Versions of songs, and etiquette

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Mrrzy
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 04:25 PM

Is singing along uninvited rude, if you aren't loud?

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Mikefule
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 04:00 PM

Ah, but what if you started the song in F# and they have a G harmonica?

Most singers who do not accompany themselves with an instrument pitch a song according to the range of their voice and the state of their nerves. It may not be in the "proper" key - "proper" as defined by some bugger with a D/G melodeon or a harmonica.

I have had to abandon a song (only once) when I could not compete with the insistent G from an uninvited melodeon.

And as for the speed thing... there appear to be only two universal rules in folk music:
1) Play as fast as possible (never mind what speed the tune was started at).
2) Sing as slowly as possible (never mind what speed the song was started at).

The only exception is if you are singing and accompanying yourself on an istrument!

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Waddon Pete
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 03:29 PM

I guess I'm old fashioned....if some-one is known for singing a particular song, then I believe that other singers should steer clear of it in that club or session. By all means sing it elsewhere...but not there!

There's nothing better than folks joining in with the chorus of your song, but I think you should warn people if you are not doing standard verses as, of course, they will want to join in those too. Especially if they are favourites. This is, after all, how people learn new song...by osmosis!

By and large I would discourage joining in with instruments, but there is an exception to every rule. At a recent gig a member of the audience quietly started to join in with a harmonica. It sounded great!

Best wishes,

Peter

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: GUEST,Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 03:23 PM

It has always struck me as incredibly arrogant when audiences insist on singing their own versions of choruses.
I have in the past, stopped singing and insisted on them either singing my chorus (and teaching it if necessary) or not singing the song at all.
Walter Pardon had to drop two songs from his repertoire (one of them his favourite), because audiences did this; and it also upset him when they ignored the speed he sang and dragged out the choruses.
Don't know what he'd have made of the eejits popping their fingers in their cheeks!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Mikefule
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 11:18 AM

To be fair, it's usually only one or two individuals, not the whole bunch. Most people are very supportive of new singers.

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 11:11 AM

It sounds like they musty be a pretty bad mannered bunch. Though I suppose they might be pulling your leg a bit, in the way Richard Bridge mentions.

One thing might be if the versions you are singing are only marginally different friom more standard versions. Perhaps significantly different versiants might work better.

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Mikefule
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 11:10 AM

Well, the thread was worth starting if only to pick up the useful word, "duckwits". LOL.

I don't set out to change my songs for the sake of change, but I often alter a couple of words here and there, and more rarely a bar or so of the tune. But even if I do a version absolutely unchanged (or perhaps with the odd personal mondegreen thrown in) there's always someone who half knows it, or knows a more authentic version!

To me, the whole concept of an "authentic" or "correct" version is alien to the folk thing. There are older versions, better versions, more widely known versions, and so on, but each version has an authenticity and correctness of its own. They were all new songs once.

I don't think people "own" songs, but if you know that Fred only has half a dozen songs, and regards Song X as his "big number", it's a bit off to sing it when he's there.

In one case, I came to an agreement with a friend: an easy beginner's song which he no longer sings. He told me he had moved on and was happy for me to use it as a stepping stone towards my own repertoire.

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: mg
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 10:57 AM

Just say upfront what you prefer...where I am from we join in on the verses if we know them but it is bad form, I would think universally, to force a different tune on the lead singer. If you don't want people to try to figure out an accompaniment or join in, just say so. I personally am not used to the concept that people own songs...it is not that prevalent a notion here as it probably is anywhere. Sing it and don't change the words from male to female please. Speak out. Just say I prefer to sing alone on the verses. I might have a different version that you know and lead them once through on the chorus..mg

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 10:41 AM

As Cacofonix may have said...

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 10:34 AM

It's not new Mike - this crabby old bugger can remember it in the mid sixties at a well respected "traditional" club not a million miles away. What hacks me off a lot more (if possible) is when you've put a lot of homework into a song, its sources and its performance and your efforts are rewarded with some variant of "hasn't XYZ recorded that?". Doubt not the value of your efforts - nor yet doubt the capacity of duckwits to irritate you; it goes with the hallowed status of bard!

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: RTim
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:56 AM

There are some songs I sing, particularly Postman's Knock from Adderbury (I was Foreman of the Morris there for 21 years!), where I have to warn the audience that my version is different to that recorded, etc..
I do HATE it when other singers join into my songs because they "Think" they know it.
I also HATE it when the audience shouts out "Free the toast" in Rolling Home (last verse), so provided I can remember it in time I have changed the words from "let the toast go free" to "Let's toast you and me"

Tim Radford

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:17 AM

In Morris or song session I would not rule out others joining in verses either on tune (if same tune) or harmonies, or adding isntruments - even if in places they were countermelodies with meshing rhythms (so long as they were in tune and in time - someone knows who I am talking about.....). Since I usually accompanymyself on guitar there are often "bridge" sections on the guitar and I have been known to get very crabby when someone wants to play those differently, or press on into the next verse while I am still playing the "bridge".

BUT I do think it is bad form to sing different chorus or song words (except perhaps late in the evening when all have drink taken, and it makes more sense and fun say to sing a Kipper or other comedian version - eg "Rolling Drunk" in stead of "Rolling Home", although you have to pick your time and victim) or tunes unless they do harmonise.

Another thing I find very rude but sadly prevalent these days is that if say I start doing a song or have been doing a song, another person starts to sing it. Fine if I am not there, or if they have asked.   Again there are exceptions: when amongst good friends it can be a bit of fun to try to pre-empt someone by doing "his" song before him - and if the whole room does it it leaves him scratching for what to sing, grin, but again you have to pick your time and victim.

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Leadfingers
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:04 AM

Taking over someone else's song is to say the least impolite !!

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Rasener
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:03 AM

I like that one LF :-)

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Leadfingers
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 08:52 AM

I have been known to stop and sit down if someone 'took over' a song or tune I was doing - A casuall- OK - You do it YOUR way and sit down CAN bring the message ho,e !

Subject: RE: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 08:10 AM

no, I think they are rude in overwhelming your performance.

Could you start by saying that you want to sing this new (to you) song they way you learnt it?

Or would you like some songs no one is likely to know - I've heard so many songs on Mudcatter CDS that no-one in my part of Oz sings or knows that I'm sure we have stuff here that your lot would not know!

sandra

Subject: Versions of songs, and etiquette
From: Mikefule
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 08:00 AM

For the last however many years, I have sung my own material, mainly parodies or other humorous songs. Over the last year or so, I've been slowly introducing some "proper" songs into my repertoire.

A lot of the "standards" are already "spoken for" in the sense that someone in my Morris side or local club has already made the song their own. So although I practise those songs for "training", I've been trying to find other songs for my own repertoire, and mainly choosing songs that I've seldom or never heard performed at a club or in a session.

So imagine my dismay when almost without fail, when I unveil a "new" song, not only does almost everyone else in the room know it, but they also know a significantly different version: either a different chorus, or a different tune, or sometimes both.

This is made worse when some individuals insist on singing the verses as well as the choruses, and when they insist on "helpfully" singing their "more authentic" version loudly enough to "correct" me mid song.

The amazing variety of versions is part of the tradition. Take a "bog standard" song like "Lowlands" and there must be dozens of variants. Sometimes the protagonist is male, sometimes female. Sometimes it is only three verses, sometimes 8. Sometimes the verses are rhyming couplets, and sometimes a single line repeated.

But surely, the version that the singer is singing is the only one that matters **at that moment**. And unless it's an "all join in" (like "Rolling Home") then the singer does the verses, and the group only does the choruses.

In my previous incarnation as a folk club regular, in the 1980s, I do not remember this being an issue.

Or am I being crabby and unreasonable?