Orac hit the proverbial nail "finally" with the mention of the Renassance "lute" minstrals and troubadors.

One has to consider the fundamental purposes of "folk music" ; fr'instance being a menas of conveying the news events of the day along with the lore, life lessons , and morality tales that defines a kind of unifying cultural identity. So the tradition of song accompanied by lute become guitar is as dyed in the wool culture as unaccompanied song. We *are* supposed celebrants of the "opposing-thumbed" tool & nstrument makers are not?

Thus, to my ear, to see some waxing nostalgic about "unaccompanied" singing as somehow more pure than having a guitar has the ring of luddite to it ; as if to suggest that gutiars , hell why not say *all* instruments , are "elitist". Not of "real" country folk.

Well that may be a hangover sentiment also held about *books* and *book larnin'* for the same historical reason; real folk couldn't *afford* them and were thus considered symbols of elites.

Ladies and Gentlemen; this is the 21st century for crying out loud and unless you're content to tribal gatherings passing down knowledge *exclusively* in the oral/aural tradition there's just no such barrier to access to the musucal instruments themselves anymore. I'm having hard enough time dealing with them that considers just playing well as somehow *elitist* rather than celebrating in enjoying those that have the *gift* of talent and take to the near monastic life of endless hours of practice towards that instruments mastery until they arrive at finding their signature style.

My God, I marvel with joy at the practice of any craft. Why not recognize the joy of acheivement in mastering a musical instrument instead of questioning whether it's *traditional* enough.

Mastery of tools/instruments are as traditional as culture itself.

O.K. Enough soapbox.

Next! ;-)