photographing/recording musicians

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 23 Dec 07 - 03:57 AM

"I never said I didn't think I have to ask - please don't put words in my mouth."
From your post of 21 Dec 07 - 04:18 AM, Jim "And if sometimes people record without asking - so what..."

I accept your committment, Jim; the thread is also full of references to the way of thinking, not necessarily to you.

As I said to Art, I'll leave it like that....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 07 - 03:12 AM

Brendy,
I never said I didn't think I have to ask - please don't put words in my mouth.
I have outlined situations where it was difficult, nigh impossible to ask, am I imagining them? If you believe so, please attend a session at the Willie Clancy School and count the recorders.
We tend not to record such events, they are not what we do.
"It stains the term 'collector', Jim. I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook."
All our collecting work has been one-to-one, go and listen to it sometime, it's in the British Library, the Irish Traditional Music Archive and The Irish Folklore Department, and soon will be available in West Clare when we manage to set up an archive there.
We have never made a penny out of our collected material. All royalties have been either paid to the singers or have been donated to ITMA for the furtherance of the music. We have never attempted to copyright what we have collected, but always attributed it to it's source. Please explain our 'mercenary outlook'.
Nor have we ever attempted to hang on to what we have collected, but have sought to make it as available as possible. We have always agreed with the people from whom we have recorded; - the songs, stories and music belong to everybody.
Mud-slinging never wins arguments, it only muddies them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 09:00 PM

Fair enough, Art..., I'll leave it at that.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Art Thieme
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:50 PM

With all due respect:

Once again, this in-your-face, I'm-more-sociologically-correct-than-thou, confrontation/conversation never would've happened or been a problem some few short years ago. For those of us who were there then, this discourse simply wasn't relevant, then, and doesn't matter now.

Folks, things is-what-is! We will be dead and gone soon enough!! Then you can warp and re-write history all you want---to your heart's content. The photos and the music will have been saved and archived for the edification of all who care to find the stuff we cared so much about. It was a wondrous privilege and mission to sing the found gems on the byways of the U.S.A.---and an exhilarating treasure hunt of discovery where we spent our glorious youthful energies striving to put the gestalt together.

In the meantime, the FOLK ALLIANCE will be giving their most prestigious award to ROUNDER RECORDS at their 2008 convention in Memphis, Tennessee! Why??? For keeping so much of the saved material available for everyone in this strange new millennium...

Personally, I need to thank the many, many people and concert makers, and club owners, and radio stations who recorded my music through all the years, and handed me copies of the tapes they'd made. And they usually did it without permission from me because it just wasn't thought to be necessary!

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 06:08 PM

Look, Dave, I only go by what is said to me and the way it is said. I'm from the tradition; my maternal grandfather was the local fiddle legend where I come from, a song and music collector of note, and a fine singer, apparently, to boot.... so we can stop the name-dropping, now.

I know of Jim's work; I lived on the backroad between Tulla & Feakle for many years. East Clare is very close to me, and it is the style of traditional that me and my musical partner (a fiddle player from Lough Graney) play over here.

The interaction between Collector and Exponent has always been a more personal connection. Relationships, close ones, have been built up over the years between these people.
Those were in the days when people had more time....

Now, with all the modern, instant methods available, I'm afraid that that respect I talk of is in danger of getting turfed aside under the guise of 'collecting the music'

I'm sure that Jim does ask... I have no doubt about it, in fact. In 'the old days' I'm sure it was considered more of an occasion when the collector was knocking around. Nowadays everywhere you look there's a mini-disc or mp3 player being discreetely slipped into the front pocket.

Now, I don't mind being recorded; most of the musicians I know, don't.

I cannot see, however that if the trouble cannot be taken to get in touch somehow with the person you have recorded, to acknowledge them in that small way, then the circle has not been completed by the collector.

The fact that Jim says he does not think he should have to, is not a reflection on the work of the collector as a grouping, neither is it dependent on the useable quality of said recording.

It is a moral issue that concerns the relationships between people.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 05:40 PM

I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook.

Wow, he must be worth a fortune then considering the hours upon hours upon weeks, upon months, upon years he has spent recording, writing and distributing traditional material.

Actually Brendy money has often been the last thing on his mind.

You clearly have no idea of the man (and his partner), of the work he has done, and the monetary reward he has taken from that.

Or to put it another way, the world of traditional music would be a much poorer place without him and Pat Mackenzie.

But don't take my word for it - here's what Peggy Seeger had to say in Living Tradition Magazine...

"....... there is no doubt that their work in the folksong world has been invaluable and dedicated. Most of the collectors who've done that have had a kind of tunnel vision, without which their work would not have been as productive. They stuck their necks out and their heads are getting chopped off. They are in good company."

She wrote that in the late 1990's - very prescient.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:20 PM

"Depends on the musicians, surely"

Musicians are musicians, Jim: The sipposed carriers of the tradition.
If you didn't have them you would have no tradition to record.

You told that story about Maguire before... must be a wee party-piece of yours

Well, obviously you will continue to dance all over other people in order to record the all-important music.

You lack respect, however in areas where it is extremely important to not to, and I find that a rather unpleasant trait in any person. Nothing, seemingly, is going to convince you to change your ways

It stains the term 'collector', Jim.
I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 02:46 PM

The possibility of getting a recording which is suitable for general release in the conditions we are discussing is negligible.
I can recall only one occasion in thirty years where anybody was ripped off in the described circumstances.
The main concerts at one of the early Willie Clancy Schools was held at Spanish Point Convent rather than the usual venue, which was being worked on.
Just before it began, the owner of a well-known record company appeared, swept aside the pre-arranged p.a. microphones on the stage, proceeded to place his own in a suitable position for recording and sat down in the front row.
Because of who he was, the organisers did not stop him, and he made ready to record the concert, until the fiddle player Sean Maguire appeared on stage, walked over to your man and said, "My name is Sean Maguire, my agent's name is **** ****, my recording fee is *****, and if I see your fingers anywhere near those buttons I'll feckin' dance on them".
Such behaviour is extremely rare, should not, nor would be tolerated.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 11:26 AM

Cap'n,
With respect, we are discussing the photographing and recording of singers and musicians, not what use is made of those photographs and recordings.Quote from Jim Carroll
surely the two are interconnected,the musician /singer is entitled to know what use the recordings are going to be put to,that is the importance of obtaining permission.
I was recorded by a fellow at Chelmsford folkclub in 1982,with my ex wife,he asked permission first,the recordings were for his own private use[he gave me a copy],fine,
The recording quality,was very good,the performances were good,I intend to have them transferred to cd,to add to a cd of a vinyl lp we made together,here is an example of the usefulness of people recording.but he asked permission first.
If he is out there and recognises himself, perhaps he could contact me,The date of the recording was 31 10 1982, Dick and Sue Miles Chelmsford Folk Club contact me at. http://www.dickmiles.com/introduction.htm,
.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 10:22 AM

Cap'n,
With respect, we are discussing the photographing and recording of singers and musicians, not what use is made of those photographs and recordings.
I have made clear my attitude to the mis-use of recordings (Kennedy etc), yet, when I raise the question of tinkering with songs got from traditional performers and then copyrighting them - (now that's what call theft) - deafening silence as usual.
It seems that we are once again working in the double standards zone.

"Just thank the heavens then, that you have musicians to record in the first place."
Brendy:
Depends on the musicians, surely
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:34 AM

Yes Folkiedave. You omitted the first part of that sentence: "I react with the level of politeness I am met with"

Un-toss-givers generally start off on the back foot, with me.

The tradition survived before clandestine recording.
One is not a pre-requisite of the other.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:15 AM

Jim ,in the days when you sang,if you had sung a song and forgotten a line,or missed out a verse,something that has happened to most singers at some time,I am sure you would have been pissed off if someone had put it up on you tube,Without asking you first.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:13 AM

Brendy,

Compare and contrast.......

... so basically, you don't give a toss.

... but I would never dream of discouraging anyone who shows an interest in the music.


Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:25 AM

... so basically, you don't give a toss.

Just thank the heavens then, that you have musicians to record in the first place.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:09 AM

It's fairly obvious that we're not going to agree on this.
Yes, it is impolite to take photographs and record without permission, but no less impolite than taking the songs we have been handed down and singing them without seeking permission first (when that has been possible - and it has been possible in the last few decades), and often without even the acknowledgement of the source. On occasion, revival singers have even copyrighted arrangements/versions (the two words are interchangeable) of songs they have taken from our source singers.
"Walking over musicians"; who has attempted to justify such behaviour - not me, not anybody.
No, I wasn't accused of being a free-loader - the term in itself is a nasty and unnecessary one when used about anybody.
As far as taking photographs, some people have expressed their opposition to this in terms of the intrusive nature of flash -I agree with this totally. But others have spoken of it as if the very act of taking a photgraph 'steals the soul' as was once believed.
I have gained great pleasure and not a little knowledge from the photographs of Brian Shuel, Eddis Thomas and Doc Rowe, and no; I don't believe they tapped their subject on the shoulder and said, "excuse me, do you mind if I take your photograph". If they had done so, the end result would have been very different.
I am pleased we (Pat mainly) took time to get photographs of people we met (and knew) MacColl, Seeger, Seamus Ennis, Paddy Tunney, Martin Byrnes, Tim Lyons, Walter Pardon, Tom Lenihan, Martin Reidy, Junior Crehan, Duncan Williamson, and the hundreds of Travellers we found and recorded..... While we didn't always directly asked permission to do so, we made no attempts to hide when we were doing. The end result now stands as a record of the tradition as we encountered it and they are very much a part of our archive.
Passing on the songs was never just a favourable aspect of the tradition - IT WAS THE TRADITION, and without it, our song tradition would be very much impoverished - non-existant even.
Aural and visual recording has become a part of the passing-on process, whether we like it or not, and although it is, of course, preferable that certain niceties are observed, as far as I'm concerned, the passing on and keeping alive of our traditional songs and music is far more important.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:59 PM

Thanks Russ. I spot sanctimonious posts fairly quickly...
They usually start with 'IMHO' ;-)

Look..., I understand the way it goes in pubs & venues; it's where I reside. I meet polite people, and I meet impolite people.
I react with the level of politeness I am met with; I have always been like that, but I would never dream of discouraging anyone who shows an interest in the music.

People who are 'in it' for the music generally are polite; I spot those people fairly quickly, also, and I react to that.

Jim is right to a degree in that he (as I do) recognise that there are times when it is difficult to make that connection, and although nobody has to, it's jolly bad form not to go back and, even just for politeness' sake, to make things right with the person you recorded it from.
No-one might be making money from this, but you, as the recorder are more 'enriched' by that recording, I imagine.

The music is the important part of all of this; I acknowledge that, also.

But that should not give anybody the right to walk over the musician to get it.

IMO

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:40 PM

Brenday,

Thanks for the clarification.

My statement was purposely vague and mildly sanctimonious.

It is perfectly reasonable for you to hope that people will meet your expectations of politeness.

My experience with traditional musicians is that politeness is somewhat context dependent.

Russ (Permanent GUEST and traditional musician)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Skivee
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:06 PM

Clog Iron said:" I don't consider that as a minor performer within a large group I've somehow become public property."
If you are performing in a public place, as part of a performance for the general public, then you cede you right to privacy. The general public would have the right to photograph you, even if they sell the photos. They are in their rights as long as the picture taking isn't disruptive and thephotos aren't used in some slanderous, or dishonest way.
In a private venue, this isn't as clear. The folks running a private venue can have a policy to restrict photography, sound recordings, etc..
On the other hand, asking permission is the best course. If a performer asks to not be photographed or recorded, I would respect that.
Pro phoyographers frequently cover themselves by obtaining a model release even when shooting is not restricted.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 02:50 PM

People who wish to record usually do so from a distance, on small recorders, usually with built-in mikes - I often wonder whether what they are recording is listenable.

I have just been working with one of these Jim, an Edirol RO-9 made by Roland. When saved as a broadcast quality file (you have a choice) it is exactly that - broadcast quality. They are so tiny because there is no need to have a tape or similar (everything is saved on a card identical to that of a digital camera) and there is no speaker (use earphones or listen later via computer).

I am no expert on these things but the quality really is remarkable. So is the cost of course. These are not toys, but serious bits of kit. You could certainly use these for field recordings with confidence.

Dave

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Clog Iron
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 02:03 PM

This is a difficult one. As somebody whose public performances on the Folk scene is as a musician with a dance team rather than as an individual artist on the festival concert stage, I've so far been flattered by the interest in what we do. There are photos of me on websites and we appear on YouTube. Knowing that it exists helps me though the day when I'm at work. However I wonder how I'd feel if there was a photo published that I wasn't happy about? I don't consider that as a minor performer within a large group I've somehow become public property. The issue of ownership of the music we play has been debated many times before - I think maybe lastly in the wake of Peter Kennedy's death - but what about our ownership of our own image? I don't know. I know that actors usually have clauses in their contracts where they receive payments if their photo or likeness is used on something like a book or a computer game as a spin off from the film or TV program they have appeared in.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 06:35 AM

"Earlier I outlined a situation where it would have been difficult or even impossible to ask - I received no reply."

The replies are all over this thread, Jim... you ask before you record...., and I cannot find a place where I called you a free-loader

But still you don't get the point:
"I'm sure there are lots of people out there who sing songs they got from recordings of Harry Cox, or Sam Larner, or Elizabeth Cronin - some of you might even have made albums which included such material.
Hands up those of you you contacted any of the families to ask permission to do so."

We have been talking about recording the musicians themselves, not 'cover versions' of the material.

You really are trying hard to avoid the fact that it's a manners 'thing'

Because that's all it is to me....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Edthefolkie
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 05:51 AM

From a mere punter's viewpoint - much of this is a question of degree isn't it?

Not long ago a very well known British musician (you can guess who) made a return to gigging after several years of severe illness. His band's first gig, which I attended, was a triumph for him, the band, and the audience. Our man was absolutely bowled over by our genuine love and respect for him, and everybody went home very happy and uplifted. Many of the audience photographed the gig and the band's website duly got some free photos.

However - a few weeks later camcorders appeared and one vid went straight to YouTube without permission from the band. Now they are professional musicians and, strictly speaking, their intellectual property rights were being nicked.

A few weeks later, another very well known gent who was once in a band with the first gent appeared at the same venue. He specifically asked for no shots to be taken - and everybody respected that.

I videoed the second gent with his band at a festival somewhere around 1983 using a ginormous VHS camera and recorder. In those days you would only see one or two other people at a festival with video kit. I would never post the footage anywhere without his permission. But the genie's out of the bottle now - you can film an hour of good footage with something the size of a matchbox.

So I can only suggest that if musicians do not want stills or movies, they should make it clear at the outset and the audience should not be upset - after all doing gigs is some people's main source of income and they ain't gonna know where the pics/vids are going to end up.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 05:00 AM

Having just followed a link on another thread, re a You-Tube recording of Dougie MacLean which is pretty awful to say the least, I am sorely tempted to change my mind.
Recording without my permission is not a problem but putting it on the Internet.... I'd have to say "No" to that.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:18 AM

Brendy,
Yes, we did ask the people we recorded first, but the bulk of the recording we did was one-to-one, usually in their homes, and it was for the purpose of archiving. All this was agreed beforehand with the performers
To equate our situation to the one being discussed here would be extremely misleading.
Thoughout the thirty-odd years we spent collecting, the impression we always got is that what we were receiving permission for was the singers' time and effort - not the songs. It almost universally was taken for granted by them that we were welcome to the songs and stories - it almost went without saying.
Earlier I outlined a situation where it would have been difficult or even impossible to ask - I received no reply.
I think I find the term 'free-loaders' particularly offensive and depressing.
Anybody involved in traditional song and music could be described as a free-loader living off the generosity of others by those unpleasant enough to wish to describe them/us as such.
I'm sure there are lots of people out there who sing songs they got from recordings of Harry Cox, or Sam Larner, or Elizabeth Cronin - some of you might even have made albums which included such material.
Hands up those of you you contacted any of the families to ask permission to do so.
Twenty-odd years ago we recorded a wonderful Traveller woman singer with a magnificent repertoire, some of which we included on an anthology of Travellers' songs. One of those songs caught the fancy of a number of revival singers and has appeared on half a dozen of their albums. While it would have been relatively simple to do so, nobody ever contacted Mary to ask her permission to record the song; nobody ever asked our permission. NOR SHOULD THEY HAVE TO.
Whatever I might think of the various renditions of the song, the fact that it has been taken up means that it stands a fair chance of staying in circulation, which means that future generations will have a chance to get the same enjoyment from it that I have. This leaves me with the feeling that what we have been doing over half our lifetime has not been wasted.
To answer a point made by The Cap'n earlier; I'm sure Harry Cox, or anybody would have been extremely uncomfortable to have a microphone 'stuck under their noses', but in my experience, it's really not like that, particularly with the latest mini-recorders. People who wish to record usually do so from a distance, on small recorders, usually with built-in mikes - I often wonder whether what they are recording is listenable.
Sure, it's nice to be asked if somebody wants to record your performance, but it really isn't always possible.
And if sometimes people record without asking - so what - nobody is going to become rich on those recordings, and to go through the beg-for-the-biscuit routine every time you perform seems extremely petty, to say the least.
Walter Pardon summed it up for me. He had been told of two folk 'stars' squabbling over which of them was going to put one of his songs on their albums. He said "they're not my songs, they're everybodys".
He went on (can't find the direct quote so I'll paraphrase)
"I had a visit from a man from Happisburg (a few miles down the coast from where Walter lived). who told me I shouldn't be giving my songs away as once you gave them to somebody they were no longer yours. I told him, that may be true, but once you die, they'll die with you, so somebody may as well have the benefit of them".
Would that everybody shared Walter's foresight.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 06:51 PM

Thanks Russ...
I'm more really talking about recording here..., and I am concentrating on the interaction (if any) between recorder and recordee.

I have read post after post, above how 'the older musicians' gave, ...'freely' even, their songs and music to 'the collectors'

Indeed they did, and I wouldn't have my knowledge without them.

So 'giving' is one thing.

On the other hand, we have many of the same posters advocating 'taking it anyway', which is a whole different attitude and interaction process from the mutual respect of the older days. It's almost an 'I'm OK, You're OK' scenario, if you want to involve the transactional aspect to it.

I have never refused time, music, or song to anyone who has asked me that simple "... do you mind if...?". It is the expression associated with the according of equal dignity to the human being you are interacting with, and if we do treat others the way we like to be treated ourselves, then any other ethic shouldn't come into the equation.

It's not an 'ego thing' (... that, again is only a Straw Man...), it's simply recognising that respect is a two-way street.

But I though all of that was obvious....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 05:21 PM

Brendy,

Thanks for the feedback, but I need some clarification regarding your comment before I can address it.
I think you are qualifying your agreement, but how?

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 02:07 PM

"A musician who "draws from" tradition in any way has one duty:
give the music as freely as it was given to you."

I agree, but I do notice you use the word give twice in that sentence.

It's a lot different from the word take

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 12:37 PM

IMHO

A musician who "draws from" tradition in any way has one duty:
give the music as freely as it was given to you.

The music should not, must not, stop with you.

Russ (Permanent GUEST and occasional soapbox orator)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 02:02 AM

I also notice that among the attitudes you think are disappearing, Jim is the respect with which you approached those people who were so kind as to give you their material.
I don't get the impression that you recorded them without their approval

You seem to have done away with all that social niceity in your last paragraph.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 01:33 AM

"As long as people record songs and music discreetly - I wonder what the objection is to being recorded...."

Jim, how many time to I/we have to tell you: asking first!

Respect and disrespect.

Personally I hate 'limelight'; you wont find a picture of me on my website. I just want to play the music.

But I don't want some a bunch of free-loaders coming around me thinking they can take anything from me without asking, and defending their right to do so.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Skivee
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 11:10 PM

Many of you know that I play in a band that performs at renaissance fairs around the country.
I don't mind folks taking our pictures. If fact we have gotten some very nice photos taken by fans...along with many that are unremarkable. Since we are being paid to perform in a public venue and we are featured performers, we know we will be photographed.
About the only time I was really bothered was when a guy with a high end amateur video camera walked up on stage during a song and moved across the stage videoing each of us from about 1/2 meter away, then moved off to the stairs on the other side. If I hadn't been mid-song, I would have given him something to chew on...self-indulgent jerk.
I also had to weigh the options of stopping the show to tell him off vs. making the interuption as short as possible by not reacting.
Most are not that stupid.
FYI I was a photographer for many years, so I know how it feels to be on both ends of the lens.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 10:23 PM

But in the end it's not about the performers is it, it's about the music. If you love it it will love you back, no strings attached!

When you bring everything else into play like cameras, comcorders, recording devices does it mean it has to then become about the performers or can it still stay all about the musice without the performer's ego gettiing in the way?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 05:54 PM

most performers love both.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:15 PM

Thanks Jim, do we love the limelight or do we love the music?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:54 PM

Examples of attitudes I think may have disappeared:
We were taping during a singers recital at the Willie Clancy Summer School one year when I realised we were rapidly running out of tape, so we decided to be selective until we could replenish our stock. One singer noticed we weren't recording him so, after the rectal he jumped off the stage and came over to us, demanding to know why we hadn't recorded such-and-such a song; "it's a great song, everybody should hear it". He then dragged us into a side room and insisted we record the song from him. He was right - it was a great song.
Martin Howley, an elderly rural labourer from North Clare gave us a few dozen songs in the mid-seventies.
We went over one summer and were told he was ill, so we went up to visit him. Finding him quite weak, we sat chatting for about half an hour, when he asked us did we have the tape recorder, as he had remembered a few more songs.
Pat insisted that we had only come to visit him and didn't want to put him to any trouble. His reply still brings a lump to the throat: "I'm a poor man; I have nothing to leave but my songs and I want you to have them".
He died of cancer of the eye a couple of months later; (a number of his songs can be heard on 'Around The Hills of Clare' the proceeds of which have been donated to The Irish Traditional Music Archive in Dublin, along with the recordings).
Anybody who ever visited Ewan MacColl (the Aleister Crowley of the revival) at his home will tell you of the filing cabinet draw stuffed with multi-copies of songs he and Peggy had researched for their own use, which were there to be taken away by anybody interested, the only condition being that you never took the one marked 'last copy' so that more duplicated could be made (this was in the days of carbon paper rather than a home printer). We still have several dozen copies of those songs, many with Peggy's tune transcriptions attached.
We visited Walter Pardon for the first time just after he had returned from the US bi-centenary celebrations. We drove to his house and found him working in the garden. Not wishing to interrupt him, we stood talking for ten minutes when he asked did we have a tape recorder. He brought us in and sang for the whole afternoon, stopping only to enquire whether he would offend Pat by singing 'The Bush of Australia'.
As long as people record songs and music discreetly - I wonder what the objection is to being recorded - what on earth do performers think is going to happen to such recordings.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,sparticus
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:37 PM

Well said Barry Finn!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:19 PM

HaHaHa, "hadn't seen it in that kind of light" HeHeHe

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Hot to trot
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 01:48 PM

'I've only encountered someone flashing in my face a couple of times, while it can be a toss off so what, if I couldn't recover.'

Please keep your sexual experiences out of this thread.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 01:37 PM

Why don't we all stay home & play with ourselves, privately, it's not like we can't do it on our own, play with ourselves that is.

Making music with other musicians (as opposed to giging, or the practice of group practice/sessions, which I detest & should be called closed sessions) is a communal intercourse & many may take it for granted but it's sometimes the equalivant of a spiritual movement that deserves, demands & disires being captured. It, like we are a fleeting moment that might never happen in the same way again. Who thinks themselves so important that they'd demand permission of this? Think of how tempermental sessions are, 1 asshole can ruin it or just changing the corner where it's been played over the yrs can through it off, so if someone thinks it's worth recording or photographing tell 'em "fuck off" & ruin it for them, you & the rest of the gang. Swallow a little bit instead of spitting it'll leave a better taste in your mouth fo afterwards.

This is making a mountain out of a mole hill, stop taking yourselves so seriously, none of us are as important as the music so whatever it is that you think you're protecting by coverting your likeness or your sounds, get over it, it's not that big a deal if you get framed, shot or redubed without permission. It's not someone being cheeky, it's someone that has an enough of an interest to bother & may not be aware of your shelfessness. In over 30 yrs of sessions I've only incountered someone flashing in my face a couple of times, while it can be a toss off, so what, if I couldn't recover I didn't know my song/tune as well as I should've but I can say that there's been so much recording & snapshot taking by both participants & non participants that I see it as 2nd nature to the session. In some bars, pictures of musicians & session has become common decore for the walls & I rather like it too. Here in the New England area where I frequent the most & the few odd times in New York & San Francisco it's more unusual that this occurance would not take place.

Maybe you can ask the photographers to post the likenesses here on Mudcat, would you balk then?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 12:54 PM

I am happy to share my music,see[dickmilesmusicyoutube]and also my website, www dickmiles.com.
I do think it is good manners to ask first or even afterwards.
a few years ago it would have been customary if another musician had a tune, to ask the musician can you teach me it,speaking for myself I have never refused,
now someone can tape you on a mobile phone and learn the tune without asking.I think this attitude shows contempt,.[cant be bothered with the player, just want the tune]
when I learned tunes off a traditional fiddler friend of mine,part of the learning of the tunes was the friendship I built up with him.
learning about his life,learning how he came to learn the tunes himself,learning about local musical history etc.I would never have dreamed of recording him without his permission,in fact he explicitly said to me that I wasnt to let anyone else hear the recording[because he didnt think he played as well as he used to].
IMO if people are interested and respect music they should also be interested in AND respect the carrier.,they are likely to learn far more as well,the musiciamn might say well sometimes I dont play it like that ,but I do an ornament somewhere else ETC .

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 12:04 PM

What Art Thieme said.

Several posters from the states have made the same point, but I'll add my version.

I've been doing old time music in the states for 40+ years and recording and photographing have always been a given.

I have many festival tapes with the same pattern:
- A tune is played.
- Someone asks "What was that?"
- The tune is named.
- There is a chorus of clicks as portable recording devices are turned off.

Cameras and recorders have always been ubiquitous at concerts as well.


Russ (Permanent GUEST and aging folkie)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:25 AM

"...will all those wishing to record please form an orderly queue for permission..."

You don't have to go that far, Jim.

You could simply inform on such a notice that it is customary, and considered good manners to ask the musician's permission to record.
If you wanted to, that is

I know it can't be stopped; I'm more lamenting the fact that there are people out there who think it is their God-given right to record you no matter what.

If you read the posts, nobody objects to recording or photography, per se.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:18 AM

"... so we can prepare ourselves..."?

What kind of nonsense is that, Barry?
Come on.....

It's not a service musicians are providing at sessions; where I come from it is only a spectator sport if you're not in the music grouping. Remember that sessions were always meant to pass the music on between the musicians, first and foremost.

What on earth is wrong with asking permission. The 'Old Timers' would have been asked permission, too, 'cos in those days everybody was a hell of a lot nicer to each other.

"Please Brendy, this is filled with some self indulgence & some self importance, it was started that way, with that intention & a cheap shot of stirring the pot"

... not quite sure what that sentence means.

Anyway..., you don't seem to have a problem with the theory of asking musicians forst, so at least that's half the battle.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:09 AM

"don't take if you don't ask".
Of course you ask when you can; the situations I was referring to were those where it is not practical or even possible to get direct permission.
We have a week-long music summer school here in the west of Ireland where some of the finest musicians around play in extremely crowded sessions, at small recitals and at a major concert on the last night. The events are full of musicians, many of them learning instruments and desperate to get material to practice on. Many of them carry recorders in order to catch such material. What are you going to do - put up notices saying "will all those wishing to record please form an orderly queue for permission"?
I am often heartened when I meet younger singers and players whose singing and playing indicate that they have gone to source singers and musicians for their material and inspiration; this has only been made possible by the generosity of those older performers in allowing others to take their material.
Barry is right - we seem to have moved a long way from the situation when the songs and music were for sharing.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:44 AM

I'll take my tongue out of my cheek long enough to say this.

Please Brendy, this is filled with some self indulgence & some self importance, it was started that way, with that intention & a cheap shot of stirring the pot. All well & good if you're working at your job/gig, but pictures & recordings at sessions, give me a break.


Place a sign at the barroom door, "we are good, we ask that you ask us 1st for the photo op & a recording, so we can prepare ourselves".

At venues it is common that there are signs saying "No Cameras or Recording devices". That fair enough but sk the owner of any place where a session's being played & you'll probably find yourself out the door.

Jim's right about the old timers, they were more interested in the music to concern themselves with PR relations

Barr

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 08:22 PM

If you don't know, then it is no proof...

"you're not all that gorgeous nor do you all sound so heavenly that you are the gift from angels"
What does that have to do with it?

The thread is sort of split between those who show respect to others, and those who don't.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Barry, at my wife's workplace
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 07:19 PM

You don't need permission to go through some one's trash, once outed it's public. That's why police (US) don't need a warrant to search it. Of course that is a bit way out there but Jim has a point about the older source singers & sessions & I agree. If you don't want to be recorded in a session of have a snap shot taken then either back out of the session, tell the feller No outright or close the session to the public. There are many folks (tourists espicially) that wander into a session & have never seen the likes & want to take the memory home. How rude of any to demand permission from them, most won't know any musical or session edicate or have the slightest idea that it even exists, go look in a mirror, please, you're not all that gorgeous nor do you all sound so heavenly that you are the gift from angels. At a gig, that's where you work, differrent story altogether.
The Boston Globe shot pictures for the Sunday edition at last night's session (Green Briar in Brighton) not a complait or murmur heard from anyone. They did make themselves known but I don't think they asked permission of every person there.

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 03:36 PM

I think our 'older traditional singers' had a more courteous bunch of people to deal with, anyway....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 03:29 PM

Yes Jim, I think you are missing the point, really.

"I have to say that if our older traditional singers had adopted a similar prima-dona attitude to being recorded to that which has been displayed here, our repertoires, and our enjoyment and understanding of the tradition would have been very much diminished."

That's taking the analysis of the posts a bit far.. It is nothing more prima donna-ish than adhering to the simple social contract: 'don't take if you don't ask'.

The contention that the ...'performer is in the public eye, so screw the conventions...,' can get defined way beyond the point where logic lies.
If you were in a pub and having a chat with your friends, would I have the right therefore, to sit discreetely behind you and record your conversation, as Im a big fan of the pub culture and just love to hear everybody talk?
Given the same premise as you purport, I would.

Fine.... Could I then go through your rubbish bin in my quest for more research?

If not, why not?
If I don't need your permission for the former, I shouldn't need it for the latter.

It's called 'respect for your fellow man', Jim.

Sorry you can't see it that way.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 06:25 AM

At a gig I did as part of the Morpeth Northumbrian Gathering back in April I was asked by a chap in the audience if he minded me filming part of my performance. This was novel, so I said okay, providing he put the resulting footage up on YouTube, which he did!

Here's the link: Sedayne at Morpeth 2007

The concert was 'Saint Cuthbert: A Life in Miracles', a sequence of of stories from Bede's 'Life...' canted with traditional Northumbrian songs to the accompaniment of my Hungarian Citera (aka The Musical Plank).