 sj |
||
|
||
The Concept of FREED Folkmusic
|
|
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:52 PM I've heard it, at least implied, many times. It's the kind of attitude that keeps people away from folk music in droves. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:42 PM By the way. How's this for a basic premise? The matter of the quality of the singers: "You don't have to be able to sing well. It's folk music!" This is what Conrad is really saying. And you know, it's not the first time I've heard someone say that! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:41 PM "Right in your back garden. Thats how I do it." Do you have a garden that will accommodate several stages and many hundreds of people? |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:38 PM During the early 1960s, most coffeehouses in my area paid something like $15.00 a night, and the one I sang in a lot had me singing three evenings a week (Thurs., Fri., and Sat.). Many coffeehouses had singers only on Friday and Saturday. That's $2,340 a year, Conrad. Out of which I had to pay for gasoline to get to and from the place. And income tax. Yes, I had to file a Schedule C with my 1040, because I was earning money working as an independent contractor (to the coffeehouse). Singing at "The Place Next Door" three nights a week, and ignoring such things as expenses, it would have taken me something like 427 years to earn a million dollars. Yeah, Conrad, we're all rolling in wealth! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:15 PM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension by those defendant upon the status quo- especially professional musicians. In the short term they might loose but in the long term they would do much better. They suffer from poor long term vision." The "new paradigm" is not new at all, nor is it radical. For over fifty years I have heard various self-style "innovators" and "visionaries (!)" with their half-assed ideas about ways to promote folk music, and at base, all these "new paradigms" invariably involve trying to bring the whole field down to their level of incompetence. And it's that level of incompetence that inspires their goof-ball ideas. They're jealous of not just those who are getting paid to perform, but those whom the vast majority of people prefer to hear sing rather than them, even when those singers are not getting paid, nor do they particular care whether or not they are paid. People like Conrad want a prominence that they are unwilling to take the effort to earn. Simple as that. ". . . folk pros strutting around, dominating festivals and excluding imperfect performers and making sure their audiences are being ripped off. . . ." 'Scuse me, folks. I've got to go now, and find myself a folk festival I can go around and dominate, exclude imperfect performers, and make sure my audiences are being properly ripped off. Conrad simply doesn't realize how important it is to we wealthy, BMW-driving, professional singers of folk songs who travel from festival to festival in our Lear jets and stay in luxury hotels (with swimming pools to loll around by) keep folk music severely limited in order to exclude the poor, downtrodden working class (and those who choose not to work, living off their wives' incomes instead), and limit our festivals and other performances to only those wealthy enough to buy tickets and who can afford to buy themselves many gallons of expensive beer to drink (so they can "awaken their muse") while listening to us perform. This is a call to the barricades!! Don (sitting on top of the huge bag of money that I earned by singing in coffeehouses) Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Sandman Date: 25 Sep 10 - 01:28 PM I object to being exploited.one of the most satisfying experiences for me has been busking, yes ,i busk for money.I make alot of money busking ordinary people [non folkies put money in my hat. it is the most honest way of performing, no hype what you see is what you get, frequently people tell me youare really good you should be singing in clubs. Ismile , and think to myself been there done that, but with busking, there is no one to stop you getting a gig, because you are a stroppy so and so, people judge purely on my music ,and they show their appreciation by chucking me fivers[ as did ronnie drew of the dubliners]long may it continue, i never turn money away. however i am happy to put videos up on you tube so people can learn songs, and i do that for nothing. but i couldnt afford to do that if people didnt book me at festivals and clubs and if they didnt put cross my palm with silver when i am busking |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:41 AM It is not that "ordinary people are not good enough to make music". Most of them don't want to. Most of them are happy for other people to make music for them to consume, just as they are happy for other people to bake their bread, make their clothes, and provide the other goods and services they use. The reason they're happy to do this is that they know that the professionals can do it better and cheaper than they can. Of course, some people like to make their own music, just as some like to bake their own bread or make their own clothes, but they're in the minority. The role of folk music in the pre-industrial world (and industrial world, come to that) was entertainment. People then didn't have access to professional entertainment, so they had to make their own. When the invention of the gramophone and wireless gave them access to professional entertainment, they had no further need for folk music, and all but a few willingly abandoned it. We may find that regrettable, but it was their choice. The simple fact is, modern society doesn't need folk music. It no longer has a role, except for a few hobbyists. Even those of us who are deeply involved with folk music engage with it very differently from the way traditional singers used to. To imagine that the majority of people just need to be exposed to folk songs in order to return to some imagined pre-industrial idyll where they spend their days singing to each other is simply fantasy. The way you go on, anyone would think that large festivals with a preponderance of professional performers are the only outlet for folk music, when they are just one of many. People can choose to go to these, or to folk clubs, house concerts, pub sessions, even communal self-help events where they can shit in a field if they like - most choose to go to a variety of these. You claim to want to spread folk music, but spend your whole time arguing for a one-size-fits-all approach which would reduce the diversity of ways in which it can be spread. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:01 AM Any music would apply But you've been persistently talking about "folk culture" in this thread - "folk culture" that's special and needs to be nurtured - learned, not just for entertainment. So... Learning songs installs them in the minds of people. Instills, eh? Why, I wonder - if a song is, say, "Sympathy For The Devil" by the Stones. Is this folk music? Entertaining with them just leaves people happy for a moment. Really? Seeing Reverend Gary Davis in 1964 made me happy for a lifetime! |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 09:41 AM Any music would apply. Learning songs installs them in the minds of people. Entertaining with them just leaves people happy for a moment. Give a man a fish....he will be fed teach him to fish and he will be able to provide for himself forever..... Yes things- but things that you have you can contribute whats wrong with that. Remember there is no profit in that. Things provided by vendors have profit added. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:22 AM Conrad - I think you're missing the essential points of my description of the little music festival/party we organise. There's a huge amount of sensible organisation involved. The festival, though there are no gate charges, still costs people money - because everyone is asked to provide something, and the something they provide has cost them money. And a large proportion of the music is provided freely by people who are consummate professionals. Your constantly reiterated comment that pro musicians by and large are simply not doing what is best for the music is simply not true in the folk world in this country. If you keep on reiterating it, it proves beyond doubt that you either simply haven't a clue or are perversely ignoring what everyone here is telling you. All the musicians I know and play with - of whom some make a modest living, some make a little money and some make no money whatsoever - are skilled, generous performers who contribute a huge amount to the music in my area. To hear you harp on about your mythical view of how the music is supposed to be socially organised and constructed fills me with incredulity. But can I ask yet again for some examples - just 2 or 3 will do - of the music that you feel falls into the category of folk music. Music that has to be learned and not entertained with. Music that has to be part of a "folk culture" - whatever that is. Music that falls into what you call your "paradigm". Why can't you respond to this simple request? I can only assume that you actually don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: GUEST,Hmmmm... Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:19 AM "Thank you lemonade lady." Who's going to break it to Conrad that the Lemonade Lady sells her lemonade at £2 (almost $4) a glass at several professional festivals, and is probably one of those he'd consider a rip-off merchant who is exploiting folk music? :) |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:16 AM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension" Nope, it been done before many times, and only works if people with the right attitudes cooperate. It's not radical, if anything it's idealistic. But I have read people say this countless times already in this thread.... |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 07:54 AM Thank you lemonade lady. It is terrible to see pros tell us that the old pre industrial role of folk music is dead. They state that people have "evolved" - consult darwin they did not evolve they were just sold and bought a bill of goods from the pros. Ordinary people are not good enough to make music. They need to hire someone who is. Simple. We can go back to the pre industrial role of folk music at any time. Right in your back garden. Thats how I do it. It is pointless from the position of a professional who would be taken down a few pegs in relation to the wider folk world. Factual evidence simple- with more access at all points there will be more people with access and more who can come to join in. Wil you know that occasionally there are free events but you also know that this is not the overall norm for the industry or community it is a very small part. It needs to be a very large part. Will- that it worked so well for you is a test- it will work all over the place so why not everywhere, all the time? Many on this thread have stated that the problem is that it will not work. We have also heard where it does work very very well and solves a big accessibility problem- self help festivals the way to go. Give the grant money back to the very poor, homeless and ill. We need to demand that professional musicians be ok with that which will develop the folk world provide access save in active form the greatist number of songs etc. Yes. We need to tell them- stop the arbitrary limitations and arbitrary barriers. Stick to the side events-weddings, private events. Once the audience grows more will demand these in the long run but now pro musicians by and large are simply not doing what is best for the music. It is a radical change but if the models work just fine cut the crap and join in the reforms. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: MikeL2 Date: 25 Sep 10 - 05:26 AM Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly - PM Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:24 AM <"The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension"> <"No it's not - it's just pointless. And, once again, you resort to insults for anyone who seems tainted with professionalism. And, once again, you provide no factual evidence whatsoever to support your "paradigm". Or should we say, dogma?">. Well said Will. But I think we are wasting our time here. There's no use knocking if therer's no-one in....!!! Cheers MikeL2 |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:39 AM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension by those defendant upon the status quo" As I've said uplist, as a hippy bird who enjoys roughing it, I'm cool with fields and bonfires and home-brew. But your model is too badly thought out even for someone with my minimal expectations, and you keep repeating yourself rather than offering more serious suggestions. Importantly, there must be *some* sanitary provision. I've done backpacking and yes, you can bury your poo if you're the only person around. But even trails get dodgy if they are well trodden. Several hundred people all shitting in the same field, even if everyone dug a hole, doesn't work. Particularly if they are pissed because they just don't bury it. Here's one alternative model that does work. At hippy fests like this: Small World in Kent there is a strong community ethic. Volunteers build shit pits with surrounding wooden structures. The jobs that you can do at such events work for the people who go there, including the sick and the unemployed. Pete who is physically fit but bi-polar is able to build the stages, erect marquees or dig out the shit pits. It's good for him. Sylvia who is partly physically disabled make fairy wings with the kids in the creche or paint up the signs. It's good for her. Everyone works together and contributes what they can and this generates a great deal of warmth and camaraderie between volunteers. No-one is being abused. Result: people are happy and go back every year! Although this model works. It only works for the type of people who are OK with that. And these types of groups are marginal in our society. They are people who already embrace an anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist/ecological, communal/semi-Marxist ethic and lifestyle (to what degree they are able). Most people in the Western world are not on this wavelength and will never be. So even following such an example, the groups of people wanting to join in that kind of experience will be very limited. Frankly your "radical" model as it stands, will attract even less interest from the wider community. And would never succeed in fulfilling your agenda. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:24 AM The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension No it's not - it's just pointless. And, once again, you resort to insults for anyone who seems tainted with professionalism. And, once again, you provide no factual evidence whatsoever to support your "paradigm". Or should we say, dogma? Sal (the lemonade lady): back garden festivals do happen. I'm a regular contributor to an an annual festival/party in the large back garden of a friend in Sussex. Each year, several of us erect awnings, PA system, blankets, chairs, bar area, food area, etc., in the garden. The back porch becomes the stage and we set out amps and mics and a guitar, a keyboard and a drum set. On the day, we put up a tall blackboard and provide a box of chalks. Those who want to perform - anything they want - get 3 songs/tunes or 15 minutes, whichever is the shorter and put their names on the board. The music starts at 2pm and finishes at 9pm, when we strike down the PA and gear and join everyone around a large fire. Kids play on swings and hammocks and table tennis in the front garden - where we also had an acoustic folk session this year - and everyone who comes, whether they perform or not, brings a food and drink contribution. The organisers themselves provide a huge amount of food and drink, and bring out a huge paella at 6pm for everyone to share. The party is by broad invitation only - simply because the space is limited to around that number. We get children singing with their parents or with their friends. We get hoary old folkies singing hoary old folk stuff - we get blues, jazz, classical music, comedy songs. We get complete beginners and consummate professionals - all playing for fun and completing the day. And we have a dedicated rota of people who do the washing-up, staff the bar - and run the PA and compere the afternoon (my job). The next day, a few of us are back again - striking down all the awnings, tables. chairs, blankets, groundsheets... This is not the only example I could quote. But - note this: we're not trying to shoehorn people into a "culture"; there's absolutely no elitism (which would be scorned); no money changes hands; it takes a huge amount of unselfish organisation - and it's immensely satisfying. And we don't need the Conrads of the world to make it happen. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: the lemonade lady Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:02 AM let's have 'festivals' in our back gardens and pass a hat around to help the artists with expenses. like house concerts, i'm sure there are artists out there who would call in on their way to bigger events. time to get back to our roots. sal |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 24 Sep 10 - 09:28 PM The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension by those defendant upon the status quo- especially professional musicians. In the short term they might loose but in the long term they would do much better. They suffer from poor long term vision. Again while you can always find an instance of someone getting it right getting it right is not widespread or as widespread as it needs to be. The point is that if the status quo prevails it will continue the limiting of the expansion of folk music additionally the number of songs in peoples heads will decline and the resource will be degraded or fail to reach its potential. Sure folk pros strutting around, dominating festivals and excluding imperfect performers and making sure their audiences are being ripped off like the situation. And it is true that most responding here have some professional connection. Of course they cant see the point! They are dependent on the status quo. We like it so it must be good. One or two people do the right thing so that is enough. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: frogprince Date: 24 Sep 10 - 09:24 PM "You are probably suffering from master race paranoia" That has to be about as absurd, and utterly groundless, as anything I've ever heard. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 24 Sep 10 - 08:35 PM "Conrad has failed to produce any evidence or examples of the problems he believes he has identified, and ignores all the evidence put to him that people are actually doing most of the things he wants, and have been for years, and that these problems are more imagined than real." Life is in shades of gray, with occasional tinges of colour. Some people can only see it though in pure black and white, pure monochrome. That's consider acceptable in Religion. Conrad has Found Religion! Pointless arguing... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 24 Sep 10 - 07:58 PM When you concentrate on the music quality does not matter assuming that minimum requirement would be knowledge of the tune and lyrics but modification in both to a degree is permissible. Dont run down local cheap places. I know many (I was consultant for Voice of Amerian Television for a piece not too long ago we visited about 60 of the best over a two night shoot.) There are good people out there everywhere. You are probably suffering from master race paranoia. No you dont need to lecture people about songs. I hate the ten minute presentation for a five minute song. That rips appart the context. Do you really think two hundred years ago that was the way songs were presented. Remove the museum atmosphere. Don- quality of singing does not and will not matter. Again you would toss out a person with hundreds of songs who did not have perfect pitch. Sound elitist to me and a big barrier to extending the folk to all who can sing and play. ALL Again performance is ok but when that is virtually all we get it is time for an adjustment. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 24 Sep 10 - 07:49 PM Thanks, Jeff! I sometimes wonder why I stick with this thread. Conrad will never get it (he doesn't want to) and I've been this close —>||<— to thinking "To hell with it!" and just quitting several times. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: jeffp Date: 24 Sep 10 - 07:21 PM Don, let me say that your writing is a major highlight of this thread. Not to denigrate others' contributions, but yours shine in the darkness. Thanks for sticking with it. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:27 PM "But you mentioned quality as being important." Yes, it is, Conrad. VERY important, for reasons I have already stated. AND as I have already said several times, poor voices and songs badly sung usually drive away people who might otherwise develop an interest in folk music (I have a specific example of someone who developed an interest in folk music by listening to a couple of reasonably compentent singers, which I will add below). There are a couple of factors which go into making a "good" singer or "quality" singer: an outstanding voice helps, but it is not necessary, as long as the voice doesn't grate on people's nerves. Being able to sing on pitch and with relatively clear diction is essential. Many people with "ordinary" voices can do this quite well. What IS essential, and the most important factor in being a good, quality singer, is not so much that the singer have a beautiful voice, but that the singer understand the song and convey his or her understanding of that song to others. And the vast majority of people CAN DO this, provided they take the time to learn about the background of the song (especially important in folk songs and ballads), and project that to listeners. "In the grand scheme of things the songs are important- you do have to know them but the singing quality is not important." I have just addressed that. But singing quality IS important in that the quality must be at least adequate. Again, on pitch, clearly enunciated, and with understanding of the song. "Many great singers only sing a few songs. Many ordinary singers can sing thousands." Not true within my experience. Most "great" singers are great because they have worked with the songs for a long time, have learned many songs, and there is a lot of "carry-over" from one song to another. How many songs do you think Pete Seeger knows? Joan Baez? Frank Hamilton? I don't know of very many "ordinary" singers who know "thousands" of songs. My friend Bob Nelson? He knows many hundreds of songs. HE probably doesn't know how many. He just keeps on learning them. As do I, and the really interested and dedicated singers that I know—and know of. And this bit of nonsense: " Oft times musicians are given free food and drink so they are often not aware of how ripped off their audiences are being." Although I didn't make a point of it, I always knew how much was being charged for food and drink in the places I sang. All I had to do was look at a menu. And back in the days when a cup of coffee in most restaurants cost a dime (maybe twenty-five cents in really upscale eateries), the fact that The Place Next Door charged 75é for a two-cup carafe of regular coffee (specialty coffees like Turkish, Swedish blend, of coffee-chocolate combinations might run to $1.50), that didn't keep people away. The place was packed every night. As were most of the other coffeehouses in this area. I rarely sang in places that served beer or other alcoholic beverages. Not that I'm any kind of "temperance" nerd. I enjoy a drink now and then myself. But I found the audiences in non-alcoholic venues far more attentive and appreciative. Even though the boozers paid a lot better than the coffeehouses! If things are as bad as you say they are, Conrad, that is strictly a local phenomenon and doesn't apply to most of the rest of the country. Or world. Now. As to the matter of spreading interest in folk music: Bob Nelson's voice is not in the same league as, say, Dmitri Hvorostovsky's, but it is quite pleasant and listenable. And his diction is impeccable. Something he has always been quite careful about. I am no Ezio Pinza in terms of voice quality, but I've been told I have a pretty good singing voice, even though I have a somewhat limited upper register, with a tendency to squeak on high notes if I'm not careful with my breath support. I can sing Gordon Bok's songs in the same keys that he sings them in. In October of 2007, Bob and I did a concert together on Sunday afternoon at Central Lutheran Church on Capitol Hill in Seattle, alternating solos and doing occasional duets. The following is a review written by a young man who, although his grandfather was a very good local singer of folk songs, hadn't really paid much attention to folk music before. He writes The light from the stained glass windows washed the little church with an autumn glow as we filed into the pews, excited murmurs filling the space where we waited for the music. As Bob Nelson and Don Firth were being introduced, I felt like I was looking in on a closely knit family joining in reunion: the audience, the announcer, the performers- there was an intimacy that truly surprised me. As they began, a complete hush fell over the crowd, allowing their voices and the sounds of their guitars to fill every corner of the room.(WOW! Jordan Myers can write my reviews any time he wants to!!) So you see, Conrad, laying down a good performance, especially if you know your material and enjoy singing the songs yourself—and without blatantly trying to "educate" your audiences, but just briefly putting the songs in context—can go a long way toward spreading interest in folk music. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it's the best way. As is stated quite plainly in Jordan Myers' last paragraph above. So, Conrad, just stuff your goofy ideas and let those who've been at it for decades and know what they're doing just get on with it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: John P Date: 24 Sep 10 - 03:37 PM Here the singers are all yuppies and they always meet in expensive places. Wrong again. Please stop insulting folk musicians. I'm about as far from being a yuppie as it's possible to be. My suggestion to performers- dont play at places which rip off your audience. According to your definition of "rip off", this would leave no local venues for folk music. Reality flash: we play where we can. A vast majority of places that want to have music don't have any interest in folk music, especially traditional folk music. And, at the risk of being called elitist again, I have no desire to play at the really cheap dives in town, since whores, bikers, and broken-down drunks also don't have any interest in folk music and make lousy audiences anyway. Would you care to respond to my post of 23 Sep 10 - 12:08 PM about the difference between competent performers and the incompetent? Especially as regards why "the folk" would want to listen to someone in a performance situation who isn't any good at performing? |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 24 Sep 10 - 02:16 PM When the gig guides are broadcast the programmers give the price of admission and often food as well. So far and I listen to three shows each week at least the prices are real bargains real good bargains. So you see in the UK you have a better situation. Here the singers are all yuppies and they always meet in expensive places. My suggestion to performers- dont play at places which rip off your audience. Get yourself into the cheapest places where those visiting you find bargains. Dont worry competition dictates that the more expensive places will come down in price to get you back. Oft times musicians are given free food and drink so they are often not aware of how ripped off their audiences are being. The more who can afford an evening out the larger your audience. Not falling for the definition of folk music thing here My point exactly I know the shakers did not breed- breeding like the shakers is worse than inbreeding in general. Exactly spleen that is how it is to be done. There are indeed some and the fact that they are doing it speaks well for the concept that it can and should be expanded. Again until you have seen the cost inflation from greedy publicans and venues you dont know. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 24 Sep 10 - 11:55 AM A whole pound to get in? That's outrageous! How do you expect to spread folk music to the drunks, winos and car artists at that price? |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Seamus Kennedy Date: 24 Sep 10 - 10:58 AM 739! Attaboy Conrad! Go for the 1,000! |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe Date: 24 Sep 10 - 10:39 AM ... Ok, Conrad, what do you think of this? I didn't particularly want to get involved with this thread, but I think you possibly have an overly pessimistic view of what is actually going on out there, so I wanted to present you with a concrete example of free and free-ish folk music in one small neighbourhood. Within 10 minutes walk of my house (so no transport costs) there is: - A mainly traditional singing session every two weeks open to all regardless of ability or experience. - A mainly traditional tune session every two weeks open to all and pitched at beginners so as not to exclude people who want to get involved but have limited instrumental skills and experience. - A weekly Irish tunes session - you have to be a pretty decent musician to keep up, but that's the only limitation. All the above take place in an old fashioned pub with normal everyday beer prices. The landlord is very supportive of the music sessions that he hosts, all of which have been set up by enthusiastic amateurs who are doing it for the love of the music. All are free to get in, but as they are in a pub there is an expectation that you buy yourself a drink or two. Plus we have a weekly folk club - this is in the local cricket club so the beer is cheap. It costs a whole one pound to get in (which goes to keep the club going rather than into anyone's pocket) and anyone can put their name down to sing or play - it's done on a first come first served basis. Traditional and contemporary music are both represented. Again its run by enthusiastic amateurs on a not-for-profit basis. This is in one small suburb of one provincial city. Other stuff happens in other parts of the city. I trust this would meet with your approval? Oh, and the singers and musicians from the singaround and beginners sessions have started to go out to local festivals and events to sing and play and take folk music out to the local people... None of this is done out of a sense of duty or mission but because its all great fun. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Bettynh Date: 24 Sep 10 - 10:39 AM "Never pooped in a hedge. In the scouts we were taught to dig holes in the ground-nothing wrong with that. One could pee in a hedge. The hedge would be greatly appreciative. But I never advocated that either. Just another of the growing number of urban myths about me. I enjoy it keep em coming." On August 24, 2010, you wrote:"People exist on a daily basis in great numbers without hauling toilets around with them or renting them to take along. Why should festivals have such difficulty? Especially in urban areas. People find a way. Yeah bushes have worked for centuries anyway." Do you have a particular spot in Baltimore in mind? Is carrying a shovel another prerequisite for entering one of your festivals? "you are just doing inbreeding. Like the shakers!" You claim to be a historian of sorts. Shakers didn't breed. If you don't know American history, don't use it for argument. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 24 Sep 10 - 10:22 AM people are doing some of the things I advocate and others are coming close. But, the problem is that it needs to be much more widespread and it can be but isnt. Too many false excuses for not making it happen. You appear to be the only person here who thinks your beliefs should be more widespread - can't you see that? And the "false excuses" you keep quoting aren't excuses at all - just common sense, which you appear to be devoid of. By the way, I'm still curious as to what you actually consider to be folk music, and whether you can quote us some examples of the music which you consider fit this category. Why no answer? Why consistently ignore this and other pertinent questions? Why no provenance or any evidence for the validity of the things you advocate? All you've done, throughout this whole thread, is make unfounded assertions, insulted good musicians who've dedicated a whole lot of their time to spreading music - most of the time for peanuts - and attempted to advocate a ludicrous and unnecessary straitjacket in which you think the music will flourish. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 24 Sep 10 - 10:10 AM We seem to be back where we started. I don't know how you can tell from the BBC listings whether sessions in the UK are held in expensive venues or cheap ones. You'd find they're held in all types of venues, from expensive hotels to basic pubs. I will agree with you on one thing: organisers probably do want to lock out those who are there for an evening of drinking and song - they tend to make an unpleasant audience themselves and spoil the occasion for others. Anyone who is there primarily for the music will find the price of drinks to be less of a factor. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 24 Sep 10 - 09:08 AM Don I never said that people who dont know the words or tunes should sing of course not. But you mentioned quality as being important. In the grand scheme of things the songs are important- you do have to know them but the singing quality is not important. Many great singers only sing a few songs. Many ordinary singers can sing thousands. I know all about sessions in pubs. If you want to know about them just listen to the gig guides on the BBC folk radio programming. Wonderful. I have never noticed anywhere in them the USA tendancy of holding open sings or folk song performances in only the most expensive bars in town. This is what happen here. The best Irish venue in baltimore raises its prices drastically for music. The chanty singers go to expensive places in silver spring and baltimore. The warf rat is very high priced. That simply is elitist and locks anyone out who wants to have a night of drinking and song. There are plenty of beautiful corner places with ancient woodwork in baltimore that one could select. They dont and it is clear that they are just being elitist. While I appreciate the good feel of word of mouth insider events such as house concerts I want the openness to be on the same level as other venues. Fully advertized for everyone to come. You have to invite new people who havent even heard folk music or you are just doing inbreeding. Like the shakers! I can not agree with the concept of taking money from the poor, the unemployed and those who are ill to fund a free folk festival. it is just not really free. When all can donate what they do for a day or two it can be free therefor it can be done - why not? Never pooped in a hedge. In the scouts we were taught to dig holes in the ground-nothing wrong with that. One could pee in a hedge. The hedge would be greatly appreciative. But I never advocated that either. Just another of the growing number of urban myths about me. I enjoy it keep em coming. Yes people are doing some of the things I advocate and others are coming close. But, the problem is that it needs to be much more widespread and it can be but isnt. Too many false excuses for not making it happen. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 24 Sep 10 - 03:49 AM Foulestroupe is right, there are the glimmers of some good ideas in there. However, despite repeated prompting, Conrad has failed to produce any evidence or examples of the problems he believes he has identified, and ignores all the evidence put to him that people are actually doing most of the things he wants, and have been for years, and that these problems are more imagined than real. Perhaps he has limited experience of only a few folk festivals and assumes these are typical, in which case he should get out more. Or perhaps he is one of these people who gets an idea in their head and doesn't want to be troubled with the facts. Conrad has produced no arguments to support either his analysis of the 'problems' or how his proposed solutions will work. He has refused to engage with any of the arguments to the contrary. He simply keeps repeating his unsubstantiated assertions as items of dogma. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 24 Sep 10 - 01:59 AM "Stop defending your right to ignore education." We have free amateur folk sessions in UK - fully open to the public - people run them in pubs. But they're not good enough because there must be a free festival with free beer with the free folk. We have near to nothing folk camps too - 'mini fests' in fields where there is even free beer. But *they're* not good enough because they are word-of-mouth and the people who go to the trouble of arranging them prefer the people attending to actually be interested in folk music. We have big folk festivals with amateur fringe activities that are fully open to the public and *free* in return for helping out (that's known as bartering services - now there's a traditional concept). But that's not good enough, because no-one should have to so much as help out in return for a free festival. We have absolutely free folk festivals like Leigh-on-Sea fully open to the public where you don't have to do anything at all whatsoever but get hammered on vodka in coke bottles (as I've observed). But they're not good enough either because they're funded by local councils. And that's all wrong too for some other reason I can't recall. Lots of people already doing free folk, lots of different ways to do free folk currently going on, lots of choices available to anyone wanting to get involved for free. None of them involve pooping in hedges though, so they're simply not good enough.. Damned elitists! |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 23 Sep 10 - 10:39 PM Pah - southerners. try this |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 23 Sep 10 - 09:26 PM The of course Don, there is The Portsmouth Sinfonia, a whole orchestra of barely competent instrumentalists - and they did issue a recording (with vocalists) of 'The Messiah' too.. .... |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:56 PM "don you said that those who got access to stages had to pass professional or adequate muster. Sorry you said it. You did not want to hear hard to listen to voices.." NO, Conrad. I did NOT say that! All anyone has to do is go back up the thread and re-read what I actually DID say. And as far as "hard to listen to voices" are concerned, such as people who don't know the tunes of songs and simply sing random notes, or who sing off-pitch—NOBODY wants to listen to that. Not just me! If someone sings in a monotone so you can't distinguish an actually melody and/or mush-mouths the words so badly that you don't know what they're singing not even academic song collectors will waste their time trying to record them!! Of course, if you can bring it off, Conrad, no one is stopping you from trying to be the Florence Foster Jenkins of folk music. Florence Foster Jenkins had a truly unique singing career. Possessed of no ear for music whatsoever and more money that brains (curiously enough, but undoubtedly with compete innocence on her part, people around her kept dying like flies and leaving their money to her; perhaps the reason they died was that it was the only way they could escape listening to her sing), she regularly hired Carnegie Hall and gave recitals. The recitals were usually sold out. She also made a number of records, and managed to sell quite a few. But what drew people to her concerts and had them buying her records was that people were absolutely astounded by her totally gawdawful singing voice, her cpmplete lack of ability to assess her own singing, and her sheer audacity. The audience came to laugh at her. She was so bad that she was hilariously funny! Now this may seem very cruel on the part of her audiences. But she was happy. She had the singing career that she wanted so badly! Here's a sample of her work: The Queen of the Night's aria from Mozart's The Magic Flute. CLICKY. Good luck on your singing career, Conrad! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:46 PM Correction top previous post: Conrad has worked out parts 1 & 3 but has no idea (which others have brought forth useful tried practical suggestions based on their real world experiences, yet Conrad rejects them all) about Part 2. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:44 PM The sad thing about Conrad's thesis as expressed here, is that while there a few good germs of ideas, such as 'preserving traditions by performance', 'teaching rather than just performing (for money)' and so on, but they are put together and expressed in such a bizarre and irrational way as to sound ridiculous and as expressed even counterproductive. Also, people what have DONE these things for decades, point out the fallacies, they are ignored by Conrad. Consequentially, many are provoked into rebuttal, as am I when some ignorant clown tries to tell me that Helholtz resonators produce NO overtones which is why they are 'brilliant for scientific research'. Rubbish - they produce overtones at above 10 times the fundamental (so 200-400 Hz fundamental will produce overtones at 2-4 Khz!) - unlike tubes and rods which have ratios of 2x 3x, etc AND every side blown flute and end blown fipple whistle has a Helmholtz resonator at the 'cork end' which if not properly tuned will give the instrument poor performance, especially at higher frequencies!!! The experienced intelligentsia just CAN'T let such foolish ignorance go unanswered! |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:24 PM Conrad's Great Plan to Reorganize the World in his Own Image reminds me of the South Park Gnomes episode. It was the 30th episode of Comedy Central's animated series South Park. Wikipedia offers... Tweek's parents, who own a coffee shop, give the boys coffee to help them stay up. The boys drink too much coffee, and end up wired, bouncing off the walls of Tweek's bedroom. Tweek sits on his bed watching. The boys finally come down from their caffeine rush in a hard crash, and are finally ready to start working on their project. While they argue ideas, Tweek notices the underpants gnomes walking single file into his bedroom toward his dresser. After stealing several pairs of Tweek's underpants, the Gnomes walk out of his bedroom, unnoticed by the other boys. Meanwhile, Tweek is freaking out and trying to get their attention. They finally stop arguing and tell Tweek to shut up. Later, the boys see the Underpants Gnomes for themselves, following them to their underpants-processing underground lair out of curiosity. The Underpants Gnomes are businessmen of sorts, and they claim to know a lot about corporations, so the boys eagerly ply them for answers. The Gnomes explain that their business plan is as follows: Phase 1: Collect Underpants Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Profit Following the episode's release, the underpants gnomes and, particularly, the business plan lacking a second stage between "Collect underpants" and "Profit", became widely used by many journalists and business critics as a metaphor for failed, internet bubble-era business plans[2][3][4] and ill-planned political goals.[5][6][7] Paul Cantor, a literary and economic professor who uses South Park episodes as teaching aids, said "no episode of South Park I have taught has raised as much raw passion, indignation, and hostility among students as 'Gnomes' has."[8] Conrad has worked out parts 1 & 2 but has no idea (which others have brought forth useful tried practical suggestions based on their real world experiences, yet Conrad rejects them all) about Part 2. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 23 Sep 10 - 07:44 PM don you said that those who got access to stages had to pass professional or adequate muster. Sorry you said it. You did not want to hear hard to listen to voices. Discrimination pure and simple. If you "have" songs competance is not a matter for consideration. No it is painless to present songs in a way that is enjoyable and educational at the same time. Stop defending your right to ignore education. Think of the act as sharing and not performing. The concept is to have fun but to put it into balance. Fun is not the only reason. Much much more. Its work to teach easy to just entertain. but if we dont teach once the internet folds, libraries are neglected (as they are being already) we will have no oral tradition or hardly any to fall back upon. We need to grow the oral tradition each time folk is applied to an event. We also need maximum access. Its simple. You cant depend on recording or curation. Look to history if you know any. Libraries get burned, recordings get brittle or obsolete. But if a song is passed on in the oral tradition the worst is that it may have constructive modification. We by relying on professionals for the most part and recording are eliminating the means by which the tradition has survived. We need to re-cultivate the oral tradition which should be easy enough with a few tolerances and adaptations of the status quo Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 07:40 PM Right. After all, we are informed that folk music is a serious study. People aren't supposed to enjoy it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 23 Sep 10 - 06:52 PM We're not supposed to have fun.. Perish the thought. I'm just off to fill the swimming pool with beer. By the way, can I take off these traditional astronaut trousers yet? They're getting a bit uncomfortable. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 05:49 PM No, George, I'll stick with what I said just above. Nobody here is thick enough to believe that anything anyone says will ever change Conrad's mind. As I say, an excuse to chat merrily among ourselves. Shall we all lighten up a bit? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: George Papavgeris Date: 23 Sep 10 - 05:42 PM There is another possibility, Jeri, that I am slowly coming to believe: Conrad has found people's buttons and he is playing them, just like Martin used to, some years back. And the rest of us come and blow, come and blow, like an obedient concertina... |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 05:21 PM Just a quick note to Jeri, who took us to task for spending so much time and energy beating up on poor bewildered Conrad. ("Fuckwits," Jeri? Now, REALLY!) It may appear that everyone's here to try to poop all over Conrad's Great Plan to Reorganize the World in his Own Image. But not so. I mean, wotthehell! It'll never get off the ground anyway, so why should we bother? Conrad is merely providing us with an excuse to chat merrily among ourselves. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 05:12 PM Excellent point, Smokey. Singing while holding to the A=415 standard would certainly be more authentic for most older songs. And the effect might be quite interesting if one kept one's guitar tuned to A=440. . . . 'Course, I have heard some folks who seem to have mastered that. ### On "Classic Arts Showcase" on cable television a few weeks ago, I watched and heard a clip from a concert by the late, great Metropolitan Opera bass-baritone, George London. George London was the first American opera singer to be invited to the Bayreuth Wagner festival in Germany to sing the role of Wotan in all four operas in The Ring of the Nibelungen. He was also the first American to be invited to Russia to sing the leading role in Mussorgsky's Boris Godunov. Bloody brilliant singer and considered by many knowledgeable people to be one of the greatest singers of all time. On "Classic Arts Showcase," George London including in his recital a rendition of "Lord Randal." That magnificent voice, deep and rich, like dark chocolate, rumbled and reverberated through the concert hall. But he gave the ballad the full operatic treatment, gasping and chest-clutching, much as he had sung, quite appropriately, the death scene in the final act of Boris Godunov. It was bloody GAWDAWFUL!!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 23 Sep 10 - 04:46 PM There, you're getting the hang of it already.. all those years wasted, eh? A tip though: you can achieve some quite extraordinarily authentic olde worlde effects by the cunningly selective use of the old pitch standard of A=415hz. I've heard quite a few amateur folk performers who seemed to have a natural gift for singing like that. We can but envy such ability. You've either got it or you haven't, I suppose. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 23 Sep 10 - 04:36 PM Right, Smokey! I've been striving for that ideal all my life. Singing a song in, for example, a minor key when others do it in major—and with a whole lot more notes than I want to use—along with accompanying it throughout with only one chord, and that a Db diminished. And, of course, singing the verses in reverse order. And alternating at random between 4/4 and 6/8. Quite a challenge. Even moreso that trying to pat you head and rub your tummy while playing the vihuela and tap-dancing at the same time. But I persevere. . . . Don Firth |
| Share Thread: |