of pop culture to reinvigorate rock.

I came to bluegrass as a natural progression from searching deeper into the roots of folk music. The first time I heard bluegrass I was blown away. But I never lost my love of the folk forms. I still love The Weavers, country blues, old-timey, Carter Family, Jimmie Rodgers, Jean Ritchie, a capella Appalachian ballads (Hazel Dickens just knocks me out).

The words we're using here: folk, bluegrass, old-timey, etc., have all become polymorphic; each word has multiple valid and distinctly useful definitions. Most often we seem to be talking about the categorizations used commercially by the music industry to decide which shelf products should sit on. These definitions have far more to do with marketing than they do with musicology. Still, those concocted definitions help to define our thinking as intended.

Bluegrass wasn't created as a new musical genre. The progenitors of bluegrass were simply competing for the attention of the marketplace with other country musicians whom they considered peers. They were just putting a new jazzy twist on commercial country music at a time when everything in American culture was getting a new jazzy twist. We're talking about the same general time period that gave birth to bebop, the atomic bomb, western swing, Chicago electric blues; the country was going nuts with creative energy. Yes, bluegrass required a much higher level of musicianship but so did the other new musical forms that were coming along.

Early bluegrass musicians didn't call it that, the term was coined outside of the country music industry. Monroe, et al., applied their jazzy new approach to ninteenth century melodies with archaic themes. This was a conscious marketing decision on Monroe's part. He wanted to appeal to the rural southern consumer and he knew that they, like he and his band, were also listening to the modern sounds on their radios.

With the advent of rock 'n' roll, bluegrass nearly died. Rock 'n' roll drew freely from bluegrass—Monroe is in the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame; Elvis recorded Monroe tunes—but even bluegrass couldn't compete with the energy of rock 'n' roll. Bluegrass was rescued in part when agents and producers decided it might appeal to folk music fans of the great folk boom. Many articles were written to support the thesis that bluegrass was somehow folk music and, eventually, the strategy paid off and bluegrass had a brand new and growing audience.

But to compare bluegrass to folk or to old-timey is like comparing bebop to the music of the New Orleans marching bands of a hundred years ago. They might be playing the same title but they aren't playing the same music.

The reasons why today's bluegrass musicians (I think we're talking amateurs here, not pros) might not like what the music industry calls folk are as varied as the musicians themselves. Of course many bluegrassers, probably the majority, like folk music quite a lot. Some bluegrass pickers probably don't care for the liberal themes of today's folk music. Some may not successfully bridge the cultural gap between the two groups. But I think the most common reason that bluegrass musicians don't want the folkies around is that, too often, they can't friggin play. Play bluegrass that is.

Folk musicians often see bluegrass as a folk idiom and it may in fact be on its way to becoming a folk idiom but that's for future musicologists to decide. Today, and historically, bluegrass is commercial country music and commercial music has expectations that folk forms often do not have. Bluegrass is paying a price for hitching its wagon to the folk star forty years ago.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 08:54 PM

Alonzo, I understood your post to say:

Only if your definition of folk singer is someone who sings only songs they have written themselves and plays acoustic guitar.

That did not imply opinions about the content of the songs.

In fact, isn't it possible that some personal observations are also so universal as to be songs of a people, not just a particular person? And are you saying that depending on the content, some songwriters may be folksingers on some songs, but not on others?

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 08:46 PM

I don't think I've read any of the "what is folk music" threads, although I may have and might have even posted... don't remember. My definition of folksinger includes people who perform at folk music venues, whether they are singer/songwriters (many of whom I generally don't care for, although I like Cheryl Wheeler -not Crow-) or old rockers (Hilton Valentine of The Animals is now doing an acoustic skiffle act) or our late friend Rick Fielding (who covered many genres including original songs on many instruments) or my own bluegrass band ShoreGrass. My definition also includes singers on the back porch or in a song circle or jam. I vaguely remember hearing Charo sing and play her guitar and it seems to me it would not be American folk, but it might be folk from wherever she comes from.

I guess my definition, if I have one, is more inclusive than that of people who say Cheryl Wheeler is definitely not folk in their book.

To get back to the point of the thread, I love bluegrass and love (what I call) folk. Play both, in fact. Some of you already know without hearing me that what I do is definitely not your kind of folk, since I do many original songs accompanying myself on guitar. Others know it's not folk because we do bluegrass. And maybe some others feel as I do that there are some wonderful folk songs yet to be written by singer/songwriters playing acoustic guitar.

But I understand why some "bluegrass musicians don't like folk" and have tried to explain.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 08:20 PM

Interesting idea, Alonzo M. Zilch, that singer/songwriters are not folk singers. It's also interesting that you think people who
write and sing original songs (like all those old trad songs that were written by someone, sometime in their original form, and all
the new ones written "in the tradition") are not folk singers. And players of acoustic guitar, and great and funny entertainers,
etc. are likewise not folk singers?

Barbara,

I did not say that singer-songwriters are not folksingers. There are many singer-songwriters who I have no trouble classifying as folksingers. Tom Paxton, Tom Russell, even Bob Dylan come to mind. Certainly Woody Guthrie, Jean Ritchie and Pete Seeger.

What I'm driving at is that playing acoustic guitar and singing only your own songs does not make you a folksinger. The songwriters that I consider to be folksingers are ones whose music is part of a on-going and constantly developing tradition.

Yes, Cheryl Wheeler plays at one we consider to be folk clubs. I've gone to see her myself on any number of occasions and I think she's great. I just happen to think that folk music is music of a people, not music of a particular person.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Allison
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 07:36 PM

One of my favorite musicians, Amy Martin, provides the best definition of "folk" I've ever heard. Check it out at http://www.ravenswingrecords.com/bio>

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: PoppaGator
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 07:06 PM

Bluegrass musicians are certainly excellent players, as a general rule, but I would take issue with the argument that they are at all comparable to jazz players when it comes to improvisation.

Bluegrass songs, like blues or even trad-jazz numbers and most folk and popular music, have fixed harmonic structures (chord progressions). They might not all be as simple or predictable as the 12-bar blues, but a reasonably competent player should be able to play along, if not immediately, certainly after listening to one or two "go-rounds."

This is not to say that a lot of inventive playing can't go on within the structure of these tunes -- just as seriously creative playing can also occur within the even-simpler structure of the blues. But it's not like modern "free-bag" jazz, where *everything*, even the chordal structure, is improvised.

I can play with bluegrassers (not saying how well I can do it, but I can surely strum along pretty much error-free), but I *know* I can't even begin to play with real jazz players.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 06:17 PM

Sorry Barbara,
I also believe you are a little off-beam, Cheryl Crow is no more a folk singer than Bob Dylan, Paul Simon etc. She might be a very good singer writing very good songs and be very(?) popular with some people such as your self. Perhaps she also sings some songs out of the folk tradition (In my book songs/tunes that have existed for some considerable time on their own merit without the benefit of the modern music industry publicity machine and hype, and because people remember and enjoy them and sing them without being brain-washed) Nothing wrong with that at all but why do you want to give her the label Folksinger??

Second question; Which is the tradition that you claim she writes in?

You say you didn't want to get sucked into this discussion, but you have failed and I would appreciate it if you could answer my two questions. Not because I'm looking for a lengthy time-wasting argument but to try and understand your claim.

Thanks for your time.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 03:39 PM

She sure doesn't sound like a folk singer to me, either. Just because she gets booked in a folk venue doesn't make her a folk singer. Just because she plays an acousting guitar and sings doesn't make her one either. I don't consider what she plays as being folk music. How about she's just a woman who writes songs and sings them while she accompanys herself on an acoustic guitar. Charo writes songs she writes and sings them with an acoustic guitar. Is she a folksinger?

Number 6, I appreciate that you "get it." Really do.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 04 - 03:15 PM

Interesting idea, Alonzo M. Zilch, that singer/songwriters are not folk singers. It's also interesting that you think people who write and sing original songs (like all those old trad songs that were written by someone, sometime in their original form, and all the new ones written "in the tradition") are not folk singers. And players of acoustic guitar, and great and funny entertainers, etc. are likewise not folk singers?

Cheryl Wheeler gets booked at the folk music coffeehouses in our area, and I consider her a folk singer. Maybe others don't. I appreciate your opinion.

(I tried not to get sucked into this re-hash of "what is folk music" but failed).

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: number 6
Date: 14 Dec 04 - 06:42 PM

I agree with MG that it takes discipline to blay bluegrass. Bluegrass musicians are about the finest around. That is one reason I get together with some of these guys to play, to improve my guitar skills, timing and most importantly discipline. If your a bluegrass musician you can play just about anything. I say this with great respect. Though improvisation in bluegrass is equal to jazz, I find and I said previously they are not the most diverse musicians when bring in different ideas. But above all have one good time jamming with them.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 14 Dec 04 - 01:05 PM

Cheryl Wheeler is surely a folk singer by anyone's definition, no?

Only if your definition of folk singer is someone who sings only songs they have written themselves and plays acoustic guitar.

Cheryl Wheeler is a singer-songwriter, and a very good one. She is also a great and funny entertainer. I've paid to see her many times and will again whenever she's in the area.

But she's not a folk singer.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,andrez
Date: 14 Dec 04 - 10:00 AM

The problem, if there is one at all, is in the ear of the beholder and certainly not in the music or the expression of it in terms of lyric, expressive style or instrumentation!

Cheers, from West Australia.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Michigan Banjo Guy
Date: 14 Dec 04 - 09:07 AM

I accidentally came across this discussion...Barbara's last post nailed a lot of the bluegrasser's psychi. I came into this genre later in life (30s) and now play around 30 gigs a year in a traditional bluegrass band..."doing" the music is addictive (5 banjos here!).

An earlier post that noted "the words don't mean a lot" really missed it. It is the very phrasing of words in the most traditional bluegrass songs that grabs me...listen to Red Allen. Many of the new CDs by bands probably more talented vocally and instrumentally just leave you flat...they have not engaged the "earthy life" adequately to phrase it.

My 2 cents,

Gary in Grand Rapids ([e-mail])

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Steve-o
Date: 22 Nov 04 - 01:32 PM

"The rare thing to me is to meet people who truly enjoy (not just SAY they enjoy) both forms of music. When people say they like bluegrass AND folk music And old-time music, the criticisms of one or the other types of music usually seeps out." Jerry, How do you do? I love all three types, I sing and play all three, and they are what I plunk my money down at the CD stores for. No qualifications seeping out from my seams, although of course there is GOOD and BAD stuff that falls into all three categories.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 22 Nov 04 - 11:43 AM

Very astute, Jerry.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 09:47 PM

"Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk"

I thought they were just cranky...

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 09:27 PM

"Sittin' On Top Of The World", as Walter Vinson of the Mississippi Shiks told me, was written by him---the man himself---Walter Vinson. He allowed me to tape record a jam between himself and Buffalo Bill Lucas and Bill Pierson in Chicago (about 1962) at the home of Bill Pierson on South Michigan Avenue. As the day drew on, and Walter drank more and more, he got more and more pissed off about that song. He saw very little, if any, cash from his song. Many others recorded it and copywrote it (or their arrangement of it)--including bluegrassers.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 09:17 PM

I'll add something about vocals. Funny that you could probably get 200 posts about bluegrass and there be next to no comment on vocals.
The same discipline that applies to the instrumental prowess of bluegrass musicians apply to the vocals. Vocals in bluegrass sound as tightly scripted as the instrumental breaks and choreography. The looser harmonies of an old-time band, or a non-bluegrass gospel group may not be music to the ears of a bluegrass musician because as Martin says, discipline is so important to the music. a get together of folk musicians can surely drive a bluegrass musician nuts because it can be pretty free-wheeling and loosey-goosey.

I think you hit on the key, Martin. Discipline. Now you step into the realm of personal taste. Is discipline inherently superior to spontaniety? Or is spontaneity superior to discipline. I don't think there is a "superior" involved. It depends on what you like... with tons of exceptions. There are some bluegrass vocals that are tighter than a drum that I really like, because they are so meticuously realized. Other vocals in bluegrass I find too predictable, because there seems to be such a strong (rigid?, traditional?) structure for bluegrass vocals that they lose all individuality in my mind. I've heard old-time bands that were just plain sloppy, and some who were having a good time and taking chances, where the harmonies and phrasing weren't precision, but full of spirit.

I don't think that bluegrass is better or inferior to old-time or folk music. Just different The rare thing to me is to meet people who truly enjoy (not just SAY they enjoy) both forms of music. When people say they like bluegrass AND folk music And old-time music, the criticisms of one or the other types of music usually seeps out. "I like bluegrass and folk music, but folk music doesn't have any energy or edge." Or, I like bluegrass and old-time string bands, but bluegrass music is too rigid."

When is discipline "rigid?" When does expressive and free-wheeling become just plain old sloppy or lazy?

Depends on case by case, night by night, song by song.

But, you nailed it, Martin. For me, discipline is admirable and impressive, but it doesn't get me in the gut. For you it does. Good for you! Good for me!

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:42 PM

...............and that's what separates the men from the boys.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Peace
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:41 PM

I think that could be said of any really tight, good group, but I will admit that the country/bluegrass guys want to get to business right away more often than not. They seem to take it very seriously, until they heva it down, then it's party time on stage. Darn thing is, some of those folks have their fingers moving so fast they have to know it cold. Mistakes in professional bluegrass or country don't happen all that often. Kinda like string quartets or solid studio musicians. Mistakes are a waste of time and money, so they just don't make them.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:22 PM

Brucie, I have read many comparisons of bluegrass to rock music when it comes to energy level.

One word that I don't believe that has come up when it comes to playing bluegrass in a group is discipline. The discipline that is needed by each musician to make a bluegrass group sound successful (and in the best sense of the word, differentiated) is what I consider makes so many exceptional bluegrass players the vituosos that they are.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Peace
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:13 PM

Thanks, Martin.

You have answered the question for me. I guess it may have been prompted by watching up-an-comin' bluegrass (mandolin, banjo, guitar players) working hard to duplicate the licks of people they heard on records. That may have just been me seeing the learning process in progress. One of the better nights I had on stage was with a mandolin player from a bluegrass/countryish group who came on stage with a bunch of us and introduced us to rock mandolin. It was cool. What I do know is that he was one helluva musician who just preferred bluegrass and country to anything else. Good musicians? You bet, buddy.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:07 PM

Brucie, I don't think so.

Too many here don't realize that bluegrass offers just as much improvisation as jazz does. There is plenty of room for extended breaks, and downright jamming in live performances of songs.

I don't know how many times I have heard a lead player be encouraged to "do it again" or a chorus to be refrained "one more time."

The people here who criticize bluegrass I don't believe have seen many concerts or done any much serious jamming with accomplished musicians.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Peace
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 08:01 PM

Question for all you bluegrass guys and gals (and it's a serious question).

Is it considered a 'good' thing in bluegrass to do the song the same way everytime?

Let me explain. In some Inuit art (sculpting), it is considered the sign of a good artist if he/she can exactly duplicate the work of an older, more accomplished artist. I guess I'm asking this: Would it be considered a good performance to exactly do a song as an older, respected group did it? Am I making any sense to anyone?

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 07:56 PM

You, as usual, miss the point, Ron and are a very troubled person.

Please get help and stop right now ruining the music posts with your inuendos and your anger.

Your lectures are for the birds, Ron.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 03:12 PM

It was short and not really so friendly, Martin.   People who want to get into bluegrass deserve encouragement. Think before you post.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 01:41 PM

Reggie

I am not an unfriendly person at all and am willing to share my knowledge and experience with anyone. There was nothing at all intentioned to be mean spirited about my short and simple response to your post.

Ron Davies just has a problem with many things in his life, that's allthat I can imagine. It was uncalled for by him to single me out and shows very little class on his part taking his vendetta into the music threads.

PM me about it if you want to.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Nov 04 - 12:44 PM

Reggie--

Most bluegrass people are even more friendly than "Martin Gibson", hard as that might be to imagine.

A couple of possibilities:

With your washboard, I would think you could do any number of railroad songs--it would fit pretty well. In the groups I've played with, I'll tell you we would have liked it.

And the saw would be good on waltzes (of course your key would have to be good for other instrumentalists also).

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: HuwG
Date: 20 Nov 04 - 12:35 PM

Bluegrass is obviously not as common in Britain as on the other side of the Atlantic, but does have its devotees.

I have worked at venues which recently hosted events sponsored by the British Bluegrass Federation. The audience was obviously different from that at a folk event. They were generally older; they were hushed and reverential.

The bands picked up this atmosphere, and while the music was excellent, it was rehearsed and unspontaneous. There was practically no communication between performers and audience, other than to say in response to polite applause, "Thank you. This next number is called, whatever", and then launch into it. The bar staff tiptoed around, but didn't have too strenuous an evening; the audience all seemed to make one or two pints last all night.

Obviously, an event which didn't have this formal backing might be a little less restrained.

Folk acts are generally marked by lots of banter between the performers and the audience (and among the performers themselves, sometimes reaching the level of "What key are we in ?"), vast quantities of drink being bought and consumed. Set lists are there as a rough guide only.

Here again, this is one extreme end of the folk spectrum, which can approach comedy. I do agree that I have had to sit through too many performances of trad. dirges.

Incidentally, one of the best bluegrass and C and W singer/songwriters has a musical background from ... Sheffield and Manchester, UK. I refer to Lorna Flowers. I have to admit I am very fond of this lady since a snog (all right, a polite peck) and a free CD, last year.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Nov 04 - 11:20 AM

No, try to do a solo act, I guess.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,reggie miles
Date: 20 Nov 04 - 10:28 AM

I didn't know that this was an issue until recently. I was at a popular bluegrass event. I heard not only bluegrass being played but oldtimey, fiddletunes, swing, country, celtic, jazz, singer/songwriters and even what I consider folk music being played there. Even some of the headliners at the event held workshops about songwriting and performed their own material in such a way that did not strike me as being bluegrass at all. This gave me some ease as I don't possess, musically speaking, what seems to be a prerequisite in most bluegrass, that ability to solo at great speed.

I also don't approach what intruments I do play in the same way as they seem to command I do in order to be a part of their circle. About the closest thing I can do to join in is play some bottleneck slide solos. I use my homemade resonator which is a cross between a Dobro and a National, I call it a Nobro. It is tuned in a different form but still a version of open G and though it has a square neck I play it as a round neck, and not lap style. That's how I set the guitar up to play when I made it. I get strange looks from some, right from the start, when I approach to join in one of their jams.

I can sing and lead a song or even add some vocal harmonies. I can also add some harmonica solos but I've noticed that harmonica is not widely accepted unless you can play solos like the devil and keep up with their fastest Celtic stuff or fiddletunes. I can't, but what I do does serve my purposes and in my opinion does sounds nice on a few things that they play.

I can really bust up a jam when I approach them with my washboard, the one instrument on which I can keep up when speed is a factor. It is visually very stimulating and looks like something Spike Jones might play. I think that shocks most bluegrass players. Before I even get an opportunity to play they figure I'm gonna make way too much of a disturbance in their formula approach to playing. Actually, quite the opposite is true. I've learned, after scrubbin on the darned ol' thing that more is often less when it comes to percussion and that subtlety is a good thing. Still there's that visual factor some find uncomfortable and tend to shy away from. Most don't consider washboard, especially one with as many crazy additions as mine has, as being an acceptable bluegrass instrument. I'll admit that I do enjoy exploring some of the zanier aspects of what I've added to my ol' Maytag but only where and when it's appropriate.

Another instrument that I can add to those rare slow numbers that bluegrass musicians are sometimes known to play is the musical saw. The saw has the capability to flow beautifully and harmonize well within many types of music, just not that speedy stuff that bluegrassers are so fond of playing. I can solo with it or play back up softly. It has a very vocal quality to it and blends easily with vocals when those complex bluegrass harmonies are being showcased but again, it's a saw and just the site of it seems to make grassers shrink away. I don't know if they're fearfull I'll scratch their precious instruments (saws are the natural enemy of all wood products you know) but they all move away from me, or quickly change tempo beyond my capabilty to follow on the razor sharp handtool when they notice I've joined their jam. I can only play so fast with my saw before I start losing body parts. Fortunately, most do grow back. It's the ones that don't that I worry about.

So, my point is, what's a saw bendin', washboard scubbin', harmonica huffin', bottleneck slidin' guy to do? Hmmmm, invent a new genre?

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 04 - 08:48 AM

they know when to hold back...

That's another reason why some bluegrassers don't like folk, again related to the jam situation. Folkies (and others) inexperienced with bluegrass jam etiquette (many good threads on this) tend to play along all the time. In a good bluegrass jam, you can hear every instrument and every voice and people know to HOLD BACK when someone is taking a lead break and HOLD BACK so as not to obstruct the vocals. Rookies thrashing away on their guitars during someone's break or during the singing will raise the irritation factor tremendously and break up a good jam. This of course is unlike an old-timey jam, where everyone happily plays along together in unison.

Communication and education solve this issue quickly and add new people to the circle if done gently.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Fortunato
Date: 20 Nov 04 - 08:23 AM

Congrats, Jerry, on getting up a thread that's worth contributing to and reading. Although the title of the thread may appear divisive at first glance, it is precisely the innumerating of differences that forces the realization of commonality.

Ron, who often jams with us, by the way, Jerry, is one of the more eclectic players and singers around our area and can contribute in many genres.

Our old pal Rick Fielding liked to use "Rolling in my Sweet Babies Arms" as an ice breaker, he did so with me the first time we sat down to play togther. That song began as Old Time (no it wasn't a fiddle tune, ahem...) traveled into Bluegrass and Country. But is performed by Doc Watson at Folk Festivals. Rick's choice was a perfect one in that that song, like Ron's example above, "Sitting on Top of the World", travels across the American Folk/Tradtional/Old Time/Bluegrass/Blues genre boundaries.

Susette and I travel across the boundaries, also. In fact, we don't see them as boundaries, and distinguish between them only when asked:
"What kind of music do you play". How I dread that question, as there is no short answer. As we have seen illustrated in this thread, we don't agree on the definitions and one never knows what one has truly said to the questioner.

regards,
chance

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Nov 04 - 01:39 PM

Cheryl Wheeler is very well known in Alaska also, Barbara Shaw. She writes excellent songs- including the ironic '(Honey), Don't Forget the Guns'. She puts on a good show.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: PennyBlack
Date: 19 Nov 04 - 12:12 PM

We like music.

Folk, Bluegrass, C&W, Irish, Pop, Classical, Punk, Jazz etc etc.

PB

Bluegrass - "Folk Music with an overdrive" - Earl Scruggs

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: balladeer
Date: 19 Nov 04 - 12:18 AM

Billy Edd Wheeler wrote The Coming of the Roads, a big hit for Judy Collins back in the day.

Great thread!

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 11:36 PM

Jerry---

You were dead right in your first posting on this--many people--not just bluegrass fans have a wildly distorted picture of folk music.

It is certainly true that bluegrass people want to participate all the time-- not just patiently wait for your turn in a song circle, nor listen to navel-gazers sing about their own angst. Folk is obviously far far more than the navel-gazers, but unfortunately there is some of that. Even more unfortunately, sometimes they sell big, and since it's now so easy for anybody to do a CD, that's what the folk DJ's get flooded with, and they play a distressing amount of it.

It's also really hard to write a song dealing with societal problems without using a sledge-hammer approach, which comes across as (usually leftist) propaganda or the aforementioned whining.

To the degree radio folk DJ's play this sort of thing, traditional or "music in the tradition" is marginalized and folk gets unfairly tarred with the bad singer-songwriter brush. Mudcatters prove constantly that there are still excellent singer-songwriters around, by doing it themselves--I heard a lot of great newly written --(say, in the last 30 years)--songs at the Getaway, for instance.

But the stereotype of a Jewell--- (or whoever the prototype is these days)--- wanna-be is really hard to shake. When the general public (including but not restricted to bluegrassers) think of folk, they either think of Blowing in the Wind folk-scare stuff or whining singer-songwriters.

It's a blatantly unfair and distorted perception, but persistent nonetheless.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 05:33 PM

Barbara

The recently late Charley Waller's work I have been familiar with since the first Country Gentlemen recordings in the early sixties and saw him on his (only ?) trip to England a few years back. He certainly had wide tastes and the ability to put the stuff across including some great country songs.
I really don't believe that most bluegrass musicians dislike folk (depending on your definition), how can they it's the roots of their music. What I do believe is that if they have a session going on and someone attempts to join in with music or instruments that don't fit into what's going on then they might not be too happy, same with any session surely. I get involved in bluegrass type sessions and old timey sessions and don't mind who joins in provided it fits and they know when to hold back. Someone playing spoons at a bluegrass session or bodhran at the old time session would certainly give me reason to put down my instrument and pick up my pint.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 12:08 PM

Terry Allan Hall:

I'll take the tip offered to Frank. Of course, there were black old-time string bands, too. The Dallas String Band being the best known (and wonderful.) I imagine there are some Hindus who love ragtime, but the exception doesn't negate the generality. :-)

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Terry Allan Hall
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 10:25 AM

GUEST,Frank - look into the McHenry Family Band, an excellent "black" bluegrass band that most festivals WON'T book because (apparently) the M.F.B is the wrong shade.

A real pity, because they're fantastic!

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 10:04 AM

Sorry about my own provincialism mentioning Cheryl Wheeler. She's very well-known around the northeast USA, and I assumed incorrectly that everyone knew her. She writes wonderful songs, has a beautiful voice, and accompanies herself on guitar. Yes, singer/songwriter. I don't really know anything about Billy Edd Wheeler except as the songwriter of "Coal Tattoo." And I assumed that most mudcats would remember our own Rick Fielding, a wonderful singer/songwriter from Toronto, Canada, who died this year.

My point was that these songs and others like them are too difficult to do in a bluegrass jam situation. In fact, I resort to looking at my songbook to get the correct chords when we do it. (My husband has no such problem, but that's my problem). That would be one reason "Why bluegrass musicians don't like folk" if in fact they don't.

Other bluegrass musicians in fact love folk. Take Charlie Waller, for example. He recorded many, many folk songs. (Am I being provincial again? I hope not...)

Jerry, I'll getcha for starting this thread! Do you have any idea how many other things I have NOT accomplished, getting absorbed in this (most interesting) discussion??

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,LUDOBOIS
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 09:35 AM

GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL , BECAUSE IN A SENSE PEOPLE (NOT EVERYBODY)DON'T SEE MUSIC AS ORIGINAL BUT MUCH MORE AS A STYLE WICH THEY CONFORM TO AND THAT DEMAND SUBMISSION CAUSE LIKE RELIGION THE RIGHT ONE CAN'T GO TO TWO DIFFERENT CHURCH. bUT I THINK THAT IT IS PERHPAS MORE REAL IN THE PLACE WHERE THES KIND OF MUSIC THRIVES SIDE BY SIDE EVEN IF IT'S IN DIFFERENT TIME, CAUSE PEOPLE SEE THIS AS PERSONAL AS PARTS OF THEIR INDIVIDUALITY AND IDENTITY. FOR MY PARTS IN CANADA I DON'T SEE THIS KIND OF SEGREGATION, FOLK MUSIC FORE ME MEANS NOTHING SINCE IT HAS PRACTICLY EVERETHING IN IT (BLUEGRASS FOR SURE), OH YEAH I DON'T THINK YOU COULD REDUCE FOLK BY CATEGORISE IT, LIKE IF LYRICS SOMETIMES IS PREDOMINANT IS BECAUSE MUSIC DON'T ALWAYS HAVE GO THROUGH TIME LIKE LYRICS. THANK YOU, HOPE I DON'T HAVE LOOK CONDESCENDANT TO ANYONE, LUDO
SORRY FOR MY ENGLISH
MUSIC IS THE HEALING FORCE OF THE UNIVERSE

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 18 Nov 04 - 09:14 AM

Barbara,
apologies for lapsing into the vernacular "slagging off" = "badmouthing".

In my world Bluegrass music is "Folk", as are cajun, old time(y), ballads, banjo tunes, fiddle tunes, blues and any material that has been around for a few generations and survived without the asistance of brainwashing by the media and their damned playlists.

I have to admit I don't know the name Cheryl Wheeler, what does she do?

I suspect (possibly incorrectly) that she is a singer/songwriter and she may be very good at what she does but I can assure you that you cannot make a claim that she is surely a folksinger by anyone's definition. As you rightly state above "What is Folk" is a never ending argument.

Billy Edd I do know (I received some audition tapes of his many years ago) and I really enjoy his work however I don't hear much/any of it now that I am aware of. Which of his songs are now performed in folk circles?

I'm looking for enlightement not an argument

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 09:39 PM

"If the "actual music" is a throwaway, why not simply recite the piece - or, better yet, do monologues?"

Dylan, come back, all is forgiven...

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 04:30 PM

Barbara and Frank are awright

Jerry

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 03:10 PM

At the risk of continuing the never-ending "what is folk?" discussion, let me say that I don't consider folk to be only old songs. Cheryl Wheeler is surely a folk singer by anyone's definition, no?

My point about folk songs in a jam vs bluegrass songs is precisely that people can usually join in on a bluegrass song that they've never heard before. Most of the songs are quite simple and do not require knowing the material. I've heard hundreds of songs at jams and festivals, and always leave them having heard many, many more that are new to me. And usually no familiarity with the song is required to join in. In fact, I look forward to hearing new songs at every jam.

As for introducing my taste on other people's sessions: we carry so many instruments in our camper and usually camp in a compound with 2 or 3 other families, so we almost always jam at our own site or our own house. People join us all the time. My point was that for the "folk" songs mentioned, the jam became more of a performance during that song, rather than a participatory event for everyone, because the songs were too difficult for people who were not familiar with the material to join in easily.

I'm not sure what "slagging off" means (I can guess) but I don't think I'm criticizing anyone's taste. My initial post states that I love both bluegrass and folk, and although I'm in a working band, I can assure you I do it for fun.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 01:05 PM

Barbara

I thought that you were referring to folk songs rather than recent compositions ??

Surely if you are playing in a 'jam' then everyone participating needs to know the material whatever genre you are playing in.
If you don't know the material how can you take part?
May I suggest that you don't try and introduce your taste on other people's sessions but start your own. Others who are familiar with the material and enjoy playing it will then join you.

Too much slagging off people for their taste! It's all music (well most of it) and whatever we play/sing surely we do it for fun.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 12:43 PM

OK, not that complex, but more than the typical 3 chords found in a bluegrass song:

Summer Fly (Cheryl Wheeler)
Coal Tattoo (Billy Edd Wheeler)
Sing With the Angels (Rick Fielding)

We've tried all of these at bluegrass jams and watched everyone drop out, turning it into a performance rather than a jam.

The "subjective timing" refers to pauses and retards and other personal expressions and tempo variations that you might find in a folk song rendition but rarely in a bluegrass song.

Subject: RE: Why Bluegrass musicians don't like folk
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 17 Nov 04 - 12:23 PM

...and "subjective timing" ! Beats me. Have any examples in mind?