How do you define a "traditional" instrument? It is rather arbitrary.

I tend to look at it as a "living" tradition. If keyboards, bass and drums were readily available centuries ago they would be considered folk instruments today?

What is the purpose of a folksong? As Toadfrog mentioned "a "folk song" ripped loose from the manner in which it was traditionally sung will finally lose whatever "folk" character it ever had." That is true, but doesn't that mean the song begins to lose character immediately after it is written? When the folk process is at work, singers are constantly adding and changing the lyrics and/or tune. It is done to suit the particular circumstances of the singer.

100 years ago families may have gathered on the porches of Appalachia to share the ballads that were part of their heritage. Banjos, fiddles, dulcimers or guitars were used if available.

Here we are in 2002 and we do have modern technology and instruments "invented" or adapted during the last century. Does it make a tune played on those instruments less of a folk song than one sung on a porch 100 years ago? Was it a folk song if someone used one of those new fangled banjos? Guitars weren't even in use in large numbers until the last century. When did a song like "Barbara Allen" begin to lose character?

That said, I am not a big fan of keyboards, drums or bass guitars. I do believe the words of the song are what attracts me to folk music and I prefer to hear it as pure as possible. However, am I being true to the folk tradition by not utilizing modern instruments and methods of delivery? Isn't a concert soloist ALSO satisfying an "inner compulsion"?

How can we presume to make up rules for this kind of music? It flys in the face of what makes folk music so special!!