I think the term "source singer" exists only because revival singers like me see a clear distinction between ourselves and the likes of Walter Pardon, Fred Jordan etc. I am a singer of traditional songs, but to describe myself as a "traditional singer" seems to claim an authenticity I do not deserve. It is a small but important distinction, but one which is perhaps relevant only to those inside the folk revival. I doubt it is of much significance to academics, unless they are studying the revival itself.

I am faintly embarrassed when young musicians hold my generation in the same regard as we used to look up to the "old boys", just because we had the opportunities to hear the greats not only of the tradition but of the revival, who they can hear only on recordings. Perhaps after 50 years of playing and singing folk I should accept that I and others of my generation maybe do represent some sort of continuity. Nevertheless I am still a bit uncomfortable with that, and still want to make the distinction between me and the "source singers" (however unsatisfactory a term that might be).