I brought up the "trained musician" comment in an attempt to find out the difference between source singers and money-making folksingers, and Steve Shaw chose to make fun of my serious question and attempted to waylay the discussion with a put-down. As did Dick Miles.

And I still don't have my question answered, and I think it is a very legitimate question that warrants exploration. What is it about a source singer that's different? I find it hard work to listen to source singers, and it demands my full attention. They're not good background music for doing other things, but I can go back to them again and again and learn new things. I don't have to think when I listen to most of the "folk revival" singers, and I find them unsatisfying when I go back to them again.

So, what is it about source singers? What makes them different? Why is it such hard work to listen to them, but so satisfying when I make the effort? Brian Peters has said some things in recent messages that come close to answering my question, but I'm wondering of the nature of the singing of source singers itself. There's something different about it, and I haven't been able to define it.

-Joe-