Is it OK to raise performance standards?

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,FloraG
Date: 10 Nov 10 - 05:00 AM

thecoombes

I would worry about you falling between 2 stools. Why would an audience come to see average grade performers when they can pay a bit more and see really good ones? ( even if there are no duf ones). Why would performers come if they are not likely to be asked to play?   I'm sorry if this sounds negative - it not. Its great to have a new venue.

Would a second half 1.5 hr showcase work better with 2 chosen performers?

How to choose - those that bring in the most audience. Some young groups come with their own friends; they seem to go round in packs. Book them again. Those that involve the audience - collective singing or manner. Those that you yourself want to hear again - its you doing the work.

Good luck with your new venue.
FloraG

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 09 Nov 10 - 11:57 PM

Graham, you're quite right about not really having to explain, perhaps a small bit of tongue lodged in cheek. I love the notion of grooming people to groom talent, it's such a valuable thing to do.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Graham_Pirt
Date: 09 Nov 10 - 05:17 PM

Crowhugger - don't really have to explain that it wasn't all done in one hour! We ran these every fortnight and were very well received.

As far as workshops are concerned I've done these for many years both with the group Cockersdale and for Folkworks at their summer schools and weekends.

It's not a case of lecturing people - it's more to do with helping people to discover the range they have which they often don't even realise.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: thecoombes
Date: 09 Nov 10 - 04:01 PM

Since this topic is still lively I'd like to explain about the club that sparked it off.

It's a new club in Loughton, Essex UK (It's on the tube - do drop in)and is just coming up to its' third weekly session this Thursday.
Althought it is called a "folk club" I am happy for any style of music to be played as long as it is acoustic. And although it is a "club" there are no members - it is open to the public, "Loughton Acoustic Music Thing" doesn't sound right so it is called "Loughton Folk Club". There is a small entrance charge which is to cover the use of the room and to go towards modest expenses.

I wanted to do something different. There are several clubs not too far away where everyone gets a go. They're great clubs and I enjoy them, but I recognised that a number of people are driven away when much of the perfermance is limp.

So I've decided to shift the emphasis a bit. We have 15 minute tune sessions, ukulele sessions and chorus song sessions and about 2 hours of "hosted" floor spots. They are like mini "features" where a local competent performer does about 3 of their own numbers and introduces 3 single-song floor spots. The idea is to promote the best locals and have popular performance spread throughout the evening. It also naturally reduces the numnber of floor spots to about 12. The question is how to select those 12. I prefer not to just take the first 12 - not everyone can make it to the start of the evening anyway. So I want to favour competent performers (they may agree to become "hosts" later) and people I haven't seen before.

So this is the context in which I made the original post. So given that I am running it in this way, how would you chooses those 12 ? (if you can still bear it after all this dialogue)
Cheers

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 09 Nov 10 - 01:14 AM

Whew, GUEST,Graham Pirt, you did all that in only 1 hour? Impressive.

That pre-floorspot planning & support you did sounds like a superb subject for a workshop, maybe done like an apprenticeship at an open stage at a festival.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 06:16 PM

"Anyone been to a club where the support act was better than the paid guest?"

I've frequently been to a folk club (some time ago, admitedly) where the audience usually repaired to the pub once the floor spots were finished and the paid guest came on - I suppose the rationale was that seeing the guest was being paid he or she didn't need an audience.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 05:11 PM

A few "folk clubs" are real clubs, with a voting membership. However most in my experience are more or less benign dictatorships, run by individuals or a group of people who decided to get off their arses and actually do something. It seems to me that it is those people, who put in the work and risk their own money, who have the right to decide the nature of the club and how it should be run. If the "members" don't like it they can vote with their feet, and maybe set up their own club run on lines which are more to their liking.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:51 PM

The OP didn't describe what context s/he had in mind for "folk club," giving plenty of room for argument over I-can't-tell-exactly-what.

Or what their own role in it was. It doesn't seem likely that they were appointed by universal consensus to become the sole arbiter of what was acceptable on club nights, but if they aren't going to tell us, what can we say?

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: DebC
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:07 PM

< "Anyone been to a club where the support act was better than the paid guest?" >

The late Rick Fielding and his lovely wife, Heather, drove over 14 hours to do an opener (support) slot for a very well known, well-established, high profile folk musician.

Rick got a standing ovation. The headliner performed as if he were bored with the whole thing and IMO, did not give a great performance.

It was Rick's finest hour.

Debra Cowan

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:06 PM

"I'm not sure you would call that raising standards but it did increase the enjoyment of both the singer and the listener."

Seems alot better than the you're crap sod off approach.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,Graham Pirt
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:04 PM

Many years ago when Malcolm Storey ran Folk Union One in Hull and I was the MC we used to run a session an hour before the club opened. In this session we helped members, who wanted to do a floor spot, to choose songs, give them confidence, help them with the best key for their own voice, examine the song to see how they wanted to perform it and generally make themselves feel better when performing. It wasn't about putting our 'spin' on the song or the singer but to let them do justice to their own performance. It led to many people doing floor spots that were a pleasure to listen to.

I'm not sure you would call that raising standards but it did increase the enjoyment of both the singer and the listener.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: MikeL2
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 03:50 PM

< "Anyone been to a club where the support act was better than the paid guest?" >

Yes many times. In the years when I was organising clubs and events, I found that different people asked for different fees.

Agreeing fees with artistes was always a bit of a haggling match. Some acts were better at this than others and tended to negotiate a better rate.

In the folk scene I found that many very good musicians were not in it purely for the money.

So it was not unusual to have say three acts all on different asking rates, and it certainly was not always the best ones that got paid the best.

I agree with Jim what you need are good resident band and local musicians who you know well. On occasions these will actually be better than the booked artist(s).

As a host I always tried to be fair in my bookings but the above type of differences did occur.
I would also say that many of the acts we booked were often more than fair with us. If they saw that we were struggling for cash they would not push for high rates. It was a reciprochal agreement. It worked for us.

As to how did I grade them -

By trying to watch as many as I could and form my own impression of their ability to interest and entertain the audiences that we attracted.
By watching and talking to the audiences to find out their views.
By involving people I respected and trusted and listening to their opinions.

This is not a finite thing, subjectivity comes in to it too. In the same audience you have very different points of view as to which acts are the best/worst.

I saw acts who were brilliant in a venue and booked them and they were poor when they came to us. We are all human we have good nights and bad ones.

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 03:11 PM

Did cow hugger nearly ask what is meant by Folk Club?

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 03:08 PM

It sounds to me like much of the disagreement it is rooted in the fact that different people & cultures have different definitions of "folk club" and "audience." Both words have degrees of meaning depending on context. So it looks to me as if all the nyich nyich will continue ad infinitum, or at least ad definitum (hmm, is that a word?). Thanks to those who explained to which situation their view applies. The OP didn't describe what context s/he had in mind for "folk club," giving plenty of room for argument over I-can't-tell-exactly-what. Interesting reading, when the discussion isn't going in circles.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 02:42 PM

"Anyone been to a club where the support act was better than the paid guest?"
Didn't always work out by any means, but I've always tended towards the clubs where guests provided a new face rather than an improvement.
I believe the backbone of any club should lie with a strong residents team and a means of helping new singers develop.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 02:06 PM

Once or twice Flora but it was probably more to do with my taste for shanties than anything else.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,FloraG
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 02:03 PM

Anyone been to a club where the support act was better than the paid guest?
FloraG

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:44 PM

"No, why cant people be allowed to play unrehearsed forget their words sing out of tune and make fools of them selves, after all a lot of pop singers are crap ,mime to their songs and have no sense of rythym[ dave clark.
the rolling stones were out of tune when they first started."

GSS
Had alot of bad news today.
Thanks for the smiles mate.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:37 PM

Jack, it all depends on the type of club, or perhaps even the nature of that particular event, since many clubs operate both singers nights and guest nights. If it's a singers' night, singaround, open mic, come-all-ye, call it what you will, then it should be open to all-comers, with the risk that some of them may not be of very high standard - but if the atmosphere of the club is right that may not matter. If it's a concert night then being asked to perform, whether as a paid guest or a floorspot, should be seen as a privilege, not a right.

It's also important that the club is correctly publicised, so that the audience doesn't have mistaken expectations of what is on offer.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Will Fly
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:35 PM

Do audiences expect a better quality of floor singers as the amount they have to pay rises?

I was discussing this very point with the organiser of a local club just recently. The organiser was adamant that, if the audience at a guest night was paying in the region of £8 to £10 each for an evenings's entertainment, then the right thing to do was to ensure that the whole evening was of value by putting on a few, good quality floor singers as support. At singers' nights at that same club, the same organiser endeavours to get as many performers as possible a spot.

This seems to me to be a sensible and sound practice.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:24 PM

No, why cant people be allowed to play unrehearsed forget their words sing out of tune and make fools of them selves, after all alot of pop singers are crap ,mime to their songs and have no sense of rythym[ dave clark.
the rolling stones were out of tune when they first started.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,FloraG
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:52 PM

I think part of the problem is that many clubs have to hire a room these days so have to charge admission - usually a £1 or £2 - to both singers and audience on singers nights, to cover the rent. If you then have a guest who charges £200 and your room only takes 30 then you are looking at the best part of £10 for admission.

Do audiences expect a better quality of floor singers as the amount they have to pay rises?
FloraG

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:46 PM

Sorry Jack - people turn up at folk clubs regularly or occasionally, do so to be entertained, and people who run clubs take on the responsibility of ensuring that they get what they pay for.
If a group of people get together and are happy to listen to each other's bad singing they are entitled to do so, as long as they do so in the privacy of their own clubs.
Once they start charging at the door they make a committment to whoever might come in looking for a pleasurable evening.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:32 PM

IMO those who turn up to sing before they have mastered the basics, and those who are prepared to accept this as acceptible, display a contempt for the music and a disregard for audiences who have made the effort to attend your club

They quite likely ARE the audience and ARE the club.

Anybody who talks about folk club regulars in terms like that is displaying their contempt for their fellow human beings, which matters rather a lot more than attitudes to pieces of music.

Autocratic crap like that from MCs is totally out of line.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 11:39 AM

"There are people who think that Bert Lloyd and Peter Bellamy (to name but two) couldn't sing!"
Both could hold a tune and remember the words (sometimes Bert dried, especially towards the end of his life), but I never saw either of them resort to a crib sheet.
I really think we are talking about people who use the platform to practice - again I find myself totally agreeing with Howard.
IMO those who turn up to sing before they have mastered the basics, and those who are prepared to accept this as acceptible, display a contempt for the music and a disregard for audiences who have made the effort to attend your club - they have a right to be given something reasonable.
Also, singers who have worked at their songs should not be expected to pick up the pieces after intolerably bad singing has naused up the evening.
If organisers are genuinely concerned about helping struggling singers who want to improve, start a workshop, or offer some other sort of practical help.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:59 AM

An Amateur practices a song till he knows it , a Semi-Professional practices until he plays it 'Right' and a Professional practices til he CANT play it wrong !
I wont say a thing about prople who dont learn a song at all !!

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: olddude
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:48 AM

Hey Tim
we should all be as "a little worse" as you" ...
You are amazing ... don't ever think otherwise !!

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,crowsie
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:46 AM

"should the owner have standards for an "Open Mike"

I think that has to be the call of the landlord. Likewise any event on his premises. If half an hour of 'orrible drives custom away, he should probably have a word.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:43 AM

I'm surprised at Desi C's comment that "many top pros request or bring a music stand on guest nights". So far as I can recall I've never seen a pro use a music stand for their usual performance - the only exceptions I can think of have been for special projects, especially where there is a script to follow, or for particularly complex band arrangements.

The problem is not with stands per se but with people relying on reading from them. In all cases where I have seen a pro using music it's been as an aide memoire - unfortunately the same cannot be said for some amateurs. It is very difficult for this not to both form a barrier with the audience and inhibit the performance.

To pick up a point made by another poster, ageing has nothing to do with the need to repeat a song many times. It demands repeated practice to learn a song, and further practice to keep it ready for performance. In my opinion, knowing you have the words or music to fall back on are an obstacle to getting the song learned properly.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:24 AM

JIm - I've PM'd you the name of the worst culprit.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:11 AM

There are people who think that Bert Lloyd and Peter Bellamy (to name but rwo) couldn't sing!

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:05 AM

"I get very annoyed by the conceit of those who decide that they are good enough but others are not. I know of at least one person of whom the truth is the reverse."
You have claimed this in the past Richard - and received an answer, which you apparently choose to ignore.
Perhaps you could name anybody on this thread who is unable to sing in tune or remember words, and is calling for basic standards to be set
You once stated that higher standards not only should not be set, but should be positively discouraged as they put off the inexperienced singers - perhaps you might find the bottle to repeat it here?
THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANYBODY BEING BETTER THAN ANYBODY ELSE, BUT RATHER, ABOUT NOT LETTING PEOPLE WHO CAN'T SING LOOSE ON A CLUB AUDIENCE.
YOU MAY NOT THINK FOLK SONG IS WORTH SETTING STANDARDS FOR - OTHERS HERE APPARENTLY THINK IT IS.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,Banjiman
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:03 AM

We only run concert nights as a general rule with one or two (usually local) support acts.

I have the priveledge of choosing these acts....... we've had quite a few people for who this is their first "gig", but I wouldn't put them on stage if I didn't think there was something about them that the audience can tune into. It wouldn't be fair on the audience or the act.

They're often quite nervous but I can't think of anyone in this category who has let themselves or the club down. Maybe a few fumbles, but this doesn't have to spoil a performance if there is at least a modicum of talent there.

There have been occaisions when newer acts have used crib sheets, which I'd rather not see on stage...... but as long as they can still put their material across I can't get too excited about this.

I like to think that by giving people this experience, we are giving them the opportunity to raise their standards.... we tend to use a stage, lights and often a P.A. Feeling comfortable in this environment is a whole new experience compared with a cosy singaround!

I suppose the general rule is I'm likely to consider someone for a stage spot if they are better than I am..... so the bar is not too high! (p.s. I've never booked myself solo!)

Paul

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: olddude
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:47 AM

OK but what about an open mike, I been to some where the same person keeps performing and very sadly is quite awful and the crowd shows it ... I don't think folks have the heart to ban him but the half hour slot he takes is pretty brutal .. should the owner have standards for an "Open Mike also"

I don't care either way, I submit the question that is all

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:42 AM

I would like to think the general movement of my standard of playing is upward.
Possibly a little worse now for not being out and doing it.
Have always been lucky in having kind people around who if they point tout a problem do it in a kindly way and even with help to overcome it.
Every one should be allowed the courtesy of an opinion as to whether they like what you play or not..There are others though...
I have handed my guitar to a few knowledgeable gob shites hoping for a practical demonstration but very rarely received any enlightenment.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,Crowsister
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:33 AM

"where contributors don't practice their pieces before performing them."

Make that: "don't LEARN their pieces"

I'm sure plenty of people can get along just fine with a piece learned yonks ago.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,crowsister
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:27 AM

"those who decide that they are good enough but others are not."

Richard, I find it hard to believe that anyone, including you, would fancy regularly attending a session where contributors don't practice their pieces before performing them. The "I haven't played this for twenty years" quote was from life. Last I heard, that session needed more people..

I don't take issue with people running sessions in any way they want to, it's a free world, but if there are a small core of regulars who can't be jogged into at least practicing their pieces first, then those sessions will obviously die because they will be the only people who do attend. And that is a loss for everyone, including those who have devoted their time and effort to establish the session in the first place.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: johncharles
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:18 AM

Only one?

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:02 AM

I get very annoyed by the conceit of those who decide that they are good enough but others are not. I know of at least one person of whom the truth is the reverse.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 08:44 AM

"Who is the "our",
Traditional music is part of "our" heritage and deserves more than the kicking some people seem to be prepared to stand by and watch it getting.
"how bad does it have to be to be a disgrace"
Tuneless, unlearned unrhearsed and misunderstood. Guest crowsister offers a fairly typical description of how bad it can get (and what is argued for and defended on threads like this)
"and who decides."
Nobody has to decide when it gets that bad, it becomes obvious to anybody without cloth-ears
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,crowister
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 08:20 AM

A friendly "Okay it's Sue & Bill - oh I see you're getting prepared, we'll come to you next then. John, are you ready?", seems to work.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,Desi C
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 08:05 AM

Some very good points made. On the subject of music stands I must defend them. Firstly any good music teacher will advise learners to use a stand, and many top pro's request or bring a music stand on guest nights. A music stand properly used should make mo difference to your enjoyment of an open mic night. But as a few people have pointed out plonking big folders on it and then searching for the right piece does take time and annoy people, including hosts like myself. Also much as I agree it's the onus of the performer to be well practised and have the right music, if needed, ready and be tuned up etc, but as a host we can 't know beforehand if someone hasn't had the sense to know all that. Personally we do try to advise people like that once we've seen it, to be better prepared.

But before you go blaming all this on 'newcomers' we have a few professional performers at our club, who variously do not have their guitar out of it's case, then spend valuable minutes tuning it, often retuning again between songs, one duo hardly ever have the right music ready and waste time again on that. And we really can't do mich about that without riskng offending some delicate egos! As I said to a visiting host from another Club recently "it really is like trying to keep a classroom of 5 year olds happy at times"

It's not the glamour and fun it might appear to be running a busy folk club, I do it because I love it but it is hard work. So on behalf of us who often get the blame, I appeal for performers to come as ready prepared as possible, an average two song spot really shouldn't take more than 8 minutes, you'd be surprised how many 'good' performers go way over that! Perhaps Folk Clubs need to become a bit more professional, but would that still be 'folk' ?

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: johncharles
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 08:02 AM

Some interesting points. Who is the "our", how bad does it have to be to be a disgrace and who decides.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: GUEST,crowsister
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 08:01 AM

I wouldn't return to a session I find a drag. The fun of waiting for someone to work their way through several halting minutes of this or that chord, oops no hold on a moment it's that one, after pleasantly announcing they haven't played the song for twenty years, really isn't. I know several guitarists socially, so if I wanted to listen to someone practicing the chords to something from "Ten Rock'n'Roll Favourites" or some-such, I can always invite myself over to their pad when they do so.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 07:45 AM

"Each club will do what suits its members"
In which case, run a 'members only' club and don't disgrace our music by showing it at its worst to anybody who might walk in off the street; and certainly don't ask visitors for money to listen to tunelass droning read from a crib-sheet.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: MikeofNorthumbria
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 07:09 AM

I've said this before on other threads, but for the benefit of those who missed it then ...

IMHO, there is folk music/song on the one hand, and showbiz on the other. And what distinguishes t'other from which is NOT the source of the music/song, nor yet the style in which it is performed.

Showbiz is what happens when some people are paid for performing and other people pay to hear them. This definition applies even if what is being performed is 100% "traditional".

Folk music/song is what happens when people play/sing to entertain themselves - and anyone else who happens to be around. Nobody pays to listen, and nobody is paid for performing. (Though sometimes non-performing listeners may buy drinks for performers to show their appreciation.) This definition applies even if what is being performed is 100% non-traditional.

So, to the original poster I would say this: if your folk club charges for admission, then you are in showbiz, and showbiz rules apply. People who have paid to come in and listen are entitled to hear the best that you can provide them with. Furthemore, performers who are respected enough to attract paying customers deserve a fair share of the gate money. Performers who are good enough to merit a hearing, but not yet well-known enough to pull in an audience, may get a brief opportunity to display their wares if there's time to fit them in. And for the rest ...

For the nervous newbies who are still learning their trade (and for the enthusiastic no-hopers who will never learn) you may choose to run an open session on another night, with free admission for all.   And if you (and any listeners who may drop by) are really lucky, then some accomplished performes may also come along and participate, just for the fun of it. This will be folk music.

End of sermon.

Wassail!

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: John Routledge
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 07:09 AM

Love your final image Bob.

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: johncharles
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 07:08 AM

A key word is "club" which can be defined as "An organization composed of people who voluntarily meet on a regular basis for a mutual purpose" Each club will do what suits its members. If the club is not meeting the members needs it will close. If the club thrives irrespective of the standards of musicianship it is meeting the members needs. Live and let live.
john

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: BobKnight
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 06:49 AM

Let's turn that around - can we afford to let standards get lower? If so, how low does it have to go before people stop coming? Surely we should be trying to raise the performance standards at ALL times.
Even if only for personal satisfaction.

We all go on about attracting new people, but the younger generation are used to hearing the finest sound production in all genres of music, thanks to CD's etc. So, imagine the shock when they go along to a club, and someone, totally unprepared, although it's obviously their turn next, takes ten minutes to get their instrument out of its case, tune it, and leaf through a pile of papers looking ominously like the Dead Sea Scrolls. Next they thrash away at their guitar, banjo, with their chin "glued" to their chest, thus ensuring the words are incomprehensible and inaudable. It's a simple matter to learn words - repetition, or as we call it in the musical world, practice, or rehearsal. That will do it every time. We don't accept poor standards in everyday life, why should we accept it in folk music. You don't have to be professional to have professional standards.

Imagine going into a restaurant - "Hey your meal's not properly cooked yet, but it won't really matter, will it, because we can't be bothered cooking it until it's just right."

Subject: RE: Is it OK to raise performance standards?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 10 - 06:25 AM

"Singers' clubs and singarounds are the reverse, and there it is entirely appropriate to encourage novice singers,"
While I appreciate Howard's point, it seems to me that UK folk clubs have to tackle the somewhat eccentric image of people sitting round listening to singers who simply can't sing.
The practice has, and will continue to drive off potential audiences, and it certainly won't attract youngsters, who, whatever I might think of their music, can spot a naff musician a mile off.
The new blood here has come into the music because it now has set itself a standard, and the newbies thrown down the gauntlet by raising that standard even higher.
It is deeply patronising to suggest that setting standards drive people away.
In opening your doors to the public you have committed yourselves to presenting something worthwhile to listen to.
Jim Carroll