Jim, I'm not at all sure about this "traditional" vs "revival" singing. There are now a great many people who've been singing traditional music for all or most of their adult lives. A typical "revival" singer born in, say, 1945, who started folk singing in the 1960s, will have been singing for over 40 years now. He/she will likely have been doing much of this singing in the company of like-minded people from their own local community and from the wider folk community, learning from each other and exchanging songs at informal social gatherings.

While I can see that in the 1960s and 70s, "revival" singers were indeed coming to it from outside, I think it's possible to argue that we have now reached a stage where the tradition has re-established itself, albeit in a specialist way that's only experienced by a minority of people (which was also the case when much of the song-collecting was done, about a century ago).

Modern communications and travel mean that communities are now defined, for most people, not just by geography, but but shared interests. It's therefore possible, for many of us, to belong to a community that values folk song and music as part of its collective identity, and I don't see why this can't be described as "traditional" singing/playing. A revival is, by definition, a transitional stage, and eventually evolves into something ongoing or permanent. Maybe we've got there now?

Marje