I wish I could go to a folk club without the claws and hammers coming out! Observe, listen, and you may perceive that in the main there are 3 categories of performer on trial:
          1/ Flashy 'slick-dick' playing syncopated with the utmost robotic accuracy, mostly bluesy, and usually beloved of guest performers. This type frequently sings in a laid-back toneless way and revels in the way he is wowing the audience with unmelodic but acoustically   embellished boring words.

          2/ Interesting playing, amazing voice but tuneless songs with banal words. A waste of a good voice.

          3/Melodious songs, average playing, not much of a voice, therefore not a lot of appreciation.

                   Which of these has the most to offer? If prissy playing is the yardstick, I'd say no.1. Because this is the "full-of-himself, look-at-me" type of player who creates the wrong mood for traditionsl folk songs to be enjoyed in a quiet room or bar.

                   Oh, and there is a fourth category -

          4/ Competent playing, average voice, original songs with good lyrics. In this category the song itself is dominant, so there is no need for prissy playing.

                     This last category is doomed, it seems, and fails to be recognised without the frenetic claw hammer (silly name!) drive of the bass plucking.

                     Guess which category I am in.

                                                 Indrani.

                     PS. Mc.Grath of Harlow - Have you started a new thread here? Flavours can indeed be squalid, as sunsets can be avaricious! Have you ever heard the sunrise? I have -
I know this - I am synaesthetic.